H.R. 5032: To require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to consider certain criteria in relicensing nuclear facilities, and to provide for an independent assessment of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station by the National Academy of Sciences prior to any relicensing of that facility.
Before you vote › Federal bills
H.R. 5032: To require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to consider certain criteria in relicensing nuclear facilities, and to provide for an independent assessment of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station by the National Academy of Sciences prior to any relicensing of that facility.
108th Congress · introduced 2004-09-08 · Energy · Latest: Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality.
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2004-09-08 · official record
- Who proposed it: Rep. Saxton, Jim [R-NJ-3] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
- If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.
Official title
To require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to consider certain criteria in relicensing nuclear facilities, and to provide for an independent assessment of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station by the National Academy of Sciences prior to any relicensing of that facility.
Plain summary
Amends the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 regarding relicensing criteria for nuclear facilities to direct the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to evaluate a facility for health risks, vulnerability to terrorist attack, evacuation plans, population increases, ability to store nuclear waste, safety and security record, and the impact of a nuclear accident. Prohibits relicensing of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Station) until after the NRC has: (1) arranged with the National Academy of Sciences (Academy) to provide an independent assessment of safety performance and recommendations for relicensing; (2) transmitted those recommendations to Congress; and (3) given appropriate consideration to those recommendations. Directs the Academy to provide an independent assessment of: (1) conformance of the Station to its design and licensing bases; (2) operational safety performance and risk factors; (3) health risks, vulnerability to terrorist attack, evacuation plans, population increases, ability to store nuclear waste, safety and security record, and the impact of a nuclear accident; (4) the effectiveness of licensee self-assessments, corrective actions, and improvement plans; and (5) the cause of safety problems and overall performance.
Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.
What a vote does
A “Yea” vote
If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.
A “Nay” vote
If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.
PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).
What does this mean? (plain words)
Official text
To require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to consider certain criteria in relicensing nuclear facilities, and to provide for an independent assessment of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station by the National Academy of Sciences prior to any relicensing of that facility.
Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text
No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.
Limited to a few requests an hour per person.
The strongest published arguments
Arguments for (supporters)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Arguments against (opponents)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Alternatives
Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes
Officials and money
Sponsor: Rep. Saxton, Jim [R-NJ-3] · 0 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
Agencies named in this bill
- Nuclear Regulatory Commission: its federal spending and other bills that name it
Found automatically: the agency's full official name appears in the bill title. A bill can affect agencies it does not name, so this list may be incomplete.
No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.
Words on this page, explained (2)
- Appropriation
- Money a legislature sets aside by law for a specific purpose. Government agencies may spend public money only as it has been appropriated.
- Securities
- Financial investments that can be bought and sold, such as stocks and bonds.
Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
- Congress.gov
- Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-108hr5032.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/108/hr>
Record fed-us-cong108-hr5032 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong108 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong108