A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the "Build Nuclear with Local Materials Act of 2026," directs the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to change its rules regarding materials used in nuclear power plants. It requires the Commission to start a rulemaking process within 90 days to allow commercial-grade steel and concrete to be used in structures that are not safety-related. The Commission can only prevent this if it decides that stricter standards are needed to address a specific safety risk. Such a determination must be based on protecting the public health, safety, common defense, and security.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +5
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill benefits energy and construction companies by allowing the use of cheaper, commercial-grade materials.
- Scored +4
Does this put more money into wind, solar and other renewable power?
The bill supports the expansion of nuclear power by allowing more cost-effective construction materials for non-safety components.
- Scored +3
Is this likely to create jobs?
By reducing material requirements for non-safety structures, the bill may lower construction costs and facilitate nuclear plant projects.
The opposite
- Scored -1
Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive?
While primarily an energy bill, changes to nuclear infrastructure standards could theoretically impact broad national security stability.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Use of commercial-grade materials in non-safety structures: The bill allows for the use of commercial-grade steel and concrete in non-safety-related structures at nuclear power plants per Section 2(a).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Potential safety risks: The Commission may decide that stricter material standards are necessary if using commercial-grade materials would be contrary to the common defense, security, or the adequate protection of public health and safety, as noted in Section 2(b).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill benefits energy and construction companies by allowing the use of cheaper, commercial-grade materials. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Expanded nuclear capacity may contribute to more stable long-term energy infrastructure for populated areas.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — By reducing material requirements for non-safety structures, the bill may lower construction costs and facilitate nuclear plant projects. Is this likely to grow the economy? — The bill promotes the nuclear energy industry by easing material standards for certain plant structures.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this put more money into wind, solar and other renewable power? — The bill supports the expansion of nuclear power by allowing more cost-effective construction materials for non-safety components.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — While primarily an energy bill, changes to nuclear infrastructure standards could theoretically impact broad national security stability.
- 5/14/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Jake AuchinclossDemocrat · Massachusetts