US States Nuclear Progress

Alabama, the nation’s fourth-largest producer of nuclear-generated electricity, operates two nuclear power plants that supply roughly one-third of the state’s electricity. In December 2025, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved subsequent license renewals for all three reactors at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, authorizing operation into the 2050s and confirming the long-term durability of Alabama’s existing nuclear fleet.

State-level nuclear policy actions—particularly with respect to next-generation technologies—remain limited but directionally supportive. In April 2025, lawmakers adopted SJR 67, which endorsed the secure storage of uranium-233 (U-233) in the state and called for a task force to evaluate related infrastructure, workforce needs, and federal coordination. The resolution highlighted the potential of advanced nuclear technologies to deliver safer, more economical, and environmentally sustainable energy, as well as opportunities for high-quality jobs and federal investment.

These actions followed HR 84 (2017), which encouraged bipartisan engagement around advanced reactor development. While Alabama has demonstrated strong institutional and operational capability through its existing fleet, the state has not yet established siting policies, deployment programs, or funding mechanisms for new nuclear construction. As a result, current activity remains focused on sustaining legacy assets rather than advancing new nuclear deployment.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Browns Ferry Subsequent License Renewals (2025) – NRC approval extending the operating licenses of all three reactors into the 2050s, reinforcing long-term operational confidence in Alabama’s existing nuclear fleet.
• SJR 67 (2025) – Expressed support for acquiring and securely storing uranium-233 within the state. Enacted.
• HR 84 (2017) – Encouraged bipartisan efforts to spur the development of advanced nuclear reactors. Adopted.

Alaska has positioned itself as one of the earliest states to prepare for microreactor deployment. In 2022, lawmakers passed SB 177, amending AS 18.45 to require the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to adopt siting and permitting regulations for microreactors. DEC finalized those rules in August 2023(18 ACC 87), including provisions for community engagement and requirements for “unorganized” boroughs. These regulations were built on the 2010 Sustainable Energy Act (SB 220), which established a statewide policy treating nuclear on equal terms with other sources and opened access to the state’s Power Project Fund.

Recent developments have moved from policy to practice. In mid-2025, the U.S. Air Force selected Eielson Air Force Base near Fairbanks as the first military site for a microreactor installation and issued a Notice of Intent to Award to Oklo, Inc. for a planned 5 MW unit, pending NRC licensing. If completed, it would be the first demonstration of a commercial microreactor on U.S. soil, placing Alaska at the forefront of small-scale nuclear deployment.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Microreactor Pilot Project Approval (June 2025) – The U.S. Air Force issued a Notice of Intent to Award to Oklo, Inc. for deploying a 5 MW microreactor at Eielson Air Force Base. 
• DEC finalized siting and permitting rules (18 AAC 87) under AS 18.45, implementing SB 177.
• SB 177 (2022) – Enacted. Directed Alaska DEC to adopt permitting rules for microreactor siting.
• Microreactor Siting Pilot Selection (2021) – Eielson AFB was officially chosen as the first U.S. military site for a microreactor installation, marking a major advance in practical deployment.
• Sustainable Energy Act (SB 220, 2010) – Established a statewide energy policy that places nuclear on equal terms with other sources and allows small-scale nuclear developers access to state Power Project funding

Arizona is home to Palo Verde, the nation’s second-largest nuclear power plant and a major source of the state’s electricity. While no new reactors have been built since Palo Verde, policymakers and utilities have started exploring the potential role of small modular reactors, particularly at sites of retiring coal plants or large industrial facilities. A recent proposal, HB 2774 (2025), would have exempted certain SMR projects from standard environmental and zoning reviews, but was vetoed by Governor Katie Hobbs, reflecting continued political division on nuclear expansion.

At the same time, Arizona’s utilities—including APS, SRP, and TEP—are actively positioning for federal support, applying jointly for DOE funding to study SMR deployment and participating in national tenders. The Arizona Corporation Commission has also launched a formal inquiry into nuclear’s role in the state’s clean energy mix, showing institutional interest in keeping nuclear on the table even amid policy setbacks.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• HB 2774 (2025) – Introduced to allow SMR deployment without a certificate of environmental compatibility or zoning review; vetoed by Governor Hobbs in April 2025.
• Utility Consortium Exploration (2025) – Arizona’s major utilities (APS, SRP, and TEP) jointly applied for DOE funding to study SMR deployment, with a focus on retired coal plant sites.
• ACC Inquiry (2025) – The Arizona Corporation Commission opened a formal inquiry into opportunities for new nuclear generation, specifically SMRs.
• DOE SMR Tender (2025) – Arizona utility consortiums positioned as participants in federal funding opportunities for first-wave SMR projects.

Arkansas has gradually shifted from nuclear research toward early-stage policy preparation. In 2019, lawmakers supported a study on commercial reuse of spent fuel, followed in 2023 by the creation of the Arkansas Nuclear Recycling Program under the Department of Environmental Quality. In 2025, the Legislature enacted two measures that signaled a more proactive stance: HB 1572 requires a comprehensive feasibility study of new nuclear generation—including siting criteria, workforce needs, and economic impacts—while SB 307, the Generating Arkansas Jobs Act, authorizes utilities to recover costs for advanced energy projects (explicitly including nuclear) and obliges them to monitor and evaluate SMRs in their long-term planning.

Following the establishment of HB 1572, Arkansas formally hired Excel Services Corporation (EXCEL) to conduct the feasibility study (mandated by the aforementioned bill). The consultancy is expected to provide a full report on siting, workforce, and economic impacts within 10 months of contract start date.

Arkansas still lacks siting or procurement mandates for new reactors, but these steps point toward a deliberate move from exploratory studies toward positioning the state for potential advanced nuclear deployment in the future.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• (2025, October update) – The state officially hired Excel Services Corporation (EXCEL) to conduct the feasibility study on new nuclear energy generation.
• HB 1572 (2025) – Established a technical feasibility study of new nuclear energy generation, including siting criteria, economic impact, and workforce needs; enacted with emergency clause.
• SB 307 (2025) – Enacted as the Generating Arkansas Jobs Act. It allows utilities to recover costs for advanced energy technologies—including nuclear—through a rider approved by the Public Service Commission, and requires utilities to monitor and evaluate SMR technologies as part of future resource planning.
• HB 1142 (2023) – Enacted. Established the Arkansas Nuclear Recycling Program within DEQ to explore the technical and economic viability of spent nuclear fuel recycling and storage.
• HCR 1015 (2019) – Adopted. Supported a study into commercial applications for reclaiming and repurposing spent nuclear fuel rods.

Alone among the most populated, industrial, and progressive U.S. states, California remains mired in antiquated antinuclear politics. Although there is a large fraction of advanced nuclear innovation happening at startups located in California, California’s moratorium on new nuclear plants will force these ventures to seek alternative states in which to build their technologies. California’s leadership has shown no interest in competing to win the race to attract all of the talent, federal funding, jobs, and economic development that will accompany the growth of this innovative sector, and, by all appearances, the state has now fallen behind Texas, Wyoming, Illinois, New York, and even Connecticut.

But, there are signs of attitudinal shifts happening even in deep blue California. Both California’s progressive Governor, Gavin Newsom, who for years worked to force the retirement of Diablo Canyon, and the state’s legislature reversed their decisions at the last minute and delayed the closure of the nuclear facility for five more years. They recognized, if reluctantly, that the plant had reliably provided almost 20% of the state’s zero-emission power and 8% of its electricity for decades. Shutting it down would expose the state to dire and life-threatening power outages without the plant’s high capacity-factor reliability and highly differentiated, non-intermittent generation. It would also set back progress on the state’s climate goals.

Sadly, despite several attempts over the years by elected legislators to bring the state into competitive parity with the country and do away with its 49-year-old nuclear moratorium, make exceptions for SMRs, and/or conduct feasibility studies about SMRs, these bills have not made it out of committee. Thus, the state appears poised to miss out on the energy revolution made possible by next-generation nuclear, even with many advanced nuclear ventures being located in California.

In the ongoing effort to extend the life of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, the California Coastal Commission has ordered PG&E to commit to a larger coastal land conservation package—over 3,000 acres—as a condition for approving the plant's 20-year license extension. The commission is scheduled to vote on the required coastal development permit before the end of 2025.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• SCR 25 (2025) – Supported building a fusion energy ecosystem and planning a pilot plant in California by the 2040s.
• AB 305 (2025) – Introduced to exempt SMRs from the moratorium and require the PUC to plan to increase nuclear procurement and phase out gas by 2028 (still in committee, not passed).
• Resolution AJR 18 (2024) – Called on Congress to find solutions for nuclear waste.
• AB 2092 (2024) – Proposed directing the PUC to study the feasibility of SMRs by 2027 (not voted on).
• SB 108 (2024) – Authorized up to $400M in loans to extend Diablo Canyon’s operation.
• SB 856 (2023) – Streamlined permitting for clean energy infrastructure (including nuclear).
• SB 846 (2022) – Enabled a $1.4B state loan to keep Diablo Canyon open through at least 2030 (possibly 2035).
• AB 65 (2022) – Attempted to repeal the nuclear construction moratorium (did not pass).
• SB 100 (2018) – Set a 100% zero-carbon electricity target by 2045, allowing nuclear to count.

Colorado has historically been wary of nuclear power, shaped by decades of political opposition and concerns over uranium mining. The state has no operating reactors, and until recently nuclear was excluded from clean energy planning. In 2023, lawmakers authorized a study (HB 23-1247) on whether advanced nuclear could replace retiring coal plants, but the work remained exploratory.

That stance shifted in 2025 when Governor Jared Polis signed HB 25-1040, officially classifying nuclear as a clean energy resource under state law. The change makes nuclear eligible for state clean energy incentives and allows utilities and private companies to begin investing in advanced nuclear technologies, though it does not mandate deployment. The move, driven by bipartisan support and grassroots pressure, signals that nuclear will now be considered alongside renewables and storage in Colorado’s long-term energy strategy.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• HB 25-1040 (2025) – Enacted. Redefines nuclear as a “clean energy resource” under Colorado law, enabling eligibility for state clean energy programs.
• HB 23-1247 (2023) – Directed the Colorado Energy Office to study advanced nuclear technologies, including the feasibility of SMRs at retiring coal sites. Enacted.

Connecticut has a state-wide ban, but passed an exception in 2022 that allows more nuclear construction at the site of the state’s one operating nuclear power plant, the Millstone Power Station, which generates a third of the state’s electricity. This specifically allows Dominion Energy to build advanced nuclear at the Millstone site. Dominion has shown interest in SMRs and recently announced a deal with X-energy to build its advanced design, in partnership with Amazon.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Senate Bill 4 (2025) – Created a $5M site-readiness fund for municipalities to explore advanced nuclear (SMRs and fusion), contingent on local opt-in vote to lift the moratorium.
• Ratepayers First Act (2025) – Enacted bipartisan reform allocating $5M to nuclear site readiness and expanding energy affordability programs.
• SB 1560 (2025) – Reclassified all in-state nuclear generation as Class I renewable; established the Connecticut Energy Procurement Authority, Green Bond Fund, and Energy Infrastructure Transition Fund. Passed both chambers, awaiting governor’s signature.
• SB 385 (2024) – Permitted DEEP to coordinate with other New England states to procure nuclear generation resources for ten years after contract expiration.
• SB 7 (2023) – Expanded Class I renewables to include nuclear facilities built after Oct 1, 2023; created the Council for Advancing Nuclear Energy Development; directed DEEP to study SMRs, advanced reactors, fusion, and other zero-carbon sources.
• HB 5202 (2022) – Established a hydrogen task force, including nuclear as a potential clean hydrogen source.
• HB 10 (2022) – Created an exception to Connecticut’s moratorium, allowing SMRs at Millstone.
• HB 1501 (2017) – Allowed Millstone to participate in the state’s zero-carbon procurement program.

Delaware, while the second smallest state, is home to more than two-thirds of the nation’s Fortune 500 companies due to its favorable tax climate. It produces less energy than any other state yet consumes nearly 100 times more than it generates. Despite this, Delaware has not advanced any nuclear-related policies or initiatives. The state has no operating nuclear facilities, has not introduced legislation for small modular reactors or advanced nuclear technologies, and continues to focus its clean energy strategy on offshore wind, solar, and efficiency measures.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• No nuclear-specific legislation or regulatory actions to date.

Florida has taken its first meaningful steps toward exploring advanced nuclear power. In 2024, the state enacted HB 1645, which mandated the Public Service Commission (PSC) to evaluate the feasibility of advanced nuclear technologies, including small modular reactors. The PSC delivered its Advanced Nuclear Power Feasibility Report in March 2025, offering technical and economic analysis, recommending potential partnerships, particularly with military installations, and advising paths toward deployment.

The report also emphasized Florida’s heavy reliance on natural gas, which accounts for about 75% of its electricity generation (vs. nuclear’s 11%) and suggested that SMRs could provide a valuable hedge against fuel price volatility and grid vulnerability. While no siting or deployment policy has been established, these actions mark the first formal move to consider nuclear in Florida’s long-term clean energy planning.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Florida PSC Feasibility Report (2025) – Issued. The Public Service Commission submitted its advanced nuclear power feasibility report as mandated by HB 1645. This included technical and economic evaluation and recommendations for deployment, especially in partnership with military installations.
• HB 1645 (2024) – Enacted (Chapter No. 2024‑186). Required the PSC to study advanced nuclear power technologies—including SMRs—and issue findings by April 1, 2025.

Georgia’s nuclear profile is anchored by the completion of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 — the first newly built commercial reactors in the U.S. in more than 30 years and now the largest nuclear power plant in the country, with a generating capacity north of 4,500 megawatts. The outcome was shaped by earlier laws: SB 31 (2009) authorized utilities to recover financing costs from ratepayers during construction, a mechanism that helped sustain Vogtle through years of overruns. Nearly a decade later, SB 355 (2018) closed that option for future projects, reflecting concerns about cost exposure.

Nevertheless, each new unit delivers significant value, producing carbon-free electricity sufficient to power about half a million homes and contributing to a measurable reduction in the state’s emissions intensity. Georgia has not promoted policies for advanced reactors, with its stance centered on large-scale builds rather than next-generation designs.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• PSC Regulation No. 29849 (2023) – Approved Georgia Power’s request to adjust rates to recover “reasonable and prudent” costs from Vogtle Units 3 & 4.
• SB 355 (2018) – Enacted. Sunsets the Nuclear Energy Financing Act’s CWIP (Construction Work in Progress) prepayment mechanism for new nuclear plants after Jan 1, 2018.
• SB 31 (2009) – Enacted as the Nuclear Energy Financing Act. Allowed utilities to recover financing costs during construction of PSC-certified nuclear plants directly from customers.

Hawaii has one of the most restrictive nuclear policies in the U.S., anchored in Article XI, Section 8 of its Constitution, which prohibits the construction of nuclear fission plants without a two-thirds vote of both legislative chambers.

No nuclear facilities have ever been built in the state, and nuclear has been excluded from its energy strategy, which instead focuses on achieving 100% renewable electricity by 2045 through solar, wind, and geothermal.

Public debate has focused on renewable integration and reducing reliance on imported petroleum, though nuclear has recently entered the conversation. In 2024, lawmakers introduced a constitutional amendment (HB 1741) to repeal the two-thirds approval requirement, but the measure did not advance to voters. In 2025, legislators enacted SB 1588, establishing a Nuclear Energy Task Force within the Hawaii State Energy Office. The task force is charged with evaluating nuclear’s potential role and must deliver an interim report before the 2026 session. While the constitutional restriction remains in force, this represents Hawaii’s first formal review of nuclear power in decades.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• SB 1588 (2025) – Enacted. Established a Nuclear Energy Task Force within the Hawaii State Energy Office; interim report due before the 2026 session.
• HB 1741 (2024) – Proposed a constitutional amendment to repeal Article XI, Section 8; would have allowed nuclear with majority approval.
• Hawaii Constitution, Article XI, Section 8 (1978–present) – Prohibits nuclear fission power plants and disposal of radioactive material without a two-thirds vote of both legislative chambers.

Idaho has emerged as one of the most active states in advanced nuclear development, largely defined by the work of the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The Legislature has consistently supported nuclear’s role in the state—from a 2020 resolution recognizing its emissions-free benefits to a 2023 law expanding the statutory definition of “clean energy” to include nuclear. In 2024, lawmakers reinforced INL’s role by formally supporting the newly formed Idaho Advanced Energy Consortium.

At the project level, Idaho is now home to several first-of-kind demonstrations. In July 2025, the U.S. Department of Energy conditionally selected Radiant’s Kaleidos microreactor for testing at INL’s new DOME facility, marking what is on its way to becoming the first new U.S. reactor design to be tested in that environment. Around the same time, Oklo advanced its 15 MW Aurora reactor into pre-construction, while Sawtooth Energy proposed a 462 MW NuScale-based SMR project near Jerome, though its viability remains uncertain. INL itself has broadened its experimental portfolio to include MARVEL, Project Pele, and the Aalo-X reactor, and even partnered with Amazon Web Services to deploy AI tools for reactor modeling and licensing.

In September 2025, Governor Brad Little signed Executive Order 2025-09 to formally create the Idaho Advanced Nuclear Energy Task Force, with the aim to assess, recommend, and support strategies that advance the state's leading role in nuclear energy innovation. The Task Force, supported by staff from the Governor’s Office of Energy and Mineral Resources (OEMR) and the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), brings together government, industry, utility, education, workforce development, and tribal leaders to focus on smart policy, responsible deployment, workforce growth, and long-term energy security. In February 2026, the Task Force convened its first inaugural meeting at the Idaho State Capitol, hosting: the State Governor (Brad Little), the DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy, the INL, the OEMR, and reactor developers Aalo Atomics, Oklo, and Antares. The next meeting is scheduled for May 21, 2026.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Executive Order 2025-09 (2025) – Signed by Governor Brad Little on Sept. 22, 2025, to establish the Idaho Advanced Nuclear Energy Task Force, with the aim to assess, recommend, and support strategies that advance Idaho’s leadership in nuclear energy innovation, deployment, and workforce development.
• Executive Order 2025-09 (2025) – Signed by Governor Brad Little on Sept. 22, 2025, to establish the Idaho Advanced Nuclear Energy Task Force, with the aim to assess, recommend, and support strategies that advance Idaho’s leadership in nuclear energy innovation, deployment, and workforce development.
• Radiant DOE/DOME Selection (2025) – DOE conditionally selected Radiant’s Kaleidos microreactor for the first-ever Demonstration of Microreactor Experiments (DOME) testbed at Idaho National Laboratory. Testing scheduled to begin Spring 2026.
• Oklo Aurora Pre-construction (2025) – Kiewit Nuclear Solutions chosen as lead constructor for Oklo’s 15 MW Aurora fast reactor at INL; pre-construction expected 2025, operations targeted for 2027–28.
• Sawtooth Energy SMR Proposal (2025) – Proposed 462 MW (six NuScale modules) plant near Jerome, Idaho. Draft EIS underway; project viability uncertain.
• INL Advanced Reactor Expansion (2025) – INL announced expansion of advanced reactor test programs, including MARVEL, Project Pele tests, and Aalo-X experimental reactor planning.
• INL–AWS AI Partnership (2025) – INL partnered with Amazon Web Services to develop digital twins and AI for reactor design and licensing acceleration.
• Senate Concurrent Resolution (2024) – Adopted. Legislature affirmed strong support for INL and recognized the Idaho Advanced Energy Consortium.
• HB 96 (2023) – Enacted. Expanded the statutory definition of “clean energy” to include nuclear, hydrogen, storage, and other zero-carbon sources.
• HCR 31 (2020) – Enacted. Recognized nuclear power as a significant emissions-free resource and affirmed INL’s contributions.
• Executive Order 2018-07 (2018) – Issued. Directed support for promotion and deployment of advanced nuclear reactor technologies, including SMRs, in Idaho.

One of the largest nuclear generating states, Illinois, produces 53% of its electricity (and 90% of its clean energy) from nuclear power. The state has moved decisively to encourage new construction. While lawmakers had previously passed HB 2473 in 2023, which partially lifted the state's moratorium to permit SMRs ≤300 MW, the most significant policy shift came in late 2025. In October 2025, the General Assembly passed the Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act (SB 25), which enacts a full repeal of the 30-year moratorium on new, large-scale nuclear reactors. On January 8, 2026, the bill was formally signed into law by Governor J.B. Pritzker, which also includes provisions for increased battery storage and expanded energy efficiency programs. This dramatic action positions Illinois to further encourage new nuclear development, including large-scale projects, in the race to meet net-zero goals.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• SB0025 (October 30th, 2025) – The Illinois General Assembly passed a clean energy bill, the Clean & Reliable Grid Affordability Act, i.e., Senate Bill 2025, which fully lifts the state’s 30-year moratorium on building new, large-scale nuclear reactors beginning January 2026.
• Governor Signals Full Repeal (Aug 2025) – Gov. Pritzker publicly expressed support for ending Illinois’s nuclear moratorium entirely to help meet net-zero goals.
• SB 2681 (2025) – Introduced to fast-track SMR permitting by requiring state agencies to decide within 150–300 days or risk automatic approval.
• SB 1527 (2025) – Proposed a full repeal of Illinois’s moratorium on new nuclear construction; currently in Senate committee.
• HB 3603 / SB 1874 (2025) – Companion bills to allow construction of advanced nuclear reactors above 300 MW starting January 1, 2026 (pending).
• Meta–Constellation Power Agreement (June 2025) – Meta signed a 20-year deal with Constellation Energy to purchase output from the Clinton nuclear plant, supporting its relicensing as subsidies phase out.
• HB 2473 (2023) – Lifted Illinois’s 36-year moratorium to permit SMRs ≤300 MW; updated waste, radiation protection, and regulatory standards. Signed into law by Gov. Pritzker.
• HB 1079 (2023) – Advanced in committee to delete language banning new nuclear until federal waste disposal technology is approved.
• SB 18 (2021) – Established a zero-emission credit (ZEC) program for the Byron, Dresden, and Braidwood nuclear facilities, ensuring continued operation.
• HB 2940 (2019) – Directed the Illinois Emergency Management Agency to study nuclear policy, siting standards, health and safety impacts, and reporting requirements for radioactive emissions.

Indiana lawmakers passed legislation to let utilities more quickly seek reimbursement for the cost to build a modular reactor, undoing a decades-old prohibition designed to protect ratepayers from bloated, inefficient, or, worse, aborted power projects.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• SMR Cost Recovery Law (2023) – Allowed utilities to more quickly seek reimbursement for building small modular reactors, undoing a decades-old restriction on passing construction costs to ratepayers.
• SB 381 (2022) – Established a statewide program for managing sources of radiation.
• SB 271 (2022) – Defined “small modular nuclear reactor” and directed the state to adopt rules for SMR construction, purchase, or lease.
• HR 54 (2013) – Called for a study on SMRs, including economic impacts (cost, jobs, savings for ratepayers) and technical/regulatory feasibility.

Iowa has no operating nuclear facilities following the 2020 permanent shutdown of the Duane Arnold Energy Center, the state’s only commercial nuclear power plant. In August 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved a waiver allowing NextEra Energy to move forward with plans to restart Duane Arnold by 2028–2029, subject to restoration of its NRC operating license. NextEra has begun preliminary recommissioning work and is in talks with potential buyers for the plant’s output.

Beyond Duane Arnold, state-level nuclear policy remains limited. Governor Kim Reynolds has proposed establishing a Nuclear Energy Task Force and expressed openness to include nuclear energy in the Iowa Energy Plan, but no new legislation has been enacted to date.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• FERC Waiver (Aug 2025) – Approved. Allows NextEra to restart Duane Arnold by consolidating interconnection agreements; restart targeted for 2028–2029.
• NRC License Restoration Request (Jan 2025) – NextEra petitioned NRC to restore Duane Arnold’s operating license.

Kansas has one nuclear power plant, Wolf Creek Generating Station (co-owned by Kansas utilities but licensed by the NRC), which generates almost 20% of the state’s electricity. State policy has not actively promoted new nuclear development, but nuclear has been referenced in energy planning documents as a potential zero-carbon option.

A new bill, SB 274 (2025), would require the Kansas Corporation Commission to hire a consulting firm to conduct a technical and legal feasibility study on nuclear energy generation in the state, including designs, environmental implications, SMRs, workforce impacts, and economics. The bill was referred to the Senate Utilities Committee and did not proceed further.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• KS SB 274 (2025) – Directs a feasibility study on new nuclear energy generation in Kansas. Referred to Senate Utilities Committee; not enacted.
• Wolf Creek Participation – Kansas utilities (Evergy, KEPCo, and Kansas Electric Power Cooperative) continue as part-owners of the Wolf Creek nuclear plant, providing ~1,200 MW of baseload power into the regional grid.

Kentucky has moved from lifting its moratorium in 2017 to building a full policy framework for nuclear development. This was followed by incremental policy building: in 2023, lawmakers established a Nuclear Energy Development Working Group, and in 2024, enacted SB 198, creating the Kentucky Nuclear Energy Development Authority (KNEDA) to oversee siting, workforce training, and “nuclear-ready” community designations. Despite a gubernatorial veto, the bill passed with strong bipartisan support, and lawmakers appropriated $20 million to the University of Kentucky to bolster research and planning efforts.

Momentum accelerated in 2025. SB 179 launched the Nuclear Energy Development Grant Program, offering up to $2 million per award to nuclear projects under KNEDA’s oversight. That same session, HCR 22 formally recognized the importance of nuclear energy, tying Kentucky’s recent efforts to its earlier repeal of the moratorium. In August, General Matter signed a multi-decade lease at the DOE’s Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant to establish new uranium enrichment capacity, positioning western Kentucky as a potential supply chain hub.

Altogether, Kentucky has progressed from lifting restrictions to actively funding research, building institutions, and attracting industry partners. Its stance on nuclear has seen a major uplift, with an emphasis on innovation, supply chain infrastructure, and workforce preparation.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• SB 179 (2025) – Established the Nuclear Energy Development Grant Program, administered by the Kentucky Nuclear Energy Development Authority (KNEDA); provides grant funding (up to $2M per award) for nuclear projects, with required reporting to the state commission.
• HCR 22 (2025) – A concurrent resolution recognizing the importance of nuclear energy, referencing SB 11 (2017), the creation of a nuclear working group (2023), and SB 198 (2024), which established KNEDA.
• DOE Paducah Enrichment Project (Aug 2025) – General Matter signed a multi-decade lease for the DOE's Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant site to develop uranium enrichment capability, reviving Paducah as a nuclear supply chain hub.
• SB 198 (2024) – Created the Kentucky Nuclear Energy Development Authority to support siting, workforce development, and “nuclear-ready” community designations. Passed with bipartisan support over a governor’s veto.
• SB 198 – DOE Appropriation (2024) – Allocated $20M (FY 2025) to the University of Kentucky’s Center for Applied Energy Research to support KNEDA and nuclear planning efforts.
• SJR 79 (2023) – Created the Nuclear Energy Development Working Group to recommend structure and policy for a permanent nuclear energy commission.
• SB 11 (2017) – Repealed Kentucky's moratorium on the construction of new nuclear facilities.

Louisiana is making modest but clear strides toward laying the groundwork for future advanced nuclear energy deployment. In 2025, the Legislature passed SB 127, which empowers the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) to establish an expedited permitting process for small modular reactors.

Complementing this, HR 249 (2025) sets up a state task force to study SMR policy and development opportunities. Another resolution, HR 212, directs the Department of Energy and Natural Resources and the Public Service Commission to examine the feasibility of transitioning to nuclear energy, evaluating its costs, risks, and benefits.

Legislation such as Act 462 (HB 692) extends the “green energy” designation under state law to include nuclear power, shifting state-level energy prioritization toward more reliable carbon-free sources.

In April 2025, Louisiana also joined a multi-state lawsuit challenging federal SMR licensing rules, aiming to reduce overly burdensome regulatory standards that hinder innovation.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• SB 127 (2025) – Enacted. Enables expedited environmental permitting for SMRs via LDEQ.
• HR 249 (2025) – Established a task force to study and recommend SMR development policies. Enrolled.
• HR 212 (2025) – Asks state agencies to assess the feasibility of nuclear energy adoption. Passed.
• HB 692 / Act 462 (2025) – Reclassified nuclear power (and natural gas) as “green energy” under state law.
• Multi-state Federal SMR Rules Lawsuit (2025) – Louisiana joined legal challenge to ease federal licensing burdens on SMRs.

Maine, which has not had an operating nuclear power plant since 1996, considered a bill to classify nuclear power as “clean,” to thus qualify it for carbon credits and other preferential treatment.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• SP 738 – LD 1868 (2025) – Signed into law on June 20, 2025. Establishes “clean” (Class III) resources—including nuclear power—and authorizes tradable clean energy credits, formalizing nuclear’s eligibility under Maine’s clean energy standards.
• Public Hearing Context (2025) – Three nuclear-related bills (LD 342, LD 343, LD 601) were publicly debated; consensus acknowledged nuclear as low-carbon, though cost, waste, and regulatory concerns were raised—LD 343 remains under consideration.
• LD 343 (2025) – Proposed directing the Public Utilities Commission to annually solicit informational bids for SMRs (≤350 MW); carried over to the next session, still under committee review.
• LD 342 (2025) – Sought to include nuclear power plants built post-2025 in Maine's Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS); died in committee (marked as “DEAD” as of May 2025).
• LD 601 (2025) – Proposed removing the requirement for statewide referenda for nuclear plant building and related facilities; advanced in committee but not enacted.

Maryland joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’ Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, to develop supportive policies, coordinate with private stakeholders, and work toward unique procurement and financing options for nuclear energy projects. Meanwhile, lawmakers in Maryland are considering a bill that would include nuclear power in a new zero-emissions credit program, creating an additional revenue stream for nuclear projects there.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Next Generation Energy Act (H.B. 1035 / S.B. 937, 2025) – Enacted. Establishes procurement authority for “dispatchable” clean energy, including nuclear; codifies state policy support for advanced nuclear; prioritizes permitting for zero-carbon firm resources.
• AACE Act (S.B. 316 / H.B. 398, 2025) – Introduced, in committee. Would create zero-emission credits for nuclear and require utilities to include nuclear in procurement plans.
• ANFMI Membership (2025) – Maryland formally joined the multi-state Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative to coordinate procurement and financing models for advanced nuclear projects.

Massachusetts has no operating nuclear plants after the permanent closure of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in 2019, which generated 20% of the state’s electricity. Since then, most legislative attention has focused on decommissioning oversight and public-health measures around Pilgrim, and the state has relied on offshore wind, hydro imports, and solar to meet its aggressive climate goals. However, in 2025, Gov. Maura Healey introduced the Energy Affordability, Independence & Innovation Act, which would allow the Commonwealth to secure new sources of power generation, energy storage, and demand response, including exploring “cutting-edge” nuclear technologies as part of an all-of-the-above approach. The proposal is pending in the Legislature.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Energy Affordability, Independence & Innovation Act (2025) – Governor’s bill filed May 13, 2025; would enable the state to explore “cutting-edge nuclear technologies” and expand procurement authority. Pending.
• S.1498 (2023) – Public-safety bill concerning communities around aging nuclear plants and high-level waste sites (Pilgrim context). Referred to committee.
• Pilgrim Nuclear Decommissioning (2019–ongoing) – Entergy permanently closed Pilgrim; Holtec is managing decommissioning and spent fuel storage.

Michigan has worked to protect and increase its nuclear power and sits at the forefront of resurgent state interest in nuclear energy. Michigan’s Democratic Governor, Gretchen Whitmer, worked to prevent the closure of the Palisades nuclear power plant. But, when a mechanical problem forced the plant’s sudden closure, the state legislature agreed to put $150 million toward the potential restart of Palisades, in what would be the US’s first-ever restart of a shuttered generating station. Under the Biden Administration’s Civil Nuclear Credit program, the plant subsequently received a $1.5 billion conditional loan commitment from the U.S. Department of Energy to help fund the repairs and restart, and potentially enable Holtec to build several SMRs on the site as well. Michigan lawmakers are also considering millions of dollars in incentives to develop and use the reactors, as well as train a nuclear industry workforce.

The comprehensive legislative package, House Bills 4124–4129, which offers R&D tax credits, SMR production credits, and workforce development grants and scholarships, passed the House in late 2025, demonstrating bipartisan support for positioning Michigan as a national nuclear leader.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• House Bills 4124–4129 (2025) – Introduced as a comprehensive package to attract nuclear investment: defines SMRs, offers R&D tax credits, production credits for initial generation, and grants/scholarships for workforce development. Passed.
• Bipartisan Nuclear Strategy Plan (Feb 2025) – House legislators unveiled a framework to position Michigan as a national nuclear leader, focusing on clean technology investment, workforce development, and SMR policy clarity.
• DOE Loan Commitment (2024) – Michigan, Holtec, and federal officials announced a $1.52 billion conditional loan commitment to restart Palisades—the first U.S. nuclear plant reactivation.
• Power Purchase Agreement (2023) – Holtec signed a multi-decade PPA securing up to two-thirds of Palisades’ output with Wolverine and Hoosier Energy, supporting revival efforts.
• HB 6019 (2022) – Enacted a feasibility study on advanced nuclear energy generation in Michigan.

Minnesota has one operating nuclear facility, the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, but has maintained a moratorium on new nuclear construction since 1994. Nuclear accounts for more than 20% of Minnesota’s electricity mix and 40% of the state’s carbon-free electricity, yet new development has been legally restricted. Over the years, proposals to lift or amend the ban have surfaced, but none have been enacted.

In 2025, lawmakers introduced multiple bills to repeal or relax the moratorium, including carve-outs for small modular reactors (≤300 MW). Some advanced through committee, but none have yet become law. Minnesota thus remains nuclear-dependent but politically constrained.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• HF 2002 (2025) – Proposed repeal of moratorium; cleared House Energy Finance & Policy Committee, but not enacted.
• SF 350 (2025) – Senate bill to repeal the moratorium (amending Minn. Stat. §216B.243, subd. 3b). Did not advance.
• SF 468 / HF 485 (2025) – Companion bills to allow SMRs ≤300 MW despite the moratorium; failed to pass.
• 100% Clean Energy Act (HF 7, 2023) – Enacted. Requires 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040; moratorium on new nuclear was left intact.
• Nuclear Moratorium (1994–present) – Statutory ban on construction of new nuclear power plants in Minnesota remains in force.

Mississippi hosts the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, a single 1,400-MW reactor near Port Gibson that provides about 16% of the state’s electricity. Operated by Entergy, Grand Gulf is one of the largest single-unit nuclear reactors in the world.

The state has not introduced legislation to expand nuclear power or site advanced reactors. Policy discussions have focused instead on extending Grand Gulf’s license, which the NRC granted in 2020 through 2044. Mississippi’s clean energy planning remains minimal, with nuclear treated as part of the existing generation mix rather than an area for new development.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• NRC License Renewal (2020) – Extended Grand Gulf Nuclear Station’s operating license until 2044.

Missouri operates one nuclear plant, the Callaway Nuclear Generating Station, which provides about 14% of the state’s electricity. The facility has been in operation since 1984 and is licensed to run until 2044. 

The state has not enacted new legislation to support advanced nuclear, and no proposals for additional nuclear facilities have advanced in recent years. Energy policy discussions in Missouri remain dominated by fossil fuel generation, with renewables and efficiency gaining attention. Nuclear has been treated as a stable, existing asset rather than a growth area.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• NRC License Renewal (2015) – Extended Callaway’s operating license through 2044.

Montana has gradually shifted from restrictive policies toward enabling a broader role for nuclear energy. In 2021, lawmakers repealed the requirement for statewide referenda on siting new nuclear facilities and commissioned a study on the feasibility of replacing coal plants with advanced reactors. More recently, though, the Legislature has moved into the nuclear fuel cycle. In 2025, HB 696 authorized uranium conversion and enrichment facilities, while HB 623 created a path for temporary in-state spent fuel storage under state and federal oversight.

Rather than focusing only on generation, Montana is now laying the groundwork across the full nuclear value chain. Its policies suggest interest in maintaining energy production from retiring coal sites while exploring whether advanced reactors and fuel-cycle infrastructure could anchor new economic activity.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• HB 696 (2025) – Enacted. Established a legislative framework authorizing uranium conversion and enrichment facilities in the state.
• HB 623 (2025) – Enacted. Authorizes legislative approval for siting temporary spent nuclear fuel storage facilities—only if fuel is produced in-state and approved by state DEQ and the NRC.
• SJR 3 (2021) – Directed a feasibility study on replacing retiring coal plants with advanced nuclear reactors.
• HB 273 (2021) – Repealed requirement for statewide public referenda on siting new nuclear facilities.

Nebraska is beginning to integrate nuclear into its long-term clean energy planning. The Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) announced in 2025 that it is evaluating options to expand nuclear capacity, including at the Cooper Nuclear Station, as part of its path to net-zero emissions. State regulators have also highlighted nuclear as a source of clean, firm baseload energy, underscoring its potential role in maintaining grid reliability.

Community-level planning is underway as well: sixteen sites across the state, including Kearney, are being studied for their suitability to host advanced reactors. Nebraska had already laid policy groundwork with LB 84 (2021), which made nuclear eligible for renewable energy tax incentives. The state has not yet committed to deployment, leaving its position exploratory rather than firmly pro- or anti-nuclear.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• NPPD Nuclear Expansion Plan (2025) – Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD) is exploring ways to expand its nuclear generation (e.g., Cooper plant) as a firm, zero-carbon source to achieve the state’s net-zero goals.
• Kearney & Communities Under Consideration (2025) – Sixteen Nebraska communities, including Kearney, are being evaluated as potential sites for advanced nuclear reactors.
• NPSC Discussion on Nuclear’s Role (July 2025) – Nebraska power regulators emphasized nuclear as clean, emission-free baseload energy during a policy meeting.
• LB 84 (2021) – Added nuclear energy as a qualifying renewable energy source for business tax incentives.

Nevada has historically been strongly opposed to nuclear development. The state’s political stance has been shaped by the long-running fight over the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, which Nevada leaders from both parties have opposed for decades.

While nuclear has been excluded from Nevada’s energy strategy, which prioritizes solar, geothermal, and storage, the state does host some educational and workforce initiatives. In 2025, NuScale Power and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) opened an Energy Exploration (E2) Center. The simulator provides hands-on training in nuclear science and reactor operations, intended to build a skilled nuclear workforce and expose students and community leaders to advanced nuclear technology.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• No state-level legislation supporting nuclear, including advanced technologies, has been enacted as of 2025.

New Hampshire has recently moved to more directly integrate nuclear into its energy framework. In 2025, lawmakers amended the state’s clean energy definition to include small modular reactors (HB 189) and adopted a resolution (HCR 2) declaring advanced nuclear development to be in the state’s interest. Additional measures that year updated regulatory definitions to cover SMRs and microgrids (SB 230) and considered — but did not finalize — legislation (HB 710) that would have allowed utilities to contract for up to 20% of their supply from advanced nuclear.

Earlier work laid the foundation for these changes: HB 543 (2022) established a commission to study next-generation nuclear technologies. While New Hampshire has taken several legislative steps toward positioning itself as receptive to advanced nuclear, no projects have yet been announced, leaving the state’s role more aspirational than operational.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• HB 189 (2025) – Amended the state’s clean energy definition to include small-scale nuclear reactors, explicitly integrating SMRs into the 10-year energy strategy.
• HCR 2 (2025) – Declared development of advanced nuclear energy technology to be in the best interest of the state; encourages federal prioritization, workforce development, and positioning NH as a clean energy leader.
• SB 230 (2025) – Added definitions for SMRs and microgrids in state energy regulations, providing a framework for their approval and oversight.
• HB 710 (2025) – Passed both chambers but died in conference. Allowed utilities to sign long-term PPAs for up to 20% of their energy from advanced nuclear, defining advanced nuclear as part of clean power options.
• HB 543 (2022) – Established a commission to study next-generation nuclear reactor technologies in New Hampshire.

New Jersey has been steadily active on both nuclear and fusion policy. Its Zero Emission Certificate (ZEC) program, established in 2018, has provided ongoing support for the state’s existing nuclear fleet at Hope Creek and Salem, with subsidies renewed through 2024. In 2024, PSEG announced plans to seek 20-year license extensions for those facilities. Alongside efforts to preserve the existing fleet, lawmakers have increasingly turned to advanced nuclear.

Since 2022, multiple bills have authorized or directed the Board of Public Utilities to regulate and incentivize small modular reactors, culminating in 2025 with SB 4423 and AB 4215, which allow siting at former nuclear facilities and establish new incentive structures. In November 2025, the New Jersey Energy Security and Affordability Act was introduced, proposing the creation of an Advanced Nuclear Development Fund (ANDF) to subsidize the construction of at least 1,200 MW of nuclear capacity. The bill also includes the creation of an Advanced Nuclear Energy Certificate (ANEC) program. The BPU also issued an RFI that year to evaluate nuclear’s role in meeting reliability and affordability goals, while a separate proposal (S3964) would create a competitive solicitation program prioritizing repurposed fossil and nuclear sites.

Fusion has also been a legislative focus, with S 219 and S 220 (2022) extending state incentives and establishing a promotion act for the sector. With activity on both fission and fusion fronts, New Jersey is experimenting with a broad policy toolkit to preserve its current fleet while testing whether advanced designs can fit into its clean energy portfolio.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• NJ Energy Security & Affordability Act (Nov 2025) - Introduced. Proposed creation of an Advanced Nuclear Development Fund (ANDF) to subsidize up to 1,200 MW of new nuclear capacity and an Advanced Nuclear Energy Certificate (ANEC) program.
• SB 4423 (2025) – Authorizes the Board of Public Utilities (BPU) to provide site approval for SMRs in municipalities with prior nuclear facilities; allows on-site spent fuel storage and requires development of financial incentives.
• AB 4215 (2025) – Directs BPU to adopt regulations facilitating SMR construction and operation, funded in part by the Global Warming Solutions Fund.
• S 3964 (2024–2025) – Proposes an incentive program for SMRs via competitive solicitation, prioritizing sites at former fossil or nuclear facilities.
• NJBPU RFI on Nuclear Generation (2025) – Issued a request for information exploring nuclear’s role in meeting affordability, reliability, and clean energy goals.
• PSEG Nuclear Relicensing Plan (2024) – Announced intent to seek 20-year license extensions for Hope Creek and Salem nuclear plants.
• S 219 (2022) – Declared fusion energy and fusion technology companies eligible for benefits under state economic incentive programs.
• A 4064 (2022) – Directed BPU to adopt rules for SMRs; authorized NJEDA to incentivize SMR construction and operation.
• SCR 90 (2022) – Urged federal government to compensate local governments that host decommissioned nuclear plants with stored spent fuel.
• A 3079 (2022) – Required that all electricity sold in the state come from zero-carbon sources by a specified energy year.
• S 220 (2022) – Established the Fusion Technology Industry Promotion Act to promote and attract fusion businesses.
• S 217 (2022) – Added fusion to the list of Class I renewable energies under the Electric Discount and Energy Competition Act.
• PUC Order ER20080557-9 (2021) – Renewed ZEC subsidies for Hope Creek and Salem nuclear plants through 2024.
• SR 14 (2020) – Urged Congress and the President to increase funding for fusion energy research.
• S 2313 (2018) – Established the state’s Zero Emission Certificate (ZEC) program to support existing nuclear power plants.

New Mexico has no commercial nuclear power plants and has not advanced legislation to deploy new reactors. The state, which holds the second-largest known uranium reserves in the country after Wyoming, has an energy mix dominated by oil, gas, and renewables (especially wind and solar).

Nuclear activity in New Mexico is concentrated on the federal side: it hosts the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, the nation’s only deep geologic repository for transuranic nuclear waste from defense programs, and is home to major DOE facilities such as Los Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories.

The most contentious civilian issue has been the proposal by Holtec International to construct a consolidated interim spent fuel storage facility (CISF) in southeastern New Mexico. State leaders, including the governor, have opposed the project and passed legislation to block it. However, in June 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that neither the State of Texas nor Fasken Land and Minerals had standing to challenge the NRC’s authority to license such facilities. The decision left NRC’s 2023 license to Holtec intact, potentially clearing a path for the project to proceed, though local and state opposition remains.

New Mexico’s broader clean energy strategy under the Energy Transition Act (2019) excludes nuclear, focusing instead on 100% renewable electricity by 2045. As such, while federal and private-sector nuclear activity is significant within the state, New Mexico itself remains reluctant to integrate nuclear into its clean energy portfolio.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Supreme Court Ruling (June 2025) – SCOTUS upheld NRC licensing authority by rejecting Texas and Fasken’s standing to sue, leaving Holtec’s license valid.
• Holtec CISF License (2023) – NRC issued a license for Holtec’s proposed interim spent fuel storage facility near Carlsbad; opposed by state government.
• Energy Transition Act (2019) – Set 100% carbon-free electricity by 2045; nuclear not explicitly included as part of compliance pathways.

New York has no statewide restriction but still has a narrow ban on new reactor development in the service territory of the Long Island Lighting Company, which covers Nassau, Suffolk, and some of Queens counties. Although New York’s disgraced former governor, Andrew Cuomo, forced the premature closure of Indian Point, which eliminated 80% of the then available clean energy for downstate New York, New York’s current Governor, Kathy Hochul, appears to be bringing nuclear back. She announced the state’s largest and most ambitious initiative to tackle the climate crisis with a new master plan. This includes a commitment of $1 billion by the state and specifically includes NYSERDA’s Blueprint for Consideration of Advanced Nuclear Energy Technologies, which outlines a process for the inclusion of advanced nuclear in the state’s Master Plan consideration process. Constellation Energy said that, with support from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, it would apply for a federal grant to seek an early site permit “for one or more advanced nuclear reactors” at its 1,907-MW Nine Mile Point Clean Energy Center near Oswego, New York.

Additionally, New York State will co-lead a multi-state initiative to support nuclear refurbishment and new nuclear development. This seems to place New York State firmly in the race to attract next-generation nuclear developers. New York joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’ Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI.

In late 2025, the New York Power Authority (NYPA) officially issued two Requests for Information (RFIs) to both contractors and Upstate NY communities for a new, state-developed advanced nuclear plant. The RFI process is designed to select a site and identify a path to achieve at least 1 GW of advanced nuclear capacity with construction targeting a start date by 2033.

Moreover, in early 2026, Governor Hochul announced in her “State of the State” address the establishment of the “Nuclear Reliability Backbone for a Zero-Emission Grid” to add 4 GW of new nuclear capacity to a total of 5 GW, significantly expanding on the 1 GW procurement underway since June 2025. The “backbone” will be created through a new Department of Public Service process “to consider, review, and facilitate a cost-effective pathway to 4 gigawatts of new nuclear energy,” to support New York's Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, which requires the state to achieve a 100% zero-emission electricity system by 2040. The State Energy Plan modeling shows that even at moderate deployment levels, adding 2.2 GW of nuclear power could cut 2040 compliance costs by about $26 billion, delivering major savings for ratepayers and taxpayers.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Nuclear Reliability Backbone for a Zero-Emission Grid (Jan 2025) – Governor Hochul announced the initiative expanding the nuclear capacity target from 1 GW to 5 GW to support the state's goal of achieving a 100% zero-emission electricity system by 2040.
• NYPA Site & Partner RFIs Issued (Nov 2025) – NYPA issued two Requests for Information (RFIs) to solicit interest from Upstate NY communities and partners to host a new, state-developed advanced nuclear plant of at least 1 GW.
• S 8458 (2025) – Enacts the "Nuclear Energy Deployment Act"; directs NYSERDA (in coordination with PSC and DEC) to create regulations to facilitate advanced nuclear reactor construction/operation, establish a nuclear energy coordinator, and administer a Nuclear Energy Deployment Fund. Currently in the Senate Committee.
• Governor Directs NYPA (2025) – Governor Hochul tasked the New York Power Authority with developing a zero-emission advanced nuclear power plant of at least 1 GW in Upstate NY to support clean energy goals.
• ANFMI Leadership (2025) – New York co-leads a multi-state initiative (Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative) to coordinate advanced nuclear policy, procurement, and financing across states.
• Master Plan & Blueprint (2025) – NYSERDA launched the "Blueprint for Responsible Advanced Nuclear Development," initiating a master plan, market RFI, and early site permitting process with Constellation for Nine Mile Point.
• A 5036 (2021) – Proposed adjustment to Zero Emission Credits to account for clean energy contributions within individual zones (pending).
• PSC Order (2016) – Established the ZEC program, preserving clean energy contributions from existing nuclear plants, laying early groundwork for policy support.

North Carolina is one of the leading nuclear power states in the U.S. It hosts five reactors across the Brunswick, McGuire, and Shearon Harris nuclear plants, operated by Duke Energy. Together, they provide roughly 30–35% of the state’s electricity, making the state the fifth-largest producer of electricity from nuclear power nationwide.

The state has not advanced legislation specific to any advanced nuclear technologies, but nuclear is central to Duke Energy’s Carbon Plan, filed with regulators in 2022 and updated in subsequent years. That plan calls for extending the life of existing plants and adding advanced nuclear as part of future resource portfolios to replace retiring coal plants and meet North Carolina’s carbon reduction mandates. In October 2025, Duke Energy filed its 2025 Carolinas Resource Plan, which, in response to unprecedented load growth, expanded its nuclear options to explicitly include the evaluation of Large Light-Water Reactor (LLWR) technology alongside SMRs, citing Shearon Harris and W.S. Lee as potential sites.

While political debate has focused more on renewables, natural gas, and offshore wind, nuclear remains a practical pillar of the state’s energy security. As of 2025, North Carolina’s role is pro-nuclear by practice rather than by new legislation, with advanced nuclear included as an option for future planning but not yet acted upon at the policy level.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• NC Carbon Plan (2022–present) – Utility resource planning framework overseen by the NC Utilities Commission. Includes advanced nuclear as a potential resource to meet emissions targets (70% reduction by 2030, net-zero by 2050). The October 2025 update expanded options to include Large Light-Water Reactor (LLWR) technology in addition to SMRs, as a potential resource to meet emissions targets (70% reduction by 2030, net-zero by 2050).

​​North Dakota has no nuclear power plants and no state legislation for advanced nuclear projects. The state’s electricity mix is dominated by coal, natural gas, and wind, with coal still accounting for more than half of in-state generation.

Nuclear has occasionally entered policy discussions as part of efforts to diversify the energy mix and maintain grid reliability, particularly given the state’s dependence on fossil fuels. However, no bills specific to nuclear power have been introduced or enacted as of 2025. North Dakota’s energy strategy continues to emphasize carbon capture and storage for coal, expansion of wind capacity, and oil and gas development.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• No state-level nuclear legislation enacted or pending as of 2025.
• Clean energy planning remains focused on CCS, wind, and fossil fuel infrastructure.

Ohio’s nuclear policy has been shaped by both controversy and cautious exploration of advanced technologies. The state operates two commercial nuclear plants, Davis-Besse and Perry, which together supply roughly 12% of Ohio’s electricity. In 2019, lawmakers passed HB 6, providing subsidies to preserve these plants, but the law later became mired in a major corruption scandal that led to partial repeal.

In 2022, the House advanced HB 434, known as the ANTHEM Act, which would have created the Ohio Nuclear Development Authority to pursue advanced nuclear deployment, including small modular reactors. Although it passed the House, the bill stalled in the Senate and did not become law. More recently, in 2025, Ohio enacted HB 15, ending coal subsidies tied to HB 6 and modernizing permitting timelines. While not nuclear-specific, the reform could indirectly benefit advanced nuclear projects by leveling the market, as coal has historically been a central economic driver, both with respect to production and consumption.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• HB 15 (2025) – Passed, ending coal plant subsidies tied to prior scandals and modernizing permitting and regulatory timelines. Not nuclear-specific but reshapes Ohio’s energy market.
• HB 434 (2022) – Proposed the Advanced Nuclear Technology Helping Energize Mankind (ANTHEM) Act, creating the Ohio Nuclear Development Authority to advance new nuclear projects. Passed the House, but died in the Senate and did not become law.
• Nuclear Energy Caucus (2019) – Established by the legislature to study nuclear policy, economic impacts, and opportunities for advanced nuclear deployment.
• HB 6 (2019) – Provided financial support to preserve nuclear generation in Ohio and facilitated continued use of nuclear energy resources (later partly repealed following controversy).

Oklahoma has no nuclear power plants and has not advanced legislation to support new nuclear deployment. The state’s electricity generation is dominated by natural gas and wind.

Nuclear has not been part of Oklahoma’s energy policy framework, and public debate and policymaking around energy remain focused on natural gas as a baseload resource and wind as a fast-growing clean energy contributor. The state’s regulatory and legislative landscape has prioritized expanding transmission and natural gas infrastructure, rather than exploring nuclear options.

On December 3rd, 2025, the DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) announced that it had removed all cesium-137 irradiators in the state, as part of the Cesium Irradiator Replacement Project, which aims to eliminate radiological risks across the country. This achievement made Oklahoma the 12th U.S. state/territory to be free of cesium irradiation.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• NNSA Radiological Milestone (Dec 2025) – The National Nuclear Security Administration announced the successful removal of all cesium-137 irradiators in the state, completing a significant radiological risk-reduction milestone.
• No nuclear-related legislation or task forces as of 2025.
• Energy strategy continues to emphasize natural gas dominance and wind growth.

Oregon is somewhat of a paradox in U.S. nuclear energy: a state with some of the strongest restrictions on deployment but also a global leader in nuclear innovation. A 1980 voter-approved ballot measure requires a statewide referendum before any new nuclear plant can be built (ORS § 469.595), and Oregon’s only reactor, the Trojan Nuclear Plant, was permanently closed in 1993. As a result, the state has no nuclear generation in its portfolio and no immediate pathway for siting new plants.

Yet Oregon is also home to NuScale Power, developer of the first small modular reactor design approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and to Oregon State University’s nationally recognized nuclear engineering program, which houses the first NuScale control room simulator.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• ORS § 469.595 (1980) – Requires statewide voter approval before construction of any new nuclear power plant. Still in force.
• No new nuclear bills or legislative initiatives introduced as of 2025.

Pennsylvania joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’s Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, to develop supportive policies, coordinate with private stakeholders, and work toward unique procurement and financing options for nuclear energy projects.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• ANFMI Membership (2025) – Pennsylvania joined the Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative to help shape procurement, financing, and supportive policy design for advanced nuclear energy.
• House Resolution 238 Report (2024) – Joint State Government Commission published a detailed study on the benefits and feasibility of nuclear energy and SMRs in Pennsylvania.
• S 979 (2022) – Proposed a Zero Emissions Certificate (ZEC) program and associated fund, but no further record of advancement; not enacted.
• Nuclear Energy Caucus Relaunch (2024) – Bicameral, bipartisan caucus was reactivated to advocate for nuclear in Pennsylvania’s clean energy future.
• SB 227/SB 576 (2017) – Encouraged FERC to ensure nuclear energy is fairly compensated for its grid reliability and environmental attributes. Enacted.
• Nuclear Energy Caucus Launch (2017) – State legislature formed the first U.S. bicameral nuclear energy caucus to review the economic and environmental significance of nuclear power.

Rhode Island has no nuclear power plants and is one of the few U.S. states with no legislative or regulatory framework to pursue nuclear energy. Its small size, dense population, and reliance on natural gas and imported electricity have kept nuclear absent from state energy planning.

State policy has instead emphasized offshore wind, solar, and efficiency, with major initiatives aimed at positioning Rhode Island as a hub for offshore wind development in the Northeast. Nuclear has not been part of legislative debate in recent years, nor has the state introduced proposals for advanced nuclear technologies.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• No nuclear-related legislation or initiatives as of 2025.
• State clean energy planning continues to focus on offshore wind, solar, and regional transmission projects.

South Carolina is among the most nuclear-reliant states in the U.S., generating more than half of its electricity from nuclear power through four operating plants (Catawba, McGuire, Oconee, and V.C. Summer). The state also hosts the Savannah River Site, a major federal facility for nuclear materials management and research.

South Carolina was once at the center of new-build efforts with the V.C. Summer Units 2 and 3 project, which was abandoned in 2017 after billions in cost overruns and delays. Since then, state policymakers have been cautious on new reactor construction, but nuclear remains foundational to the state’s energy mix. Recent discussions in South Carolina have centered on workforce development, SMR potential, and federal partnerships at Savannah River, rather than direct state-led legislation to expand capacity.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• No new nuclear-specific legislation introduced since the V.C. Summer cancellation in 2017.
• Nuclear remains part of South Carolina’s long-term Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) framework through the Public Service Commission.

South Dakota has no operating nuclear power plants and no history of commercial nuclear generation. The state’s electricity mix is dominated by hydropower, wind, and coal, with renewable generation making up more than half of total output.

Nuclear power has not featured prominently in South Dakota’s energy policy, and there is no legislative framework in place for advanced nuclear development. While national conversations around coal-to-nuclear transitions have referenced states with significant coal fleets, South Dakota has not advanced proposals to repurpose sites for nuclear.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• No nuclear-related bills or policy actions have been introduced in South Dakota as of 2025.

Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee proposed allocating more than $90 million to help subsidize a Tennessee Valley Authority project to install several small reactors, boost research and attract nuclear tech firms. As a long-time proponent of the TVA’s nuclear project, Lee also launched Tennessee’s Nuclear Energy Fund in 2023, designed to attract a supply chain, including a multibillion-dollar uranium enrichment plant billed as the state’s biggest-ever industrial investment.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Sales & Use Tax Exemption Rule (2025) – Exempts sales and use taxes on machinery for SMR facility construction, including when procured through private vendors. Enacted.
• Governor's Budget Proposal (2025) – $10 million to the nuclear energy fund to attract advanced nuclear technology companies; $10 million to support nuclear workforce education; $2.6 million for a regulatory framework for commercial nuclear fusion power and $20 million for the federal grant-matching fund for Tennessee universities and businesses applying for federal research funding.
• Tech-Power PPA (2025) – Google and Kairos Power signed a 20-year PPA with TVA for 50 MW of advanced nuclear from Oak Ridge, slated for 2030. Finalized.
• TVA Federal SMR Grant Application (2025) – TVA submitted an $800M federal grant application to accelerate Clinch River SMR deployment (target 2033). Application pending.
• Nuclear Energy Fund Established (2023) – Gov. Bill Lee created the Tennessee Nuclear Energy Fund with $50M initial capital to attract nuclear supply chain investment. Enacted.
• Nuclear Energy Advisory Council (2023) – Formed via Executive Order 101 to guide nuclear innovation, workforce development, and supply chain planning; final report issued in 2024. Enacted.
• TVA New Nuclear Program (2022) – TVA approved development of new nuclear at Clinch River, beginning with GE-Hitachi’s BWRX-300 design. Program initiated.

Texas prides itself on being the “energy capital of the world”. It is setting itself up to become the “epicenter” for deployment of advanced nuclear and has taken some impressive steps to achieve this goal. In the aftermath of Winter Storm Uri, which resulted in extended power outages that caused many cold-related fatalities, an industry group got together to form the Texas Nuclear Alliance, dedicated to the advancement of nuclear technology in Texas and a mission to make Texas the “Nuclear Capital of the World.” TNA’s underlying premise was that, to meet the need for low-carbon and reliable energy, Texas could not afford to turn its back on “clean, safe, reliable and secure” nuclear energy.

By late 2023, Texas Governor Greg Abbott directed the Texas Public Utility Commission to establish a working group to study advanced nuclear. A year later, in November 2024, the Governor and the PUCT announced the release of the Texas Advanced Nuclear Reactor Working Group’s final report on Texas’ plan to build a world-leading advanced nuclear power industry. The report’s multiple goals sought to enhance electric reliability and energy security, promote economic development, and unleash new opportunities for the growing Texas workforce. In commenting on the PUC’s report, Governor Abbott said:

“Texas is the energy capital of the world, and we are ready to be No. 1 in advanced nuclear power. By utilizing advanced nuclear energy, Texas will enhance the reliability of the state grid and provide affordable, dispatchable power to Texans across the state. As we build an advanced nuclear industry in our great state, we will ensure Texas remains a leader in energy and strengthen the Texas grid to meet the demands of our growing state.”

If you click on the report image on the right, it takes you directly to the report package, which is a thing of beauty. The Executive Summary finds five key benefits to making Texas the epicenter of advanced nuclear in the U.S.: 1) Enhance energy security; 2) Improve grid reliability; 3) Expand economic development opportunities; 4) Capture first-in-nation advantages that bring jobs, revenue and industrial growth; and 5) Capture international trade opportunities as the world works to triple the amount of nuclear available by 2050.

The comprehensive legislative package, including HB 14, SB 1535, and SB 1061, became fully effective on September 1, 2025, officially establishing the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office (TANEO) and the Texas Advanced Nuclear Innovation Fund. This was released around the same time as other major agreements took place: Texas-based developer Fermi America signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP) and Samsung C&T Corporation for the Korean companies to participate in the construction of Fermi's planned 11-GW advanced energy complex near Amarillo.

How will Texas take this lead? By doing what Texas does best: cutting “red tape” and establishing major “incentives” to “attract investments,” accelerate advanced nuclear deployments, and overcome regulatory hurdles. It’s a very good plan...and far exceeds efforts by any other state to attract advanced nuclear development to itself.

Best of all, Texas isn’t merely posturing. The Texas Nuclear Alliance has partnered with the Texas A&M University System (TAMUS, which boasts eleven universities, eight agencies and an enormous 2100 acre parcel of land called the Rellis Campus devoted to supporting technology innovation) and announced that they have selected four advanced nuclear ventures to build their own advanced reactor at Texas A&M. These companies, called TNA Founding Members, include: Kairos Power, Natura Resources, Terrestrial Energy and Aalo Atomics. These companies responded to an RFP in the summer of 2024 to bring their designs to the Rellis campus and were accepted. While there are unknowns about what this selection means for these companies, solving the siting issue can provide a significant advantage in the highly competitive race to be the first to deploy.

[Click here to see how beautifully Texas A&M promotes the Rellis campus.]

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• HB 14, SB 1535, SB 1061 Enacted/Effective (Sept 2025) - The key legislative package took effect, officially establishing the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office (TANEO), the Texas Advanced Nuclear Innovation Fund, a workforce development program, and streamlined uranium mining permitting.
• SB 1105 / HB 2678 (2025) – Proposed creation of the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Authority (TANEA) and a state nuclear permitting officer, following recommendations of the PUCT Advanced Nuclear Working Group. Referred to committee; did not advance.
• PUCT Advanced Nuclear Working Group Report (Nov 2024) – Released final report “Deploying a World-Renowned Advanced Nuclear Industry in Texas”, recommending TANEA and a Texas Nuclear Energy Fund.
• Governor’s Directive (2023) – Governor Abbott directed the PUCT to form a working group to study advanced nuclear and deliver recommendations.
• Texas Nuclear Alliance Formation (2022) – Industry group formed in response to Winter Storm Uri to position Texas as the “Nuclear Capital of the World.”
• Vistra Comanche Peak License Renewal Filing (2022) – Vistra submitted an application to extend Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant operation through 2053.

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox's "Operation Gigawatt" to double the state's electricity generation is driving rapid advancements in nuclear deployment. The state is fulfilling its goal to become the "nation's nuclear hub" by actively attracting reactor developers. In September 2025, Valar Atomics broke ground on its Ward 250 test reactor at the Utah San Rafael Energy Lab (USREL). Further demonstrating momentum, a major partnership was announced in November 2025 with Brigham City, Hi Tech Solutions, and Holtec International to create a "full-scale nuclear energy ecosystem" based in Brigham City. This project, which includes the deployment of Holtec's SMR-300, has secured over $750 million in private investment and is expected to create hundreds of long-term jobs. These physical demonstration projects, alongside the earlier MOU with TerraPower and Flagship and the creation of an Investment Fund, cement Utah's stance as an aggressively pro-nuclear, deployment-oriented state.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Holtec SMR-300 Partnership Announced (Nov 2025) - Governor Cox announced a partnership with Brigham City, Hi Tech Solutions, and Holtec International to establish a full-scale nuclear energy ecosystem, including the deployment of Holtec's SMR-300.
• Valar Atomics Groundbreaking (Sept 2025) - Valar Atomics broke ground on its Ward 250 test reactor at the Utah San Rafael Energy Lab (USREL).
• MOU with TerraPower & Flagship (2025) – Signed a non-binding agreement to assess potential sites for a Natrium reactor and energy storage under "Operation Gigawatt." Preliminary site recommendations expected by end of 2025.
• HB 249 – Nuclear Power Amendments (2025) – Passed House committee unanimously. Creates the Nuclear Energy Consortium and Utah Energy Council, establishes Energy Development Zones and an Investment Fund for nuclear and clean energy projects.
• Governor’s Budget Request (2024-2025) – Proposed $20 million to prepare sites for nuclear development as part of Operation Gigawatt; ultimately, $8.25 million was approved.
• Operation Gigawatt Launch (Oct 2024) – Governor Cox unveiled the initiative to double Utah’s energy production over a decade and included nuclear as a key clean energy component.

Vermont currently has no operating nuclear power plants following the closure of the Vermont Yankee facility in 2014, which used to account for 70%–80% of the state’s net generation.

Overall, the state’s energy policy remains notably restrictive on nuclear since the passing of H.127 (30 V.S.A. § 248) in 1975 which requires explicit approval from the General Assembly for new nuclear power plant construction before the state's Public Service Board can issue a "certificate of public good" for any new nuclear plant. This granted the legislature a direct veto over new nuclear facilities.

However, the state is showing early signs of renewed interest in nuclear feasibility, particularly regarding advanced technologies. In 2025, lawmakers introduced H.287, proposing the formation of a Vermont Small Nuclear Consortium to conduct a feasibility study on reintroducing nuclear generation in the state. Governor Phil Scott, in addressing rising power demand driven in part by AI infrastructure, stated publicly that SMRs could serve as a short-term clean energy bridge.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• H.287 (2025) – Introduced. Would establish a Vermont Small Nuclear Consortium to assess nuclear feasibility; currently under committee review.
• Governor’s commentary (2025) – Governor Scott expressed cautious openness to SMRs as a potential clean energy “bridge,” emphasizing their role amid AI-driven power demand growth.
• Constitutional restriction still in place – Vermont retains a legal prohibition requiring legislative approval for new nuclear construction.

Virginia’s recent pro-nuclear moves include state funding for an energy “career cluster” and a state-supported energy lab that help enable deployment of advanced nuclear reactors near former coal mines. These efforts are designed to attract workers, jobs and investments by companies in the growing advanced nuclear sector, which is poised to begin building SMRs at the country’s already shuttered and retiring coal plants. Dominion Energy issued a request for proposals for a possible small modular reactor deployment at its 1,892-MW North Anna Power Station and subsequently announced a memorandum of understanding with Amazon to support the Virginia project. Virginia joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’ Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, a regional initiative.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• Pellwise County Study Grants (2025) – Virginia Clean Energy Innovation Bank and GO Virginia granted ~$197,500 to conduct feasibility studies for an advanced reactor site in Southwest Virginia. Enacted.
• VIN Hub Grants (2025) – Awarded $1.2 million to the Virginia Innovative Nuclear Hub for nuclear research infrastructure, workforce training, and advanced technology development. Enacted.
• Utility Cost Recovery Reform (2024) – HB 1491/SB 454 amended utility cost recovery laws to allow preliminary SMR project costs to be passed to consumers—capped at $1.40/month; changes effective post-2026. Enacted.
• Governor’s Energy Plan (Oct 2022) – Included $5M for a Southwest Virginia Nuclear Innovation Hub aimed at deploying SMRs, workforce development, and spent fuel research.
• HB 894 (2022) – Directed DOE to study deployment of advanced small modular reactors in the Commonwealth. Enacted.
• Clean Energy Policy (S 1284, 2021) – Established policy framework under the Commonwealth Clean Energy Policy that includes nuclear among viable clean energy technologies. Enacted.
• Nuclear Energy Research Encouragement (SRJ 60, 2020) – Urged advancement of nuclear energy research and economic development opportunities. Enacted.

Washington has begun to integrate advanced nuclear into its broader decarbonization agenda. In 2023, the Legislature amended the state’s clean energy strategy (SB 5129) to explicitly include advanced reactor technology, and although a companion bill (HB 1584) cleared the House by a wide margin, it failed in the Senate. Nonetheless, more recent proposals in 2025, including HB 1679 and HB 1249, would let utilities count nuclear toward clean energy mandates and create a state advisory commission to examine SMR siting, workforce needs, and financing. Both measures remain pending.

Outside the legislature, the most visible development has been Energy Northwest’s partnership with X-Energy to plan as many as 12 Xe-100 reactors at the Hanford site, with Amazon backing the project. Early work is underway, but deployment is targeted for the 2030s. Washington has therefore established a policy framework that acknowledges nuclear as part of its climate strategy while leaving concrete deployment to utility-led initiatives still in early planning stages.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• HB 1679 (2025) – Introduced to allow electric utilities to invest in advanced nuclear reactor projects as part of meeting state clean energy mandates. Referred to committee; still pending.
• HB 1249 (2025) – Introduced to create the Commercial Liftoff for Energy from Advanced Nuclear Advisory Commission to study SMR deployment, workforce development, and site planning. Referred to committee; still pending.
• SB 5129 (2023) – Amended the state's decarbonization strategy to include advanced nuclear reactor technology. Enacted.
• HB 1584 (2023) – Mandated consideration of advanced nuclear as part of Washington's State Energy Strategy. Passed House (91–6); died in Senate.
• SB 5244 (2021) – Encouraged the inclusion of SMRs under the Invest in Washington tax incentive program. Referred to committee; did not advance.
• Xe-100 SMR Project Planning (2023) – Energy Northwest and X-Energy advanced plans for up to 12 Xe-100 reactors at Hanford, supported by Amazon and aimed at deployment in the 2030s. In planning phase.

West Virginia joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’ Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, to develop supportive policies, coordinate with private stakeholders, and work toward unique procurement and financing options for nuclear energy projects.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• ANFMI Membership (2025) – West Virginia joined the Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative to help develop advanced nuclear policies and financing strategies. Continues active participation.
• HB 208 (2024) – Granted the state authority to regulate certain radioactive materials and oversee low-level waste disposal; passed both chambers and awaits the governor’s signature.
• SB 4 (2022) – Repealed the state ban on constructing nuclear power plants. Enacted.
• HR 14 (2021) – Recognized clean energy—including nuclear—as a meaningful part of the state’s energy future. Adopted.
• SR 35 (2020) – Highlighted the importance of clean energy in the state energy strategy, including support for nuclear energy. Adopted.

In Wisconsin, several lawmakers introduced a resolution calling on the Legislature to publicly support nuclear power and fusion energy. They intend that the state, in passing the resolution, make what could be deemed a formal declaration that Wisconsin is open for nuclear industry business.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• 2025 Wisconsin Act 12 (SB 125, 2025) – Enacted. Requires the Public Service Commission (PSC) to conduct a nuclear power siting study, establish reporting deadlines, and include $2 million in funding to support analysis of nuclear and fusion sites.
• 2025 Wisconsin Act 11 (SB 124, 2025) – Enacted. Establishes a Nuclear Power Summit Board to host a statewide nuclear and fusion energy summit in Madison (by 2028), with funding directed to the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation to support the initiative.
• SJR 7 (2025) – Passed. A Senate Joint Resolution affirming legislative support for nuclear power and fusion as clean energy sources critical to meeting Wisconsin’s growing energy demand.
• Assembly Joint Resolution 6 (AJR 6, 2025) – Introduced. Expresses legislative support for nuclear power and fusion; referred to committee and laid on the table.
• Act 344 (2016) – Enacted. Repealed Wisconsin’s moratorium on the construction of new nuclear facilities.

Wyoming, seen as an “early mover,” is one state that began laying the groundwork to attract and build next-generation nuclear prior to 2020, when Republican Gov. Mark Gordon signed a bill forbidding coal plants to close but allowing small modular reactor capacity to replace the coal generation capacity. Subsequent legislation in 2022 and 2023 provided regulatory streamlining for advanced reactor deployment and authorized the state to match private funds up to $150 million. These actions helped the state win over TerraPower, the advanced nuclear venture owned by Bill Gates, which is now building infrastructure for what may be the first advanced nuclear power plant near the site of a retiring coal-fired power plant in Kemmerer, Wyoming. This project is advancing rapidly through the federal process: the NRC completed the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in October 2025 and issued the Final Safety Review in December 2025, marking the first FSE for an advanced reactor completed with a fully risk-informed approach. It helped Wyoming a lot that Bill Gates was then close friends with Warren Buffett, whose Wyoming-based company, PacifiCorp, owns many struggling coal plants and so found a site they were willing to let TerraPower use. Wyoming joined the National Association of State Energy Officials’ Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative, or ANFMI, to develop supportive policies, coordinate with private stakeholders, and work toward unique procurement and financing options for nuclear energy projects.

Key Legislation & Policy Actions

• NRC Environmental Review Acceleration (2025) – NRC completed the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in October 2025 and the Final Safety Evaluation (FSE) in December 2025, accelerating the review of the TerraPower Natrium project.
• ANFMI Membership (2025) – Joined the Advanced Nuclear First Mover Initiative to coordinate policy, financing, and deployment strategies with other states.
• NRC Environmental Review Acceleration (2025) – NRC shortened the federal review of the TerraPower Natrium project in Kemmerer by seven months.
• SF 186 (2025) – Proposed expansion of spent-fuel storage rules to include advanced reactor manufacturers. Passed Senate but died in House committee.
• Advanced Reactor Infrastructure Acts (2022–2023) – Enacted regulatory streamlining and authorized matching funds up to $150 million to support advanced nuclear deployment, securing TerraPower’s Natrium project near Kemmerer.
• HB 131 (2022) – Amended state law to allow temporary on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel at operating nuclear power plants. Enacted.
• HB 74 (2020) – Authorized siting of small modular reactors (≤300 MW) to replace retiring coal or gas facilities. Enacted.