Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Lawmakers and experts warn that regulator independence and waste policy must be addressed alongside rapid nuclear expansion
Loading...
Summary
Members pressed witnesses about recent White House and DOE actions they say threaten NRC independence and highlighted the need to modernize the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and pursue consent‑based storage or recycling—while witnesses urged transparency, staffing and oversight to preserve public trust.
A central thread of the subcommittee hearing was not only how to accelerate nuclear deployment but how to preserve public confidence and manage spent fuel as the industry scales.
Ranking Member Pallone opened with a forceful critique of the administration’s dealings with nuclear regulators, saying recent moves "have shattered confidence in America's hard won record on nuclear safety." Pallone cited the firing of an NRC chair, departures of senior staff, and an executive order requiring independent agencies’ rulemakings to undergo White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs review, arguing those changes have reduced transparency.
Witnesses uniformly stressed that regulatory independence, transparency and staffing are prerequisites for public trust. "As an independent bipartisan commission, [the NRC] has a long history of remaining mission focused and relatively insulated from political pressure," Judy Greenwald said, adding that implementation of the Advance Act needs congressional oversight to ensure efficiency without compromising safety.
Members and witnesses discussed nuclear waste policy at length. Lawmakers and witnesses agreed the current Nuclear Waste Policy Act reflects an older era and requires modernization to account for recycling and interim storage. Greenwald and Korsnick supported consent‑based siting for a permanent repository and said recycling could meaningfully reduce the volume requiring final disposal but would not eliminate the need for a deep geologic repository.
John Wagner of Idaho National Laboratory described INL’s existing recycling and fuel conditioning work (DOE reactor fuel and EBR‑II material) and recommended revisions to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to allow commercial spent‑fuel recycling and to incentivize new fuel‑cycle capabilities.
Several members asked whether recent DOE staffing changes and borrowed DOE staffers at NRC risked undermining independent technical review. Wagner and Greenwald said collaboration between DOE and NRC is proceeding under memoranda of understanding in the pilot and demonstration space, and Wagner denied awareness of collaborations that would undercut NRC’s licensing expertise.
The hearing closed with calls for further oversight: members requested additional documents and briefings on DOE roles at NRC, the scope of staff reassignments, and written material on recycling pilot programs and consent‑based siting proposals. No formal committee action was taken; lawmakers characterized the session as the start of intensified oversight on rulemaking, staffing, waste policy reform and implementation of the Advance Act.
