Senate EPW panel presses Nuclear Regulatory Commission on staffing, licensing and White House review

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held an oversight hearing on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Oct. 12, 2025, where senators and NRC commissioners debated how to accelerate reactor licensing while preserving safety and the agency's independence.

The hearing — the committee's first NRC oversight session since March 2023 — focused on implementing the bipartisan Advance Act and Executive Order 14300, workforce losses at the NRC, new licensing pathways for advanced reactors, and concerns about White House review of agency rules through OIRA. Committee Chair Shelley Moore Capito opened the hearing by saying, “So anyway, this morning, we are going to hold our first oversight, hearing on the nuclear regulatory commission, the first 1 we've had since March 2023.”

Why it matters: Democrats and Republicans on the panel framed the debate as balancing two priorities: speeding safe deployment of nuclear energy to meet rising electricity demand and protecting the NRC's technical independence and public trust. Ranking Member Sheldon Whitehouse warned that political intervention and staff losses threaten the agency's reputation, saying, “The industry stands or falls on the NRC's gold standard reputation for nuclear safety. It's now in jeopardy.”

What the NRC said: NRC Chairman David Wright told the committee the agency is implementing the Advance Act and Executive Order 14300 to create streamlined, risk‑informed review paths. He cited recent agency actions including design‑certification extensions, a fast‑tracked review for TerraPower in Wyoming that separated nuclear and non‑nuclear systems to allow parallel state permitting, an early approval of the NuScale U.S.‑460 standard design, work to restart the Palisades plant, and a 6‑month review for DISA Technology's multistate radioactive materials license to help remediate abandoned uranium mines. Wright said, “The NRC is delivering results that matter, expedited reviews, streamlined regulations, and a rededicated focus on the safety mission. We are embracing innovation.”

Workforce and transparency concerns: Multiple commissioners and senators raised staffing losses and transparency risks tied to the administration's rule review process. Commissioner Bradley Crowell said, “My greatest concern is the current and future NRC workforce,” noting attrition and the deferred resignation program. Commissioner Matthew Marzano stressed transparency: “The NRC's emphasis on transparency ensures that the agency devotes its full focus to assuring safety and security for the public.” Senators pressed whether OIRA review could alter NRC rules and whether White House detailees at the NRC — repeatedly called “doggy” staff in the hearing — were exerting improper influence. Chairman Wright described one meeting in which an outside attendee used the phrase “rubber stamp,” saying, “it was actually Seth Cohen that used the rubber stamp comment,” and defended the agency's pushback in that meeting.

Licensing priorities and timing: Commissioners told senators the NRC needs to pursue a mix of near‑term actions (power‑up rates, license renewals, and restarts of recently closed reactors) and longer‑term work to certify advanced reactor designs. Wright said achieving large capacity goals requires utility‑scale plants while advanced reactors and microreactors have specific roles. The commission reiterated that statutory and evidentiary requirements will govern whether applications meet safety standards and that timelines (e.g., 12–18 month review goals referenced under the Advance Act) do not require approval if the record is insufficient.

Specific technical and program updates: Commissioners described several concrete items: approval and early completion of the NuScale design review; extension of design certification terms from 15 to 40 years; licensing steps underway to restart Palisades and to extend operations at VC Summer through 2062; and work to enable uranium mine remediation technologies. Senators from states with nuclear or mining interests — including Lummis, Ricketts and Kelly — pressed the commissioners on state coordination, environmental reviews, and groundwater standards for in‑situ recovery uranium operations.

Discussion versus action: The hearing was oversight and did not change regulations or grant licenses. Commissioners were asked to report back with timelines and to provide written answers. Senators were invited to submit additional questions for the record; the committee set deadlines for written questions and responses.

Votes at a glance: Before the hearing the committee approved two sets of actions.

• Ten GSA prospectus resolutions (considered en bloc). Motion to consider and approve 10 committee resolutions to approve prospectuses from the General Services Administration was moved by Chair Capito and seconded; the chair put the question and, by voice vote, “the ayes have it” and the resolution(s) were approved.

• Catherine Scarlett nomination. The committee voted to approve and report the nomination of Catherine Scarlett to be a member of the Council on Environmental Quality. The nomination was seconded and called for roll; the clerk reported yeas 12, nays 7, and the nominee was favorably reported.

What to watch next: The NRC is conducting multiple rulemakings and is updating part 51/NEPA‑related guidance to align environmental review with the Advance Act and Executive Order 14300. Senators signaled interest in further oversight of OIRA interactions, the agency's reorganization and workforce plans, timelines for specific license reviews (including microreactor and advanced reactor applications), and the DISA licensing path for abandoned uranium mine cleanup. The committee gave commissioners deadlines for written follow‑ups and reserved further oversight as the reforms proceed.