A bill to require reports on the dangers posed by nuclear reactors in areas that might experience armed conflict.

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 28, 2023

This bill requires the Department of Defense and the National Nuclear Security Administration of the Department of Energy to jointly report on national security concerns and recommendations related to nuclear reactors and nuclear power plants located in specific areas (e.g., regions that have recently experienced or are likely to experience armed conflict), including reactors and power plants scheduled to be completed during the 10-year period beginning after the enactment of this bill.

The report must be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex.

Read the summary on Congress.gov

PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA] · D–MA

Committees

Armed Services Committee

0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

Feb 28, 2023
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Feb 28, 2023
Introduced in Senate

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Introduced in Senate · Feb 28, 2023 Formatted Text PDF Formatted XML

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Jan 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

AI Conversation Starters

Explore the bill from different angles

Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze S.571 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss S.571, 118th Congress: A bill to require reports on the dangers posed by nuclear reactors in areas that might experience armed conflict.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/571

Text version to examine: Introduced in Senate · 2023-02-28.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/s571/BILLS-118s571is.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-14T17:07:58Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze S.571 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine S.571 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss S.571, 118th Congress: A bill to require reports on the dangers posed by nuclear reactors in areas that might experience armed conflict.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/571

Text version to examine: Introduced in Senate · 2023-02-28.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/s571/BILLS-118s571is.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-14T17:07:58Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine S.571 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine S.571 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss S.571, 118th Congress: A bill to require reports on the dangers posed by nuclear reactors in areas that might experience armed conflict.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/571

Text version to examine: Introduced in Senate · 2023-02-28.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/s571/BILLS-118s571is.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-14T17:07:58Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine S.571 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine S.571 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.

View full prompt & sources

Discuss S.571, 118th Congress: A bill to require reports on the dangers posed by nuclear reactors in areas that might experience armed conflict.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/571

Text version to examine: Introduced in Senate · 2023-02-28.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/s571/BILLS-118s571is.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-01-14T17:07:58Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine S.571 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.