Members probe licensing and regulatory barriers; witnesses endorse milestone-based federal support

Members and witnesses focused on regulatory and permitting barriers that can delay and increase the cost of new reactors, and discussed milestone-based contracting as one method to reduce schedule and budget risk.

Committee members asked witnesses why utilities in competitive (merchant) markets lag in deploying new reactors compared with regulated utilities. Kathleen Barone of Constellation explained that competitive markets do not guarantee rate recovery during construction, which increases financial risk. She said that state actions and corporate offtakers can change that dynamic.

Pat Schweiger of Oklo described milestone-based contracting as valuable because funding is released on meeting performance milestones rather than upfront tranches. "What I like about it is you have to perform to get funding instead of just getting a tranche of money that may or may not produce something," Schweiger said. He suggested milestones should be tied to credible technology readiness evidence and recommended using a technology readiness assessment similar to NASA's model.

Members flagged specific permitting burdens. Barone said renewing an early site permit at Constellation's Clinton site cost about $35 million and took a couple of years, and argued that minimizing redundant work for sites that already host reactors would speed deployment. Several members urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to streamline reviews without sacrificing safety; witnesses acknowledged NRC internal reviews aimed at process improvements.

The committee also discussed the role of FERC rules on interconnection arrangements and how "behind-the-meter" or collocated configurations could lower transmission needs for data centers. Witnesses urged clearer federal rules to enable these arrangements.