Public Record Service

Energy and permitting policy, read from the public record.

Register entry No. 0038BillH.R. 2347

House passes six Atomic Energy Act bills, including H.R. 5549 on uncontested NRC hearings; four match text in Senate substitute SA 6883

The House cleared the nuclear package November 9 and 11 under suspension of the rules. Hearing, enrichment, NRC pay and DOE disclosure provisions also ride in the permitting substitute, on which a Senate cloture vote is set for November 13.

Entered by
Public Record Service
Date
Sources
17 cited

Summary

The House passed six bills amending the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 or setting nuclear disclosure rules this week, four on November 9 and two on November 11, all under suspension of the rules [7, 10, 11]. The most consequential for licensing, H.R. 5549, would end the requirement that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission hold a hearing on every reactor construction permit application whether or not anyone asks for one [1, 15]. In the Senate, the same hearing language, with the enrichment, NRC pay and Department of Energy disclosure texts, sits inside SA 6883, the permitting substitute to H.R. 2347; Majority Leader John Thune filed cloture on that substitute November 11, with the vote set for November 13 [12, 13, 14].

What the record shows

The six House bills

The two recorded votes were lopsided. H.R. 3978, the Nuclear REFUEL Act, passed 397-2 on Roll Call 315, and H.R. 9612, the American Enrichment Deployment Act, passed 394-3 on Roll Call 316 [8, 9]. Republicans voted 196-0 on both [8, 9]. The other four passed by two-thirds votes with no roll call [5, 6, 10, 11].

Bill What it does House action Counterpart in SA 6883
H.R. 5549, Efficient Nuclear Licensing Hearings Act Makes NRC licensing hearings depend on a request; requires informal procedures Passed Nov. 11 [10] Sec. 1501 [12]
H.R. 9612, American Enrichment Deployment Act Allows enrichment plant construction before licensing Passed Nov. 9, 394-3 [9] Sec. 1502, with an added notice step [12]
H.R. 9614, NRC Staff Pay Alignment Act Lets the NRC chairman pay career appointees up to 110% of the agency’s top SES rate Passed Nov. 9 [6, 7] Sec. 1504 [12]
H.R. 9084, DOE Nuclear Transparency Act 72-hour web postings for DOE nuclear facility decisions Passed Nov. 11 [11] Sec. 2261 [12]
H.R. 3978, Nuclear REFUEL Act Removes reprocessing that “does not isolate plutonium” from the production facility definition Passed Nov. 9, 397-2 [8] None [4, 12]
H.R. 9613, Nuclear Advisory Committee Reform Act Lets the ACRS decline reviews lacking “unique, novel, or noteworthy” issues Passed Nov. 9 [5, 7] None [5, 12]

What H.R. 5549 changes in section 189

Current section 189 a. of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2239) says “The Commission shall hold a hearing after thirty days’ notice and publication once in the Federal Register” on each application for a construction permit for a facility or a testing facility [15]. H.R. 5549 strikes that sentence and the text that follows it. In its place the NRC “may, in the absence of a request for a hearing by any person whose interest may be affected,” issue a construction permit, operating license or combined license, or amendments to them, “without a hearing, but upon thirty days notice,” with one Federal Register publication of its intent [1]. A new clause requires that the NRC “shall use informal adjudicatory procedures for any hearing held” under the subparagraph [1]. The bill also rewrites section 185 b. so a permit or license follows “the thirty days notice and publication period or holding a hearing, as applicable” [1]. The changes would apply to applications “pending before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on or after the date of enactment” [1].

Section 1501 of SA 6883 carries the same section 189 and 185 b. text and the same applicability clause [12]. It drops one piece: H.R. 5549’s subsection (c), which edits section 193(b) to make enrichment facility hearings depend on a request [1, 12]. The substitute’s next section strikes section 193(a) through (c) outright, so the edit has no text to act on [12].

Where the Senate text departs

Section 1502 of SA 6883 follows H.R. 9612 on at-risk construction and on the 180-day deadline for NRC regulations, and keeps the House bill’s rule that the change does not affect NEPA, hearing rights or NRC inspections [3, 12]. It then adds a subsection the House did not pass. An applicant must certify that, at least 15 days before starting construction, it will notify the governor, each local government where the plant would sit, and the governing body of each Indian Tribe with an offsite response organization named in its emergency plan [12].

Section 2261 matches H.R. 9084’s postings and its January 31 annual report to the House Energy and Commerce and Senate Energy and Natural Resources committees [2, 12]. The definitions differ by one phrase. The House bill ties “covered DOE nuclear facility” to 10 CFR 830.3(a) “as in effect on the date of enactment”; the Senate text reads “or a successor regulation” [2, 12].

Section 1503 has no House counterpart in this package. It would exempt NRC reactor, nuclear materials and waste disposal licensing from the NEPA document deadlines in 42 U.S.C. 4336a(g) and from the bill’s own one-year permit deadline in section 1403(b) [12].

Where it sits in the process

Which House bills has the Senate received?

The Senate received H.R. 3978, H.R. 9612, H.R. 9613 and H.R. 9614 by message on November 10 [12]. H.R. 9612 and H.R. 9613 went to the Environment and Public Works Committee, H.R. 9614 went to Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and H.R. 3978 was placed directly on the calendar [12]. The two bills passed November 11 had been debated November 9, but Rep. Bob Latta (R-Ohio) objected for lack of a quorum, which postponed the votes [1, 2, 10, 11].

The cloture sequence on H.R. 2347

On November 11 the Senate resumed H.R. 2347, with SA 6883, seven other Thune amendments and the motion to commit pending [13]. Thune then sent two cloture motions to the desk, one on “substitute amendment No. 6883” and one on the bill, each signed by 17 senators beginning with Thune, Capito and Lee [13]. Under the Daily Digest entry, the substitute vote occurs Friday, November 13, and the bill vote follows disposition of the substitute [14]. Cloture motions on three district court nominations are stacked behind the bill [14]. This site’s November 12 report covers the 73-25 vote that opened debate.

Senators filed ten more amendments November 11, numbered SA 6891 through SA 6900, all ordered to lie on the table [17]. Five, from Sens. Alsobrooks and Blunt Rochester, are drafted as amendments to SA 6883 [17].

What the record does not show

  • How the House bills and the substitute would be reconciled. Both chambers must pass the same text. If the House takes up the Senate’s H.R. 2347, four of its own bills would already be inside it, but the record does not show whether the House would instead send its stand-alone bills to the President separately [12].
  • What happens to section 193 if both House bills become law. H.R. 5549 edits section 193(b) while H.R. 9612 strikes subsections (a) through (c), and the House passed them as separate measures [1, 3]. SA 6883 resolves this for its own text only [12].
  • Any vote count on four of the six bills. No yeas and nays were ordered for H.R. 5549, H.R. 9084, H.R. 9613 or H.R. 9614 [5, 6, 10, 11].
  • An NRC cost estimate. Floor speakers said a mandatory hearing can take 1,000 hours and cost an applicant about $4 million [1]. No NRC study with those figures appears in the record.
  • REFUEL and ACRS in the Senate bill. Neither text is in SA 6883 [12]. The record does not show whether any senator will offer either one as an amendment.

Positions on the record

Majority and minority managers. Latta said H.R. 5549 “builds on this effort by repealing a 70-year-old provision of the Atomic Energy Act that is no longer necessary” and said it “preserves the right of any person whose interest may be affected” to a hearing [1]. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) called mandatory hearings “purely paper proceedings that take months to complete happening between NRC staff and reactor developers, not the public,” and said contested hearings are “completely untouched” [1]. On the enrichment bill, Pallone said the version on the floor makes it “crystal clear” that NEPA and hearing rights still apply and that early construction is “truly at their own risk” [3].

Sponsors. Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) said a mandatory hearing averages up to 1,000 hours charged to the applicant [1]. Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), sponsor of H.R. 9084, said Congress had sought information on DOE’s fast-tracked reactor efforts and “the Department provided Congress with very little information about how the Department will preserve safety and transparency” [2]. Rep. Gary Palmer (R-Ala.) said the transparency bill “does not add approval steps, and it does not change the DOE’s authority” [2].

On the ACRS bill. Pallone said abolishing the advisory committee “would be wildly irresponsible” and that the House version keeps the ACRS “in charge of making the decision about what is unique, novel, or noteworthy, not the NRC” [5].

Outside analysis. Writing November 2 for Columbia’s Center on Global Energy Policy, Ashley Finan said broad permitting reform “may leave important nuclear-specific regulatory issues unresolved” [16]. On the hearings bill, she wrote that “Continued support may depend on demonstrating increased efficiency while maintaining a record of transparency in licensing decisions” [16]. On the ACRS change, she said documenting a decision to decline review “could require substantial technical work, limiting potential efficiency gains” [16]. She also wrote that Pallone made amendments to the enrichment and ACRS bills a condition of his support for the six-bill set [16].

Reading-room questions

Questions readers bring to this record, answered from the documents cited below.

Did the House pass the bill ending mandatory NRC hearings?
Yes. The House passed H.R. 5549, the Efficient Nuclear Licensing Hearings Act, under suspension of the rules on November 11, 2026, after debating it November 9 [1, 10]. It would let the NRC issue construction permits and operating licenses without a hearing when no affected person requests one, after 30 days' Federal Register notice [1].
Would H.R. 5549 take away the right to request an NRC licensing hearing?
No, as written. The bill keeps the hearing right for any person whose interest may be affected and requires informal adjudicatory procedures for hearings that are held [1]. Bill managers from both parties said contested hearings are untouched [1].
Are the House nuclear bills part of the Senate permitting bill?
Four of the six have close counterparts in SA 6883, the substitute pending to H.R. 2347: sections 1501 (hearings), 1502 (enrichment), 1504 (NRC pay) and 2261 (DOE disclosure) [12]. The REFUEL Act and the ACRS bill have no counterpart in the substitute's text [4, 5, 12].
Can a uranium enrichment plant start construction before getting an NRC license?
Not under current law, according to the Center on Global Energy Policy [16]. H.R. 9612, which passed 394-3, would permit construction before licensing on the same terms as other fuel cycle facilities, and the Senate version adds a 15-day notice to governors, local governments and certain Tribes [3, 9, 12].
When does the Senate vote on cloture for the permitting substitute?
The Daily Digest sets the cloture vote on SA 6883 for Friday, November 13, 2026 [14]. A second cloture vote, on H.R. 2347 itself, would follow disposition of the substitute [14].

Note on sourcing

H.R. 5549, H.R. 9084, H.R. 9613 and H.R. 9614 passed by two-thirds votes without a roll call, so no member-by-member tally exists for them; only H.R. 3978 and H.R. 9612 have recorded votes. The bill texts described here are the versions printed in the Congressional Record for the House floor; engrossed texts could carry clerical differences. The comparison with SA 6883 covers the sections quoted and is not a line-by-line review of the full substitute. The $4 million and 1,000-hour hearing cost figures are statements by Reps. Pallone and Griffith on the floor and have not been checked against an NRC study. Rep. Pallone's statement that the Senate unanimously passed its own enrichment bill is his description; this report does not identify that Senate bill. The Senate cloture vote on SA 6883 was scheduled for November 13, the date of this report, and its result is not reflected here. The Senate's receipt and referral of H.R. 5549 and H.R. 9084 do not appear in the record this report draws on.

Sources

  1. Congressional Record, House (November 9, 2026): Efficient Nuclear Licensing Hearings Act, H.R. 5549, pp. H6097-H6099U.S. House of Representatives, November 9, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  2. Congressional Record, House (November 9, 2026): Department of Energy Nuclear Transparency Act, H.R. 9084, pp. H6099-H6100U.S. House of Representatives, November 9, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  3. Congressional Record, House (November 9, 2026): American Enrichment Deployment Act, H.R. 9612, pp. H6100-H6102U.S. House of Representatives, November 9, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  4. Congressional Record, House (November 9, 2026): Nuclear REFUEL Act, H.R. 3978, pp. H6096-H6097U.S. House of Representatives, November 9, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  5. Congressional Record, House (November 9, 2026): Nuclear Advisory Committee Reform Act, H.R. 9613, pp. H6102-H6104U.S. House of Representatives, November 9, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  6. Congressional Record, House (November 9, 2026): NRC Staff Pay Alignment Act, H.R. 9614, pp. H6104-H6105U.S. House of Representatives, November 9, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  7. Congressional Record, Daily Digest (November 9, 2026), House of Representatives, pp. D996-D997U.S. House of Representatives, November 9, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  8. Final Vote Results for Roll Call 315: H.R. 3978, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as AmendedU.S. House of Representatives, November 9, 2026 · clerk.house.gov
  9. Final Vote Results for Roll Call 316: H.R. 9612, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as AmendedU.S. House of Representatives, November 9, 2026 · clerk.house.gov
  10. Congressional Record, House (November 11, 2026): Efficient Nuclear Licensing Hearings Act, p. H6171U.S. House of Representatives, November 11, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  11. Congressional Record, House (November 11, 2026): Department of Energy Nuclear Transparency Act, p. H6171U.S. House of Representatives, November 11, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  12. Congressional Record, Senate (November 10, 2026), full Senate section including Message from the House, Measures Referred and Text of Amendments, SA 6883U.S. Senate, November 10, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  13. Congressional Record, Senate (November 11, 2026): Survivor Justice Tax Prevention Act, remarks of Sen. Thune and cloture motions, pp. S5567-S5568U.S. Senate, November 11, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  14. Congressional Record, Daily Digest (November 11, 2026), Senate, pp. D1012-D1013U.S. Senate, November 11, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  15. 42 U.S. Code § 2239, Hearings and judicial reviewU.S. Congress, accessed 2026-11-13 · law.cornell.edu
  16. Nuclear Regulatory Reform Beyond the Permitting Bill (Ashley Finan)Center on Global Energy Policy, Columbia University, November 2, 2026 · energypolicy.columbia.edu
  17. Congressional Record, Senate (November 11, 2026): Amendments Submitted and Proposed, SA 6891-6900, p. S5576U.S. Senate, November 11, 2026 · govinfo.gov

Subject headings

Cross-references

Other register entries filed under the same subject headings.

  1. No. 0037 · Floor order · 3 shared headingsSenate takes up H.R. 2347 after 73-25 cloture vote; Capito substitute SA 6883 carries revised permitting text
  2. No. 0031 · Floor order · 3 shared headingsSenate order sets Nov. 9 cloture vote on motion to proceed to H.R. 2347, the vehicle for a permitting package
  3. No. 0036 · Report · 2 shared headingsNRC issues Long Mott construction permit No. CPAR-3 for four Xe-100 reactors, Docket No. 50-614, after denying intervenor review