Restore and Modernize Our National Laboratories Act of 2025
HB4496, the Restore and Modernize Our National Laboratories Act of 2025, would direct the Secretary of Energy to fund restoration and modernization projects at National Laboratories to address deferred maintenance, critical infrastructure needs, and broader facility upgrades. The bill defines eligible projects broadly to include repairs and upgrades to research labs, administrative and support buildings, utilities, roads, power plants, and other critical infrastructure, as well as modernization tied to scientific user facilities and computing capabilities.
The bill also requires the Department of Energy to submit annual project lists and funding profiles to congressional committees through fiscal year 2030, creating a more structured reporting and oversight process. In addition, it amends section 993 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to require a department-wide facilities and infrastructure strategy covering National Laboratories and single-purpose research facilities across multiple DOE offices, including plans for maintenance, closures, modifications, new construction, 10-year reconfiguration plans, funding estimates, and planning criteria.
If enacted, the bill would create a new authorization for up to $5 billion per year from fiscal years 2026 through 2030, with at least one-third of the funding managed by the Office of Science. It would also amend existing federal law governing DOE facilities strategy, expanding planning and reporting obligations for National Laboratories and related research facilities. The practical effect would be to increase federal investment and oversight in laboratory infrastructure, affecting DOE, the Office of Science, other DOE program offices, and the National Laboratories themselves.
The available record shows no committee debate, votes, or recorded opposition, so there is no documented partisan or procedural sentiment beyond the bill’s introduction and referral. Based on the text, the bill appears to be framed as a support-and-investment measure aimed at maintaining U.S. scientific competitiveness, operational reliability, and long-term infrastructure planning at national labs. The absence of votes or transcripts suggests the bill had not yet generated a recorded public controversy at the time of referral.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of debate, based on the bill’s structure, could include the size of the authorization, the requirement that at least one-third be managed by the Office of Science, how projects are prioritized, and whether the bill’s expanded reporting and planning mandates would meaningfully improve accountability or add administrative burden. However, no member positions or stakeholder objections are recorded in the available context.