A resolution designating December 2, 2025, as "World Nuclear Energy Day".

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/sres/536

Last Updated: December 8, 2025

A resolution designating December 2, 2025, as "World Nuclear Energy Day".

SRES. 536, 119th Congress — read as touching Nuclear Power.

The sponsor

Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$69,035 raised

21 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Energy and Related Commissions" section, p. 398-400 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8533; text: CR S8532)

December 7, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

📍 Current Status

Next: The full Senate will vote on whether to pass the bill.

✅

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

**Analysis of SRES 536: A Resolution Designating December 2, 2025, as "World Nuclear Energy Day"**

As a seasoned observer of the legislative landscape, I'll dissect this resolution with a focus on its implications for wealth and power.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** This resolution is a symbolic gesture to promote nuclear energy, celebrating its contributions to clean, reliable, and sustainable power generation. The primary objective is to raise awareness about the benefits of nuclear energy and encourage continued cooperation in research, development, and implementation.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** There are no significant changes to existing law or regulations in this resolution. It's a non-binding declaration, lacking teeth or enforcement mechanisms. However, it may serve as a precursor to future legislation or policy initiatives supporting the nuclear energy sector.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**

1. **Nuclear Energy Industry:** This resolution is a clear win for the industry, as it promotes their interests and highlights the benefits of nuclear energy. 2. **Utilities and Power Generators:** Companies invested in nuclear power plants may see increased public support and potentially favorable regulatory environments. 3. **Research Institutions and Academia:** Organizations focused on nuclear research and development may receive increased attention and funding opportunities.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** While this resolution has no immediate, tangible impact, it sets the stage for potential future legislation or policy shifts favoring the nuclear energy sector. This could lead to:

1. **Increased Funding:** For research and development of advanced nuclear technologies. 2. **Regulatory Support:** Favorable regulatory environments may emerge, supporting the growth of nuclear power plants. 3. **Public Perception:** A shift in public opinion, increasing acceptance and support for nuclear energy.

From a strategic perspective, this resolution is a smart move by the sponsors (Risch, Warner, Tillis, et al.) to curry favor with the nuclear energy industry and its allies. The backing of various PACs, such as the Nuclear Energy Institute's PAC, demonstrates efficient capital allocation in support of their interests.

In conclusion, SRES 536 is a symbolic resolution that may have long-term implications for the nuclear energy sector. As a rational observer, I recognize this move as a calculated effort to shape public opinion and pave the way for future policy initiatives benefiting the industry.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$69,035

18 donors

PACs

Organizations

$1,000

Committees

Individuals

$68,035

No PAC contributions found

CRW RESOURCES

1 transaction

$1,000

No committee contributions found

GRANIERI, ROBERT

2 transactions

$6,600

HEGYI, ALBERT

2 transactions

$6,600

PFAUTCH, ROY

2 transactions

$6,600

SNELL, PETER

1 transaction

$5,000

KAYALI, ZEID

1 transaction

$3,500

MOORE, JEFFREY

1 transaction

$3,435

KTELEH, TAREK

1 transaction

$3,300

ALAAMA, ABDUL M.D.

1 transaction

$3,300

ASHOURI, DIANA

1 transaction

$3,300

DIAB, MOHAMED KHEIR

1 transaction

$3,300

MOUJTAHED, SAED

1 transaction

$3,300

MONSEN, MARION F

1 transaction

$3,300

ABDRABBO, FAWAZ

1 transaction

$3,300

HOLDING, CHRISTINE S.

1 transaction

$3,300

HOLDING, KATHLEEN

1 transaction

$3,300

HOLDING, STEPHEN E.

1 transaction

$3,300

MONSEN, PEDER

1 transaction

$3,300

Donor Network - Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Showing 39 nodes and 21 connections (41 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $69,035

Top Donors - Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

1 Org17 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped.

+Nuclear Powerconfidence 0.95
Resolution designates December 2, 2025 as 'World Nuclear Energy Day' and celebrates contributions of nuclear energy, honors scientists and engineers, commends global community, and encourages continued cooperation in research, development, and implementation of nuclear energy technologies (see resolved clauses (1)-(5)). This is a clear benefit via recognition and promotion.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Strong

Vector: 62%

Pages: 398-400AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"SRES 536 strongly aligns with Project 2025's objective to promote nuclear energy innovation and deployment by recognizing nuclear energy's role in clean, reliable power generation and encouraging domestic and international cooperation in nuclear technology development."

Key themes:nuclear energy promotionclean energy advancementprivate-sector innovation supportenergy securityscientific leadership

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Strong

Vector: 61%

Pages: 398-400AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

Key themes:nuclear energy promotionenergy securityscientific innovationprivate-sector advancementU.S. energy leadership

— 365 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Support repeal of massive spending bills like the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)3 and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA),4 which established new programs and are providing hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to renewable energy developers, their investors, and special interests, and support the rescinding of all funds not already spent by these programs. l Unleash private-sector energy innovation by ending government interference in energy decisions. l Stop the war on oil and natural gas. l Allow individuals, families, and business to use the energy resources they want to use and that will best serve their needs. l Secure and protect energy infrastructure from cyber and physical attacks. l Refocus the Department of Energy on energy security, accelerated remediation, and advanced science. l Promote U.S. energy resources as a means to assist our allies and diminish our strategic adversaries. l Refocus FERC on ensuring that customers have affordable and reliable electricity, natural gas, and oil and no longer allow it to favor special interests and progressive causes. l Ensure that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission facilitates rather than hampers private-sector nuclear energy innovation and deployment. American Science Dominance. Ever since the age of Benjamin Franklin, the United States has been at the forefront of scientific discovery and technological advancement. Beginning with the groundbreaking science of the Manhattan Proj- ect, the U.S. has developed 17 National Laboratories that conduct fundamental and advanced scientific research. The National Labs have been critical in supporting national defense and ensuring that the United States leads on scientific discoveries with transformative applications that benefit America and the world. In recent years, however, U.S. science has been under threat. Externally, adversaries like the Chinese military have been engaged in scientific espionage, infiltrating taxpayer-funded scientific research projects, and funding their own science research. In addition, the National Labs have been too focused on climate change and renewable technologies. — 366 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise American science dominance is critical to U.S. national security and economic strength. The next conservative President therefore needs to recommit the United States to ensuring this dominance. MISSION STATEMENT FOR A REFORMED DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY The Department of Energy should be renamed and refocused as the Department of Energy Security and Advanced Science (DESAS). DESAS would refocus on DOE’s five existing core missions: l Providing leadership and coordination on energy security and related national security issues, l Promoting U.S. energy economic interests abroad, l Leading the nation and the world in cutting-edge fundamental advanced science, l Remediating former Manhattan Project and Cold War nuclear material sites, and l Developing new nuclear weapons and naval nuclear reactors. These missions work together by using advanced science to promote national security while getting the government out of the business of picking winners and losers in energy resources. Reform is needed because DOE, instead of focusing on core energy and security issues, has been spending billions of taxpayer dollars to subsidize renewable energy developers and investors, thereby making Americans less energy secure and distorting energy markets. OVERVIEW DOE was created by the Department of Energy Organization Act of 19775 in response to the 1970s oil crisis, consolidating various energy programs that pre- viously had operated without coordination throughout the federal government in a single department. In addition to addressing energy issues, DOE is tasked with: l Engaging in basic and fundamental science and research through the 17 National Laboratories; l Cleaning up the Manhattan Project and Cold War nuclear material and weapons sites;

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Moderate

Vector: 63%

Pages: 440-442AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"SRES 536 promotes nuclear energy awareness and its benefits, which aligns with Project 2025's goal of advancing nuclear power through regulatory reform and support for clean, reliable energy, though the bill does not implement specific policy changes."

Key themes:nuclear energy promotionclean reliable powerregulatory efficiencyenergy securityadvanced reactor support

— 408 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise FERC is considering policy statements that would consider GHG emissions as part of its NEPA review and its NGA determination as to whether approval of an LNG export facility is consistent with the public interest. New Policies Since Congress through the NGA has already determined that LNG exports to countries with free trade agreements are in the public interest,129 and because LNG exports help to ensure America’s ability to support our friends and allies around the world while also supporting domestic natural gas production, FERC: l Should not use environmental issues like climate change as a reason to stop LNG projects. l Should ensure that the natural gas pipelines that are needed deliver more of the product to market, both for domestic use and export, and are reviewed, developed and constructed in a timely manner. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Mission/Overview The Energy Reorganization Act of 1974130 created the Nuclear Regulatory Com- mission (NRC). Before then, the commercial nuclear industry was regulated by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), which was established by the 1954 Atomic Energy Act.131 Importantly, the AEC was responsible for encouraging and regulat- ing commercial nuclear power. Broad criticism of this dual function was a major factor in the establishment of the NRC, which held regulatory authority while the newly established Department of Energy held the advocacy function. Today, the NRC is responsible for a broad range of regulatory activities, including reactor safety, oversight of nuclear materials, and protection against radiation as well as permitting new reactors, certifying new reactor designs, and regulating nuclear waste management activities. Needed Reforms In 1989, the NRC established alternative licensing processes that were meant to provide a more predictable and efficient regulatory pathway for new Light Water Reactors (LWRs) by combining construction and operating nuclear power plant licenses, allowing for Early Site Permits, and establishing a framework for pre- approval of reactor designs. More recently, the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act directed the NRC to establish a technology-neutral licensing process for new, advanced reactor technologies.132 Despite these efforts, the NRC remains a significant cost and regulatory barrier to new nuclear power. Especially — 409 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions frustrating is that these costs to a large extent are due to the agencies being overly prescriptive rather than outcomes-focused and fall on well-known and understood LWR reactor technologies. New Policies While refocusing its regulatory efforts on new reactor technologies, the NRC should also continue to ensure the security of radiological sources and mitigate cybersecurity risks across the industry. Applications for Combined Operating Licenses (COLs) and design certifications that rely on light-water technology should generally be completed within two years. Early Site Permits should gener- ally be issued within one year for construction on or adjacent to an existing reactor site. Additionally, the NRC should: l Expedite the review and approval of license extensions of existing reactors, which will require the NRC to streamline and focus its NEPA review process. l Set clear radiation exposure and protection standards by eliminating ALARA (“as low as reasonably achievable”) as a regulatory principle and setting clear standards according to radiological risk and dose rather than arbitrary objectives. l Work with Congress to reform its funding approach so that licensee fees are generally required for activities that are specific to a regulated entity, with other agency costs being provided through normal appropriations. Budget In FY 2022, the NRC was required to recover approximately 85 percent of its $887.7 million budget through licensee fees.133 The Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act requires the NRC to recover nearly all of its costs through fees. These reforms would likely not cost additional money but could rebalance the fee-versus-appropriations calculation. AUTHOR’S NOTE: The preparation of this chapter was the work of many individuals. All contributors to this chapter are listed at the front of this volume, but I wish to give special thanks to Brent Bennett, Willis Bixby, Travis Fisher, Ben Lieberman, Brian McCormack, Tom Pyle, Mark Robeck, Daniel Simmons, Jack Spencer, Katie Tubb, and David Walsh. Though informed by many, the author alone assumes responsibility for the content of this chapter, and no views expressed herein should be attributed to any particular individual.

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Moderate

Vector: 62%

Pages: 404-406AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"SRES 536 promotes nuclear energy awareness and aligns with Project 2025's emphasis on nuclear energy's role in energy security and scientific advancement, though it does not implement specific lab reforms or waste management policies outlined in the document."

Key themes:nuclear energyenergy securityscientific innovationclean power generation

— 371 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions l Refocus the National Labs on fundamental and advanced science. DOE currently oversees 17 National Laboratories. The three National Labs run by DOE’s NNSA should continue to focus on national security issues. The remaining 14 science and energy labs should focus on basic research projects; demonstration and deployment of technology should be left to the private sector. This goal can be achieved by realigning the labs to limit duplication and mission creep and to maximize potential. l Conduct a whole-of-government assessment and consolidation of science. Before the start of a new Administration, there should be a review of all the federal science agencies.12 This should include a review of the ill-advised attempt to expand the National Science Foundation’s mission from supporting university research to supporting an all-encompassing technology transition. Specific to DOE, there should be a review to measure, prioritize, and consolidate DOE programs based on a range of beneficial factors, including degree of relationship to national security; furtherance of energy security (cyber but also international aspects); and importance to scientific discovery/advancement. New Policies: Remediation of Nuclear Weapons Development Programs and Civilian Nuclear Waste Cleaning up the radioactive waste produced in support of the Manhattan Project and the Cold War at America’s nuclear development sites is a massive and com- plicated process led by DOE’s Office of Environmental Management. Projected liabilities and costs to be borne by America’s taxpayers, according to DOE’s FY 2023 budget request, total $887,205 billion.13 In addition, the federal government is required by law to dispose of nuclear waste produced by the private sector, includ- ing spent fuel rods from nuclear power plants. The new DESAS should: l Continue DOE’s remediation of radioactive waste created by the nuclear weapons projects from the Manhattan Project and Cold War. Strong leadership focused on accelerating the cleanup, coupled with technical and administrative innovation, will be needed to reduce the federal government’s third largest liability. l Develop a new approach that increases the level of private-sector responsibility for the disposal of nuclear waste. Disposing of civilian nuclear waste is an important national issue that requires strong scientific study. According to an independent audit conducted by the public accounting firm of KPMG, the Nuclear Waste Fund holds $46 billion in payments by utilities and their ratepayers, plus interest, for a permanent waste disposal site for spent nuclear fuel and other nuclear waste.14 The — 372 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise licensing process for Yucca Mountain as a permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel is on hold. Without storage sites, spent nuclear fuel remains temporarily stored at nuclear plants. In addition to permanent storage, low- level nuclear waste facilities are needed. New Policies: NNSA The U.S. nuclear arsenal needs to be updated and reinvigorated if we are to be able to deal effectively with threats from China, Russia, and other adversaries. As a semi-autonomous agency, the NNSA has the primary responsibility for researching and designing new nuclear warheads and for ensuring that the existing nuclear arsenal is still potent. These efforts require significant funding and scientific know- how. In addition, NNSA develops and designs nuclear propulsion reactors for the U.S. Navy. NNSA also plays a role in preventing nuclear proliferation. With strong leadership by the Secretary of DESAS, the next Administration should: l Fund the design, development, and deployment of new nuclear warheads, including the production of plutonium pits in quantity.15 l Expand the U.S. Navy and develop new nuclear naval reactors to ensure that the Navy has the nuclear propulsion it needs to secure America’s strategic interests. l End ineffective and counterproductive nonproliferation activities like those involving Iran and the United Nations. Budget DOE’s total FY 2023 budget request (which does not include IIJA, IRA, and CHIPS and Science Act funding) was for $48,183,451,000.16 Many DOE activities are required by various authorization and appropriations bills. To implement many of the policies contained in these proposals, several laws will need to be amended, including the Department of Energy Organization Act, IIJA, IRA, and possibly portions of the CHIPS (Creating Healthy Incentives to Produce Semiconductors) and Science Act.17 Ending taxpayer subsidies will promote an “all of the above” energy policy, lead to more energy resources, reduce costs, and save taxpayers billions of dollars. OFFICE OF CYBERSECURITY, ENERGY SECURITY, AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE (CESER) Mission/Overview CESER’s mission is to “enhance the security and resilience of U.S. critical energy infrastructure to all hazards,” to “mitigate the impacts of disruptive events and risk

Department of Energy and Related Commissions

Weak

Vector: 63%

Pages: 407-409AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill is a symbolic resolution promoting nuclear energy awareness, while Project 2025 seeks to limit the Office of Nuclear Energy's scope and shift commercialization to the private sector; they share only a general interest in nuclear energy but diverge on policy direction."

Key themes:nuclear energyresearch and developmentadvanced reactorsclean energyenergy security

— 375 — Department of Energy and Related Commissions OFFICE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY (NE) Mission/Overview The Office of Nuclear Energy’s “mission is to advance nuclear energy science and technology to meet U.S. energy, environmental, and economic needs.” It has five stated goals: “Enable continued operation of existing U.S. nuclear reactors,” “Enable deployment of advanced nuclear reactors,” “Develop advanced nuclear fuel cycles,” “Maintain U.S. leadership in nuclear energy technology,” and “Enable a high-performing organization.”29 Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act,30 the Office of Nuclear Energy “has also been responsible for the DOE’s statutory requirements to collect and dispose of spent nuclear fuel…since the Obama Administration’s dissolution of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.”31 Needed Reforms NE is too influential in driving the business decisions of commercial nuclear energy firms. Instead of focusing on a limited set of basic research and devel- opment activities that solve foundational technical issues that apply broadly to energy production, NE intervenes in nearly all aspects of the commercial nuclear energy industry. Absent wholesale reforms that restructure the federal energy and science bureaucracy to eliminate such functional energy offices, the next Admin- istration should: l Substantially limit NE’s size and scope. l Adopt broader regulatory and energy policy reforms that reduce regulatory obstacles, allow all energy sources to compete fairly in the marketplace, and establish a predictable policy environment. This will avoid unfair bias against the nuclear industry. New Policies NE should transition to a more limited scope of responsibilities that focuses on basic research, solving broadly applicable technology challenges, and solving the nuclear waste management issue as it relates to the development and deployment of advanced next-generation reactors, which can include small modular reactors (SMR). While respecting existing contractual obligations, NE should not initi- ate any new civilian reactor demonstration and commercialization projects. NE also should: l Focus on overcoming technical barriers that are preventing commercial reactor demonstration projects from moving forward. Any activities in support of existing nuclear plants and any other projects — 376 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise directed toward commercialization, including licensing support, should be shouldered by the private sector. l Reorganize its remaining activities into three basic lines of responsibility: nuclear fuels across the fuel cycle, reactor technology, and civilian radioactive waste. Budget The above reforms would cost substantially less than the $1,675,060,000 requested for FY 2023.32 Legislation such as the IIJA placed additional funding for new reactor demonstration projects outside of NE. These responsibilities and their associated funds should be moved to NE as appropriate. NE should not simply add or subtract programs, as some programs may help to support NE’s new priorities. The better approach would be to build a new budget and program strategy that accounts for related DOE programs and submit a new budget request reflecting NE’s new priorities. OFFICE OF FOSSIL ENERGY AND CARBON MANAGEMENT (FECM) Mission/Overview DOE is authorized by law to increase the conversion efficiency of all forms of fossil energy, reduce costs, improve environmental performance, and increase the energy security of the United States.33 In recent years, the Office of Fossil Energy (FE) has been transformed from its statutory role of improving fossil energy pro- duction to one that is focused primarily on reducing the carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel extraction, transport, and combustion. This change is reflected in the office’s new name, the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM), effective as of July 2021, and FECM’s mission: “to minimize the environmental impacts of fossil fuels while working towards net-zero emissions.”34 Needed Reforms l Eliminate carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) programs. Despite the recent expansion of the 45Q tax credit for carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) to $87 per ton, most carbon capture technology remains economically unviable, although private-sector innovations are on the horizon. CCUS programs should be left to the private sector to develop.35 If the office continues any CCUS research, that research should be focused more on innovative utilization. l Pursue the processing of critical minerals. Development of domestic critical material sources is important for national security, as the vast

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Sen. Risch, James E.

A bill to amend the Public Lands Corps Act of 1993 to modify the cost-sharing requirement for conservation projects carried out by a qualified youth or conservation corps, and for other purposes.

119/s/1228

A bill to amend the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to authorize the use of funds for certain additional Carey Act projects, and for other purposes.

119/s/1257

Urban Canal Modernization Act

119/s/2753

A resolution designating December 2, 2025, as "World Nuclear Energy Day".