[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 158 (Tuesday, September 25, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H8789-H8792]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NUCLEAR UTILIZATION OF KEYNOTE ENERGY ACT
Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 1320) to amend the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990
related to Nuclear Regulatory Commission user fees and annual charges,
and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1320
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Nuclear Utilization of
Keynote Energy Act''.
SEC. 2. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION USER FEES AND ANNUAL
CHARGES THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2020.
(a) In General.--Section 6101(c)(2)(A) of the Omnibus
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 2214(c)(2)(A))
is amended--
(1) in clause (iii), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in clause (iv), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(v) amounts appropriated to the Commission for the fiscal
year for activities related to the development of a
regulatory infrastructure for advanced nuclear reactor
technologies (which may not exceed $10,300,000).''.
(b) Repeal.--Effective October 1, 2020, section 6101 of the
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 2214) is
repealed.
SEC. 3. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION USER FEES AND ANNUAL
CHARGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021 AND EACH FISCAL
YEAR THEREAFTER.
(a) Annual Budget Justification.--
(1) In general.--In the annual budget justification
submitted by the Commission to Congress, the Commission shall
expressly identify anticipated expenditures necessary for
completion of the requested activities of the Commission
anticipated to occur during the applicable fiscal year.
(2) Restriction.--The Commission shall, to the maximum
extent practicable, use any funds made available to the
Commission for a fiscal year for the anticipated expenditures
identified under paragraph (1) for the fiscal year.
(3) Limitation on corporate support costs.--With respect to
the annual budget justification submitted to Congress,
corporate support costs, to the maximum extent practicable,
shall not exceed the following percentages of the total
budget authority of the Commission requested in the annual
budget justification:
(A) 30 percent for each of fiscal years 2021 and 2022.
(B) 29 percent for each of fiscal years 2023 and 2024.
(C) 28 percent for fiscal year 2025 and each fiscal year
thereafter.
(b) Fees and Charges.--
(1) Annual assessment.--
(A) In general.--Each fiscal year, the Commission shall
assess and collect fees and charges in accordance with
paragraphs (2) and (3) in a manner that ensures that, to the
maximum extent practicable, the amount assessed and collected
is equal to an amount that approximates--
(i) the total budget authority of the Commission for that
fiscal year; less
(ii) the budget authority of the Commission for the
activities described in subparagraph (B).
(B) Excluded activities described.--The activities referred
to in subparagraph (A)(ii) are the following:
(i) Any fee-relief activity, as identified by the
Commission.
(ii) Amounts appropriated for the fiscal year to the
Commission--
(I) from the Nuclear Waste Fund established under section
302(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C.
10222(c));
(II) for implementation of section 3116 of the Ronald W.
Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2005 (50 U.S.C. 2601 note; Public Law 108-375);
(III) for the homeland security activities of the
Commission (other than for the costs of fingerprinting and
background checks required under section 149 of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2169) and the costs of
conducting security inspections);
(IV) for the Inspector General services of the Commission
provided to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board;
(V) for the partnership program with institutions of higher
education established under section 244 of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2015c); and
(VI) for the scholarship and fellowship programs under
section 243 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2015b).
(iii) Costs for activities related to the development of
regulatory infrastructure for advanced nuclear reactor
technologies (which may not exceed $10,300,000).
(C) Exception.--The exclusion described in subparagraph
(B)(iii) shall cease to be effective on January 1, 2026.
(D) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2023, the
Commission shall submit to the Committee on Appropriations
and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the
Senate and the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee
on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a
report describing the views of the Commission on the
continued appropriateness and necessity of funding for the
activities described in subparagraph (B)(iii).
(2) Fees for service or thing of value.--In accordance with
section 9701 of title 31, United States Code, the Commission
shall assess and collect fees from any person who receives a
service or thing of value from the Commission to cover the
costs to the Commission of providing the service or thing of
value.
(3) Annual charges.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B) and except as
provided in subparagraph (D), the Commission may charge to
any licensee or certificate holder of the Commission an
annual charge in addition to the fees set forth in paragraph
(2).
(B) Cap on annual charges of certain licensees.--
(i) Operating reactors.--The annual charge under
subparagraph (A) charged to an operating reactor licensee, to
the maximum extent practicable, shall not exceed the annual
fee amount per operating reactor licensee established in the
final rule of the Commission entitled ``Revision of Fee
Schedules; Fee Recovery for Fiscal Year 2015'' (80 Fed. Reg.
37432 (June 30, 2015)), as may be adjusted annually by the
Commission to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index
published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department
of Labor.
(ii) Fuel facilities.--
(I) In general.--The total annual charges under
subparagraph (A) charged to fuel facility licensees, to the
maximum extent practicable, shall not exceed an amount that
is equal to the total annual fees collected from the fuel
facilities class under the final rule of the Commission
entitled ``Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for Fiscal
Year 2016'' (81 Fed Reg. 41171 (June 24, 2016)), which amount
may be adjusted annually by the Commission to reflect changes
in the Consumer Price Index published by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics of the Department of Labor.
(II) Exception.--Subclause (I) shall not apply if the
number of licensed facilities classified by the Commission as
fuel facilities exceeds seven.
(III) Changes to annual charges.--Any change in an annual
charge under subparagraph (A) charged to a fuel facility
licensee shall be based on--
(aa) a change in the regulatory services provided with
respect to the fuel facility; or
(bb) an adjustment described in subclause (I).
(iii) Waiver.--The Commission may waive, for a period of 1
year, the cap on annual charges described in clause (i) or
(ii) if the Commission submits to the Committee on
Appropriations and the Committee on Environment and Public
Works of the Senate and the Committee on Appropriations and
the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives a written determination that the cap on
annual charges may compromise the safety and security mission
of the Commission.
(C) Amount per licensee.--
(i) In general.--The Commission shall establish by rule a
schedule of annual charges fairly and equitably allocating
the aggregate amount of charges described in clause (ii)
among licensees and certificate holders.
(ii) Aggregate amount.--For purposes of this subparagraph,
the aggregate amount of charges for a fiscal year shall equal
an amount that approximates--
(I) the amount to be collected under paragraph (1)(A) for
the fiscal year; less
(II) the amount of fees to be collected under paragraph (2)
for the fiscal year.
(iii) Requirement.--The schedule of charges under clause
(i)--
(I) to the maximum extent practicable, shall be reasonably
related to the cost of providing regulatory services; and
(II) may be based on the allocation of the resources of the
Commission among licensees or certificate holders or classes
of licensees or certificate holders.
(D) Exemption.--Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to the
holder of any license for a federally owned research reactor
used primarily for educational training and academic research
purposes.
(c) Performance and Reporting.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall develop for the
requested activities of the Commission--
[[Page H8790]]
(A) performance metrics; and
(B) milestone schedules.
(2) Delays in issuance of final safety evaluation.--If the
final safety evaluation for a requested activity of the
Commission is not completed by the completion date required
by the performance metrics or milestone schedule under
paragraph (1), the Executive Director for Operations of the
Commission shall, not later than 30 days after such required
completion date, inform the Commission of the delay.
(3) Delays in issuance of final safety evaluation exceeding
180 days.--If a final safety evaluation described in
paragraph (2) is not completed by the date that is 180 days
after the completion date required by the performance metrics
or milestone schedule under paragraph (1), the Commission
shall submit to the Committee on Environment and Public Works
of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the
House of Representatives a timely report describing the
delay, including a detailed explanation accounting for the
delay and a plan for timely completion of the final safety
evaluation.
(d) Accurate Invoicing.--With respect to invoices for fees
charged under subsection (b)(2), the Commission shall--
(1) ensure appropriate review and approval prior to the
issuance of invoices;
(2) develop and implement processes to audit invoices to
ensure accuracy, transparency, and fairness; and
(3) modify regulations to ensure fair and appropriate
processes to provide licensees and applicants an opportunity
to efficiently dispute or otherwise seek review and
correction of errors in invoices for such fees.
(e) Report.--Not later than September 30, 2022, the
Commission shall submit to the Committee on Appropriations
and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the
Senate and the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee
on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a
report describing the implementation of this section,
including any effects of such implementation and
recommendations for improvement.
(f) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Advanced nuclear reactor.--The term ``advanced nuclear
reactor'' means a nuclear fission or fusion reactor,
including a prototype plant (as defined in sections 50.2 and
52.1 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations), with
significant improvements compared to commercial nuclear
reactors under construction as of the date of enactment of
this Act, including improvements such as--
(A) additional inherent safety features;
(B) significantly lower levelized cost of electricity;
(C) lower waste yields;
(D) greater fuel utilization;
(E) enhanced reliability;
(F) increased proliferation resistance;
(G) increased thermal efficiency; or
(H) ability to integrate into electric and nonelectric
applications.
(2) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
(3) Corporate support costs.--The term ``corporate support
costs'' means expenditures for acquisitions, administrative
services, financial management, human resource management,
information management, information technology, policy
support, outreach, and training.
(4) Research reactor.--The term ``research reactor'' means
a nuclear reactor that--
(A) is licensed by the Commission under section 104 c. of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2134(c)) for
operation at a thermal power level of not more than 10
megawatts; and
(B) if so licensed for operation at a thermal power level
of more than 1 megawatt, does not contain--
(i) a circulating loop through the core in which the
licensee conducts fuel experiments;
(ii) a liquid fuel loading; or
(iii) an experimental facility in the core in excess of 16
square inches in cross-section.
(5) Requested activity of the commission.--The term
``requested activity of the Commission'' means--
(A) the processing of applications for--
(i) design certifications or approvals;
(ii) licenses;
(iii) permits;
(iv) license amendments;
(v) license renewals;
(vi) certificates of compliance; and
(vii) power uprates; and
(B) any other activity requested by a licensee or
applicant.
(g) Effective Date.--This section takes effect on October
1, 2020.
SEC. 4. STUDY ON ELIMINATION OF FOREIGN LICENSING
RESTRICTIONS.
Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Comptroller General shall transmit to Congress
a report containing the results of a study on the feasibility
and implications of repealing restrictions under sections 103
d. and 104 d. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2133(d); 2134(d)) on issuing licenses for certain nuclear
facilities to an alien or an entity owned, controlled, or
dominated by an alien, a foreign corporation, or a foreign
government.
SEC. 5. STUDY ON THE IMPACT OF THE ELIMINATION OF MANDATORY
HEARING FOR UNCONTESTED LICENSING APPLICATIONS.
Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Comptroller General shall transmit to Congress
a report containing the results of a study on the effects of
eliminating the hearings required under section 189 a. of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2239(a)) for an
application under section 103 or section 104 b. of such Act
for a construction permit for a facility in the absence of a
request of any person whose interest may be affected by the
proceeding.
SEC. 6. INFORMAL HEARING PROCEDURES.
Section 189 a. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2239(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(3) The Commission may use informal adjudicatory
procedures for any hearing required under this section for
which the Commission determines that adjudicatory procedures
under section 554 of title 5, United States Code, are
unnecessary.''.
SEC. 7. APPLICATION REVIEWS FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY PROJECTS.
Section 185 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2235) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``c. Application Reviews for Nuclear Energy Projects.--
``(1) Streamlining license application review.--With
respect to an application that is docketed seeking issuance
of a construction permit, operating license, or combined
construction permit and operating license for a production or
utilization facility, the Commission shall include the
following procedures:
``(A) Undertake an environmental review process and issue
any draft environmental impact statement to the maximum
extent practicable within 24 months after the application is
accepted for docketing.
``(B) Complete the technical review process and issue any
safety evaluation report and any final environmental impact
statement to the maximum extent practicable within 42 months
after the application is accepted for docketing.
``(2) Early site permit.--
``(A) Supplemental environmental impact statement.--In a
proceeding for a combined construction permit and operating
license for a site for which an early site permit has been
issued, any environmental impact statement prepared by the
Commission and cooperating agencies shall be prepared as a
supplement to the environmental impact statement prepared for
the early site permit.
``(B) Incorporation by reference.--The supplemental
environmental impact statement shall--
``(i) incorporate by reference the analysis, findings, and
conclusions from the environmental impact statement prepared
for the early site permit; and
``(ii) include additional discussion, analyses, findings,
and conclusions on matters resolved in the early site permit
proceeding only to the extent necessary to address
information that is new and significant in that the
information would materially change the prior findings or
conclusions.
``(3) Production or utilization facility located at an
existing site.--In reviewing an application for an early site
permit, construction permit, operating license, or combined
construction permit and operating license for a production or
utilization facility located at the site of a licensed
production or utilization facility, the Commission shall, to
the extent practicable, use information that was part of the
licensing basis of the licensed production or utilization
facility.
``(4) Regulations.--The Commission shall initiate a
rulemaking, not later than 1 year after the date of enactment
of the Nuclear Utilization of Keynote Energy Act, to amend
the regulations of the Commission to implement this
subsection.
``(5) Environmental impact statement defined.--In this
subsection, the term `environmental impact statement' means a
detailed statement required under section 102(C) of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332(C)).
``(6) Relationship to other law.--Nothing in this
subsection exempts the Commission from any requirement for
full compliance with section 102(2)(C) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).''.
SEC. 8. REPORT IDENTIFYING BEST PRACTICES FOR ESTABLISHMENT
AND OPERATION OF LOCAL COMMUNITY ADVISORY
BOARDS.
(a) Best Practices Report.--Not later than 18 months after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission shall submit to Congress, and make publicly
available, a report identifying best practices with respect
to the establishment and operation of a local community
advisory board to foster communication and information
exchange between a licensee planning for and involved in
decommissioning activities and members of the community that
decommissioning activities may affect, including lessons
learned from any such board in existence before the date of
enactment of this Act.
(b) Contents.--The report described in subsection (a) shall
include--
(1) a description of--
(A) the topics that could be brought before a local
community advisory board;
(B) how such a board's input could be used to inform the
decision-making processes of stakeholders for various
decommissioning activities;
(C) what interaction such a board could have with the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other Federal regulatory
bodies to
[[Page H8791]]
support the board members' overall understanding of the
decommissioning process and promote dialogue between the
affected stakeholders and the licensee involved in
decommissioning activities; and
(D) how such a board could offer opportunities for public
engagement throughout all phases of the decommissioning
process;
(2) a discussion of the composition of a local community
advisory board; and
(3) best practices relating to the establishment and
operation of a local community advisory board, including--
(A) the time of establishment of such a board;
(B) the frequency of meetings of such a board;
(C) the selection of board members;
(D) the term of board members;
(E) the responsibility for logistics required to support
such a board's meetings and other routine activities; and
(F) any other best practices relating to such a local
community advisory board that are identified by the
Commission.
(c) Consultation.--In developing the report described in
subsection (a), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission shall
consult with any host State, any community within the
emergency planning zone of an applicable nuclear facility,
and any existing local community advisory board.
SEC. 9. REPORT ON STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS.
Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission shall submit to
Congress a report on the status of addressing and
implementing the recommendations contained in the memorandum
of the Executive Director of Operations of the Commission
entitled ``Tasking in Response to the Assessment of the
Considerations Identified in a `Study of Reprisal and
Chilling Effect for Raising Mission-Related Concerns and
Differing Views at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission' '' and
dated June 19, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No.: ML18165A296).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Olson) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
General Leave
Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
insert extraneous materials in the Record on the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
{time} 1530
Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1320, the Nuclear Utilization of Keynote Energy Act
is a bipartisan bill. The NUKE Act, as it is known, was sponsored by my
Energy and Commerce friends, Adam Kinzinger from Illinois and Mike
Doyle from Pennsylvania. The bill went through regular order in the
committee. With only one single amendment, it went through the full
committee by a voice vote.
The NUKE Act makes targeted reforms to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. It reforms the fee structure, which, at present, threatens
to increase the financial burden of our Nation's nuclear fleet, nuclear
suppliers, and those working on cutting-edge technology. This will be
critical in the coming years as a large number of reactors are taken
out of service.
The bill also streamlines some of the licensing steps and other rules
at the NRC. It means Congress will get useful information for oversight
so we can find even more steps to keep the NRC on track. We need to
make sure the old rules on nuclear power, dating back as far as the
1960s, still makes sense today.
Overall, H.R. 1320 will help the nuclear industry with more clear and
straightforward rules. And in doing so, average Americans and
companies, large and small, will benefit. Nuclear technology can be
part of the future for industry, medicine, and clean energy. Nuclear
power is unique. It is the only baseload power we have that has no
hydrocarbon emissions, zero. We also make sure that global leadership
on nuclear power stays right here in America. That is important not
just for jobs but for our national security.
There is no question that nuclear power in America is flying into a
headwind, but there is also no question that the industry provides
important and sometimes underappreciated benefits to America. Congress
can help lighten the burden while still making nuclear power the safest
in the industry.
H.R. 1320 is a key piece of this effort to ensure we have a robust
nuclear industry going forward. I urge my colleagues to support this
bill.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1320, the Nuclear
Utilization of Keynote Energy Act. This bill makes commonsense
revisions to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC's licensing
process that can ease the financial pressure on the nuclear industry
without jeopardizing safety or the environment.
Specifically, the bill makes a number of changes to the NRC's budget
process and fee structure, most significantly by limiting the fees
charged to innovate and advance nuclear reactor projects.
An important component of the bill requires NRC to report back to
Congress on the commission's actions to address instances of employees
facing reprisal for raising safety concerns that differ from the
commission's position on a particular licensing action.
A recent internal NRC report identified several troubling cases of
NRC employees, who raised safety issues, being passed over for
promotions or being excluded from work activities by management. This
can't stand, and I am pleased that this bill will take steps toward
addressing this unacceptable situation.
The bill also requires NRC to report to Congress on best practices
for community engagement in regions where a nuclear power plant has
shut down and is going through the decommissioning process. This is
particularly important in my home State of New Jersey where the Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station ceased operations last week.
I appreciate the efforts of the sponsors of this bill,
Representatives Doyle and Kinzinger, to work with Ranking Member Rush
and me to make important changes to their original draft bill that
significantly improved the legislation. I commend Mr. Doyle and Mr.
Kinzinger for their efforts.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Walden), the chairman of the full Energy and Commerce
Committee.
Mr. WALDEN. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle for their great work on the Nuclear Utilization of Keynote Energy
Act, H.R. 1320. I especially thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Olson), who is one of our real leaders on energy issues writ large on
the Energy and Commerce Committee.
By any measure, atomic energy has brought tremendous benefits to the
Nation. It has provided a baseload, emissions-free source of
electricity that has powered homes and industry over the past half
century. It has provided an infrastructure for our national and
international security--from the technologies and fuels for our nuclear
Navy, to the safety and security for civilian nuclear power the world
over.
However, a confluence of factors--abundant natural gas, power market
designs, economic and regulatory burdens--they have all inhibited the
Nation's nuclear industry over the past 10 years.
So the challenge confronting Congress is how to preserve and enhance
the beneficial use of atomic energy for future generations. To continue
to harvest the economic and national security benefits associated with
our domestic nuclear energy infrastructure, we must take steps to
update the relevant policies. So these policies must be forward looking
to enable innovation and the development and deployment of new,
advanced nuclear technologies.
This bipartisan bill by Mr. Kinzinger and Mr. Doyle updates the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission's fee structure for the first time in
nearly 20 years, Madam Speaker. It reflects thoughtful work on both
sides of the aisle to achieve really good public policy.
H.R. 1320 establishes reasonable and predictable timeframes for
regulatory decisions so that companies like Oregon-based NuScale Power
can develop business plans to commercialize new nuclear technologies
while also protecting future consumers from high regulator costs.
[[Page H8792]]
I commend my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their great
work on yet another piece of legislation out of the Energy and Commerce
Committee, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1320.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Michael F. Doyle), my colleague on
the committee.
Mr. MICHAEL F. DOYLE of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr.
Pallone. I appreciate the opportunity to speak about the Nuclear
Utilization of Keynote Energy Act, or the NUKE Act. I thank my
colleague, Adam Kinzinger, for introducing this bill and working with
me to advance it. I also thank Chris Bowman and Claire Borzner from my
staff, as well as Mr. Kinzinger's staff, and the Energy and Commerce
Committee staff for their diligent work to get this bill to the floor.
This legislation is very timely as the nuclear industry is facing
pressure from a variety of factors. Nuclear energy provides nearly 40
percent of Pennsylvania's electricity, and it employs thousands of
skilled workers in Pennsylvania.
However, increasing NRC fees and uncertainty in the nuclear export
process threaten this carbon-free and reliable source of baseload
power. Addressing some of these issues is necessary to protect jobs in
Pennsylvania and across the country, as well as to meet our Nation's
climate goals.
This bipartisan legislation will take important steps to modernize
the NRC's fee structure, set achievable and flexible timelines for
application reviews, and look to future reforms that will ensure the
NRC can continue to effectively protect public health and safety.
The bill addresses a serious reality facing the nuclear industry. As
nuclear power plants retire, the remaining fleet will be faced with
increasing fees from the NRC. We need to support our existing nuclear
plants while ensuring that the NRC is able to fulfill its mission, and
I believe that this legislation accomplishes those goals.
So once again, I thank Mr. Kinzinger for his work, and I urge my
colleagues to support this important legislation.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kinzinger), the author of the bill.
Mr. KINZINGER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill, H.R. 1320, the
Nuclear Utilization of Keystone Energy Act, which I proudly introduced
with my colleague, Mike Doyle. I want to also share my compliments to
his staff and my staff working together very well on hammering out a
lot of the technical issues and getting this done. It shows that hard
work matters.
The United States is home to nine nuclear power plants--my district
has four of those--which provide reliable, carbon-free electricity to
thousands of American homes and businesses.
Unfortunately, nuclear power is at a critical impasse, and many of
these plants are facing early retirements, which means a loss of clean
energy, good jobs, and our global leadership on vital issues like
safety and nonproliferation.
This legislation, the NUKE Act, makes commonsense reforms to increase
transparency, predictability, and accountability at the NRC. Because
nuclear plants pay to be regulated by the NRC, these reforms, including
a predictable fee recovery structure, caps on annual fees, and keeping
overhead costs in line with similar Federal agencies, will not only
increase stability at our operating plants, but it will also pave the
way for the next generation of nuclear technology.
I also think it is important to point out that many times in the
energy battle, we sometimes find out we needed to do something when it
is too late and you spend a lot of time playing catch-up. This is a
proactive way to make sure we maintain this strong fleet of which
America is a leader.
In closing, I urge my colleagues to join me and Congressman Doyle in
supporting H.R. 1320, the NUKE Act, and help ensure a safe and strong
future for American nuclear power.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this
bipartisan initiative, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. OLSON. Madam Speaker, the ranking member of the full committee
said it just perfectly: Support this bill. It is a good bipartisan
bill.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Brooks of Indiana). The question is on
the motion offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Olson) that the
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1320, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________