The Restore and Modernize Our National Laboratories Act of 2025 directs the Secretary of Energy to fund projects that address deferred maintenance, critical infrastructure needs, and modernization at National Laboratories and single-purpose research facilities. It also amends the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to require a department-wide facilities and infrastructure strategy and a detailed planning report.
The bill aims to align capital investments with science and energy missions by requiring the Department to identify priority projects and planning metrics. It signals a multi-year, programmatic approach to lab facilities rather than one-off project appropriations, while leaving final funding decisions to the appropriations process.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires the Secretary of Energy to fund restoration and modernization projects at National Laboratories and to publish an annual list of funded projects timed with the President's budget. It also replaces Section 993 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 with a new facilities-and-infrastructure strategy requirement and a report specifying 10-year plans for each lab.
Who It Affects
Directly affects Department of Energy offices that manage labs (Office of Science, NNSA, Environmental Management, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Fossil Energy, Nuclear Energy), the National Laboratories themselves, prime contractors that operate labs, construction and facilities-management firms, and congressional budget and oversight committees.
Why It Matters
This bill centralizes planning for lab capital assets and channels multi-year appropriations authority at a scale that could reshape capital priorities for U.S. research infrastructure. That matters to lab directors, program managers, procurement officials, and firms that deliver large-scale lab construction or upgrade work.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill has two principal parts. First, it directs the Secretary of Energy to fund projects needed to repair, sustain, and modernize National Laboratories and single-purpose research facilities.
It defines eligible work broadly to include deferred maintenance, upgrades and construction of research labs, administrative and support buildings, utilities, roads, on-site power plants, and core infrastructure that supports scientific user facilities and computing capabilities. The Secretary must publish, each year through 2030, a list of projects the Department plans to fund timed to the President's annual budget submission and send that list to the relevant appropriations and energy committees in both chambers.
Second, the bill amends the Energy Policy Act of 2005 by replacing Section 993 with a new statutory requirement that the Department implement a cross-office strategy for facilities and infrastructure. That strategy must cover how offices that sponsor lab work—Office of Science, Environmental Management, EERE, Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, Nuclear Energy, and NNSA science programs—will maintain, modify, close, or build facilities to meet current and future missions.
The statute spells out what the statutorily required report must contain: a priority project list with cost and schedule, a 10-year reconfiguration and operations plan for each lab, preliminary funding estimates and anticipated budget sources, and an explanation of planning processes, metrics, and stakeholder engagement.Funding authority in the bill is expressed as authorization: it authorizes appropriations of $5 billion per fiscal year for each year 2026 through 2030 to carry out the restoration and modernization program. The bill also requires that not less than one-third of amounts made available each fiscal year be managed by the Office of Science.
Practically, that means Congress must appropriate the authorized amounts for the program to take effect; the statute does not create mandatory spending. The combination of an annual project list tied to the President's budget and the 10-year planning requirement is intended to give Congress and program managers a multi-year view of capital needs while preserving annual appropriations control.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill authorizes $5,000,000,000 per year for fiscal years 2026–2030 for lab restoration and modernization but does not appropriate the funds; Congress must appropriate them.
At least one-third of annual program funding must be managed by the Department of Energy’s Office of Science.
The Secretary must submit, each year through 2030, the list of projects to the House and Senate Appropriations and energy-related committees at the same time as the President's budget submission.
The amended Section 993 requires a report within one year that includes for every National Laboratory a prioritized project list with cost and schedule, a 10-year reconfiguration and operations plan, preliminary funding estimates, and the planning metrics and stakeholder engagement processes used.
Eligible projects explicitly include priority deferred maintenance and lab modernization tied to user facilities, advanced computing capabilities, on-site utilities and power plants, roads, and administrative buildings—i.e.
both mission equipment and the surrounding enabling infrastructure.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
States the Act may be cited as the 'Restore and Modernize Our National Laboratories Act of 2025.' This is purely formal but useful because later appropriations and legislative history will reference the short title in budget justification and oversight documents.
Definitions
Defines 'National Laboratory' by reference to the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and confirms 'Secretary' means the Secretary of Energy. By tying the definition to existing statute, the bill inherits the legal scope of what counts as a National Laboratory (including FFRDC-operated labs) and the attendant management relationships with DOE offices and operating contractors.
Scope of funded projects
Directs the Secretary to fund projects 'as needed' to address deferred maintenance, critical infrastructure and modernization; then lists eligible project types ranging from facilities sustainment and construction to core infrastructure supporting user facilities and computing. Practically, this gives program managers latitude to fund both traditional bricks-and-mortar repairs and investments tied to high-end scientific capability, but that breadth also means Congress and DOE will need prioritization criteria to decide among competing needs.
Annual project list and funding authorization
Requires an annual submission to the appropriations and energy committees timed to the President's budget through FY2030 and authorizes $5 billion per year for FY2026–2030, with at least one-third allocated to the Office of Science. Two practical points flow from this language: first, the authorization does not itself obligate money—Congress must appropriate—and second, the Office of Science carve-out channels substantial program management responsibility and influence over which projects move forward.
New departmental facilities and infrastructure strategy and report
Rewrites Section 993 to require a cross-office strategy and a report within one year describing that strategy. The required report must include, for each lab and single-purpose facility, a priority project list with cost/schedule, a 10-year reconfiguration and operations plan, preliminary funding estimates and proposed funding sources, and a description of planning processes and metrics. This creates a statutory planning duty: DOE will be required to produce standardized, comparable planning documents to support capital budgeting and oversight.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Science across all five countries.
Explore Science in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- National Laboratories: Receive prioritized capital funds and statutory backing for long-deferred maintenance and upgrades, reducing mission risk and improving research infrastructure.
- Office of Science programs and user communities: The one-third management requirement gives the Office of Science a guaranteed role in allocating program funds toward user facilities and computing modernization.
- Construction, engineering, and facilities management contractors: Increased project volume for upgrades, retrofits, and new build work across multiple labs could translate into multi-year procurement opportunities.
- Regional economies around labs: Upgrades and construction projects typically create local jobs and procurement demand for goods and services in lab host communities.
Who Bears the Cost
- Department of Energy budget lines and program offices: Implementing the program and meeting reporting requirements will compete with other DOE priorities unless Congress provides offsetting appropriations.
- Congressional appropriations committees: Will face pressure to allocate multi-billion-dollar annual appropriations and to adjudicate trade-offs between this program and other discretionary priorities.
- Lab operating contractors and program managers: Must participate in prioritized planning, meet new metrics and stakeholder engagement rules, and potentially absorb transition costs when facilities are reconfigured or closed.
- Federal program oversight and administrative staff: Preparing the required 10-year plans, cost estimates, and stakeholder engagement documentation will increase workload for DOE staff and may require new data systems or hiring.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between accelerating capital investment in lab infrastructure to sustain world-class science and preserving congressional control over discretionary spending: the bill mandates planning and authorizes large sums, but Congress must still choose which projects to fund, creating a trade-off between strategic, multi-year facility modernization and uncertainty about which priorities will actually receive appropriations.
The bill ties a sizable but discretionary funding stream to a statutory planning process, which creates both opportunity and implementation risk. Authorizations of $5 billion per year are meaningful if appropriated, but because the bill uses 'authorized to be appropriated' language, its impact depends entirely on future appropriations choices and budget offsets.
The requirement that one-third of funds be managed by the Office of Science ensures science programs get dedicated management attention but also raises allocation tensions with mission-driven programs in NNSA, Environmental Management, and applied energy offices that also manage labs.
Operationally, the statutory planning requirements—priority lists, 10-year reconfiguration plans, and preliminary funding estimates—will force DOE to make judgment calls about closing or reconfiguring facilities, setting prioritization metrics, and estimating life-cycle operational costs. Those choices carry distributional consequences across regions and programs and run up against real-world constraints: NEPA, procurement lead times, skilled construction labor availability, and the need to fund not only capital but also increased operating costs for modernized facilities.
Finally, the bill centralizes planning while leaving the ultimate appropriation decision to Congress, which could produce a mismatch between plans and available resources if the appropriations process funds only a subset of authorized projects.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.