[Decoding] The New U.S. Strategy for Civilian Nuclear Power

Through a series of executive orders signed in late May, the Trump administration has set unprecedented nuclear ambitions: quadrupling installed capacity by 2050, restarting idle reactors, simplifying regulation, and regaining control over the nuclear fuel cycle. Behind this push lie questions of sovereignty, artificial intelligence, and geopolitical rivalry. However, implementation remains fraught with uncertainties, especially financial ones, generating debate even within the nuclear community.

On June 28, the U.S. Senate began the reconciliation process on the Trump administration’s new budget bill, particularly focusing on funding support for the nuclear industry. Previously, on May 23, President Trump signed four new Executive Orders aimed at “revitalizing the American nuclear industry.” While Republican administrations have traditionally supported nuclear power, questions remain about the continuity of the support mechanisms implemented under the Biden administration, especially those from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

The newly announced strategy aims to meet “urgent energy needs to address the challenges of AI” and to “consolidate U.S. energy dominance.” Though ambitious and offering significant advances—particularly in fuel recycling—many points still require clarification.

Highly Ambitious Domestic and Export Goals

The Trump administration’s strategy starts from a clear observation: although the U.S. remains the world’s leading nuclear energy producer, with 97 gigawatts (GW) and 94 reactors, only three new reactors have come online over the past 20 years. The administration notes that “87% of the reactors commissioned globally since 2017 use designs from ‘two foreign countries’ (Russia and China).” It also highlights that America’s upstream nuclear fuel infrastructure has “atrophied,” with significant external dependence not only on imported uranium but also on foreign conversion and enrichment services, concluding: “This cannot continue.”

The executive orders issued by President Trump in late May set a target to add an additional 300 GW of nuclear capacity by 2050 (quadrupling current capacity), surpassing President Biden’s previously stated goal of adding 200 GW (tripling). Without outlining a detailed trajectory, the administration initially plans to collaborate with industry to facilitate power upgrades totaling 5 GW, support reactor restarts, and complete partially constructed projects. It also aims to initiate construction of 10 new large reactors by 2030.

The ambition extends internationally. The Trump administration intends to compete globally for civilian nuclear projects. The State Department and other agencies, including the Department of Energy (DOE), have 90 days to define strategies, particularly financial and technical support, to promote the adoption of U.S. nuclear technology abroad, aiming to conclude “at least 20 new 123 agreements” (civil nuclear cooperation agreements).

Financial Uncertainty Around Federal Resources

Regarding reactors, the DOE is tasked with proposing federal financing schemes through its Loan Program Office, though amounts remain unspecified. On June 20, the DOE Secretary announced a fourth disbursement of $100 million to Holtec for restarting the Palisades nuclear plant, under a $1.52 billion loan approved during the Biden administration (with $252 million disbursed to date).

The American nuclear industry, via the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) and 120 of its member companies, has mobilized in recent weeks before Congress during the review of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” NEI President Maria Korsnick emphasized the necessity of maintaining the Inflation Reduction Act’s tax credits. Since 2022, these credits have allowed nuclear plants to remain economically viable against gas in deregulated markets. The new Senate budget law under discussion proposes drastic cuts to wind and solar credits for projects not online by the end of 2028, while preserving credits for three non-carbon energy sources: nuclear, hydro, and geothermal, provided construction begins by 2033 (one year later than stipulated by the IRA). Lawmakers also retained the “transferability” of credits, allowing project owners to transfer credits to third parties.

Reforming the Nuclear Regulatory Authority

The executive order “Ordering the Reform of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission” critically assesses the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), citing high costs and lengthy licensing processes. It accuses the NRC of over-protecting Americans from improbable risks while neglecting domestic supply and geopolitical risks. The priority now is to expedite licensing applications and encourage innovative technologies. The DOE will conduct a comprehensive review of NRC regulations, emphasizing efficiency and technological progress, proposing both structural and cultural reforms. A previous reform had already been initiated through the bipartisan July 2024 Advance Act, requiring the NRC to reduce certain licensing fees and authorizing staffing increases to accelerate review processes.

The new order instructs the NRC to finalize new reactor construction and operating licenses within 18 months and renewals within 12 months. Additional measures include fixed hourly fee caps for licensing reviews (since halved by the NRC after the orders’ publication), streamlined processes for reactor designs previously approved by the DOE or Department of Defense (DOD), and simplified authorization procedures for widespread deployment of micro-reactors and small modular reactors (some models or components could receive DOD/DOE-issued licenses).

While developers requested clearer licensing visibility, concerns arose in mid-June following the dismissal of a NRC commissioner and former chair, causing worry in the American nuclear community. The American Nuclear Society (ANS), the U.S. counterpart of France’s Sfen, reported internal expert debate concerns: “While the NRC can and should improve, nothing replaces it, and maintaining its independence remains crucial.”

Accelerating Innovation and Reversing Fuel Recycling Policy

For advanced reactors, the orders propose constructing and testing three pilot reactors at national laboratory sites, targeting criticality by July 4, 2026, thereby reviving successful early nuclear-era R&D at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The DOE must revise regulations to expedite project reviews and approvals under its oversight.

Advanced nuclear technologies are cited as a cornerstone of President Trump’s national security strategy alongside fossil fuels to achieve “Energy Dominance.” Trump has directed the DOE to designate AI data centers, even privately owned, as “critical defense facilities,” authorizing the deployment of advanced nuclear reactors to power them. The DOD, supported by the DOE, must deploy a nuclear reactor on a military site by September 30, 2028. As noted above, these measures will be complemented by the NRC’s accelerated review process for reactor concepts tested and demonstrated by the DOE and DOD, without challenging their conclusions.

To support advanced reactor development, the administration has reopened, for the first time since the Carter Doctrine of the late 1970s, the issue of spent fuel recycling. Within 90 days, the DOE must inventory reusable uranium and plutonium stocks, establish a 20-ton reserve of high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) for private AI infrastructure projects, and propose a national policy for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste management. President Trump also orders a program to eliminate surplus plutonium, processing it into fuel for advanced reactors, and identifying methods for permanent waste disposal. ■