Subcommittee Markup of Six Pieces of Legislation
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy U.S. House of Representatives
Follow its sittings
Kathy Castor
The Department of Energy's recent nuclear supply chain announcement shows the scale of the opportunity: $17.5 billion in loans for long-lead components that could support 10 new large-scale reactors and power 10 million American households and shorten deployment timelines by up to three years.
While nuclear energy can play a key role in powering our future, it will not address our immediate challenges, which means the higher cost of everything right now. Attacking clean, cheap energy while doubling down on polluting sources is not an energy abundance strategy. It is a policy of higher bills, fewer jobs, more pollution, and a less reliable grid. And even if we succeed in licensing and building nuclear reactors in the United States, it doesn't help if we cannot connect them to a modern grid in a timely manner. America needs to build.
Yes, more firm, clean power like nuclear, but also flexible energy sources like storage and more transmission. Just last week, the Department of Energy put out their annual transmission needs study, which emphasized the need for interregional transmission to support reliability, grid resilience, and demand growth. We need strong and trustworthy regulators as well to help us safely advance the next generation of nuclear energy. But the NRC is under stress itself. The NRC commissioners have warned they could be fired for refusing to rubber-stamp a reactor.
DOGE-affiliated staff with no nuclear safety experience have forced out career experts. The NRC has lost nearly 500 professional staff in the past two years alone, just as more than 100 companies are pursuing advanced nuclear technologies and the agency continues to oversee more than 90 nuclear reactors. Yes, we should remove unnecessary barriers, support domestic enrichment capabilities, but it is difficult to do so without a strong nuclear workforce and strong oversight and accountability. Efficiency does not mean cutting corners. Reform cannot mean weakening safeguards.
And speed cannot come at the expense of transparency, independence, and the public trust. So I hope my Republican colleagues will work with us to make progress on building a 21st-century grid, helping to connect up these nuclear resources that are vital for the future, particularly to permit and build new transmission lines and support all forms of clean, affordable energy. We cannot afford to be complacent as our neighbors back home face soul-crushing energy costs and need our help now. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.
Brett Guthrie
Well, thank you very much. The gentlelady yields back, and the chair now recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky, the chair of the full committee, for five minutes for an opening statement.
Thank you. Good morning, and thank you, Chairman Latta, for holding this important markup to consider bills related to spurring further investment in nuclear energy. I'd also like to thank my good friend from New Jersey, Ranking Member Pallone, for his and his staff's collaboration on these bills to ensure the regulatory framework for nuclear safety and security is up to date and capable of meeting the demands of the expanding nuclear industry. This industry, from the fuels, manufacturers, and reactors to operators and workers, will be essential for long-term American technological leadership globally and for reliable and abundant energy here at home. I have noted in recent hearings that we must strive to return to a pace of nuclear expansion that surpasses what America achieved over 30 years ago.
In that period, we demonstrated our leadership on nuclear power, in nuclear power production, nuclear operational safety, setting the standard for the world. While American industry still sets the standard, adversaries such as China are working hard to catch up, whether it's on nuclear technology or AI or other advanced technologies. We can't let the licensing process itself be a major impediment to maintaining our edge. The six bills today build upon bipartisan reforms we started two years ago with the ADVANCE Act to improve nuclear permitting to bring about benefits faster while still maintaining safety.
The central goal then and today is to make sure the NRC licensing is efficient, predictable, and timely. The bills before us today clarify pay authority, improve transparency, and eliminate unnecessary Atomic Energy Act requirements to ensure licensing runs more smoothly, and all the bills deserve strong bipartisan support. While we have some ongoing discussions about the details in a couple of the bills, I am encouraged by the continued cooperation across from the aisle in our shared goals to get this right. I appreciate the work that has gone into these bills today already. I thank both of our staffs on both sides of the aisle for all the hard work, and particularly Ranking Member Castor and Chairman Latta for doing this.
I really appreciate your work. I thank you and I yield back.
Frank Pallone
Thank you. The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey, the ranking member of the full committee, for five minutes for an opening statement.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Nuclear energy plays a critical part in delivering carbon-free power in our nation's power grid. In an era of increased power demand, new nuclear facilities can provide clean energy to the power grid around the clock. Unfortunately, when President Trump took office, he immediately launched an attack against the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, our nation's nuclear safety regulator, by inappropriately letting unaccountable DOGE workers from the Department of Energy to get involved in NRC business. The attack continued a few weeks ago with a Supreme Court decision granting the president sweeping powers to fire our nation's nuclear safety cops on the beat at any time for any reason.
And this poses a serious risk, and it could imperil the nuclear industry in our country. At all three of our nuclear energy hearings this Congress, the subcommittee has heard testimony about how vital it is that the NRC remain independent. We heard testimony from the Secretary of Energy and the chairman of the NRC itself that the NRC's independence is paramount. But unfortunately, Trump and his accomplices on the Supreme Court think they know better, and I just hope the rest of us don't have to pay the price. These actions jeopardize both the safety of our nation's nuclear industry and the public's perception that the industry is safe.
And if the public loses confidence in nuclear power, then we will never build more nuclear power in this nation, and it's that simple. I've made clear that my support for nuclear legislation is contingent upon transparency and confidence in our nuclear safety regulators. For the moment, I'm satisfied that the inclusion of Ranking Member Castor's bill, the Department of Energy Nuclear Transparency Act, combined with continued efforts from NRC Chairman Nee to improve transparency, are sufficient to help us move forward today. But I must emphasize that these commitments to transparency must be an ongoing process, and frankly, it's ridiculous that we had to raise the alarm in the first place. I also want to be clear: even though the majority on the Supreme Court may have blessed the illegal firing of NRC commissioners, I certainly do not.
If the administration attempts to fire or threatens to fire another NRC commissioner, the Democratic support for nuclear legislation will evaporate. We're not going to let Trump endanger the safety of millions of Americans. Now turning to the specifics of the bills today, most are bipartisan efforts to increase nuclear transparency and improve the licensing process, and I look forward to supporting them. But I do have concerns with HR 9613, which as currently drafted, would double down on the Trump administration's attacks on the NRC's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. I do think there are ways to tweak the bill to address my concerns, and I appreciate the Republican majority's willingness to engage us on those concerns.
of any action when we go to full committee. So thank you Chairman Latta, I yield back the balance of my time.
Robert Latta
Well thank you very much, the gentleman yields back. And the chair calls up HR 3978, oh I'm sorry. The chair reminds members that pursuant to the committee rules all members opening statements will be made part of the record. Are there any further opening statements from any of the members? Hearing none.
The chair calls up HR 3978 and asks the clerk to report.
Speaker 6
HR 3978, a bill to amend the definition of production facility in the Atomic Energy Act.
Robert Latta
Well thank you, without objection the first reading of the bill is dispensed with and the bill will be open for amendment at any point so ordered. Does anyone seek recognition on the bill? For what purpose does the gentleman from California's 50th district seek recognition?
Scott Peters
Thank you, clean base load nuclear energy is and will continue to be a critical part of our energy generation mix, especially as energy demand continues to rise. Plans for more nuclear power plants across the country to meet this demand is a worthy idea that this committee and Congress should make a reality through a sound durable energy strategy. One key aspect of that strategy which has consistently been ignored is a solution to the question of nuclear waste, specifically the long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel. Whenever this committee talks about nuclear energy, I talk about the first thing that my constituents think when they hear nuclear, SONGS or the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. This decommissioned nuclear power plant is up the coastline about 20 minutes outside my district in San Diego.
Right now we are on schedule to fully decommission the plant by 2028. However, after the plant is demolished, the spent nuclear fuel will remain on the site in dry storage close to the ocean and population centers and a military center, and people in San Diego are quite worried about it. So I'm encouraged to see the Department of Energy move forward with their nuclear life cycle innovation campuses, which is more of a consent-based siting process for spent nuclear fuel, and I hope that works. But Congress must work in parallel on a durable legislative path for interim and long-term storage and utilization of nuclear waste. That should include removing barriers to recycling and other innovative uses for spent fuels.
That's why the Nuclear Refuel Act is such a great first step and I'm glad the committee's acting on it. Making it easier to recycle and reuse spent fuel keeps them in reactors and away from communities. It also keeps a reliable supply chain of fuel which is good for national security. I want to thank Chairman Latta, Chairman Guthrie and Ranking Member Pallone and their staffs for working hard to ensure the Nuclear Refuel Act could be considered in advance during today's markup. While this bill is only one component of a larger more comprehensive solution to the storage of spent nuclear fuel, I urge my colleagues to support it as it gives us another tool in our toolbox without sacrificing safety or oversight.
Thank you and I yield back.
Robert Latta
Thank you, the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. The chair now recognizes himself for five minutes to speak on the bill. First I want to thank my colleague from California's 50th district for the hard work on this legislation. HR 3975 amends the Atomic Energy Act by clarifying the definition of a production facility to exclude spent fuel reprocessing facilities, bringing them in line with the licensing framework of other fuel cycle facilities.
A strong, robust domestic nuclear fuel cycle is paramount to maintaining and growing nuclear capacity in this country. The deployment of advanced reactors and the operation of our existing fleet cannot be done without access to abundant, secure fuel supply. Efficient licensing of reprocessing facilities, as this legislation ensures, advances our policy to maximize access to the additional energy available in spent nuclear fuel. The Nuclear Refuel Act supports this goal by clarifying that spent fuel reprocessing facilities would be licensed under the same framework as other fuel cycle facilities, rather than production facilities, which require a longer, two-step process for licensing, which is more appropriate for nuclear reactors. Allowing for a more efficient and predictable licensing pathway for reprocessing facilities supports the pursuit of this promising technology.
A central theme of the legislation in this markup is to remove unnecessary barriers to licensing the technology we need for a strong, robust nuclear sector. This bill helps ensure that industry has an efficient licensing path to deploy spent fuel reprocessing while maintaining all necessary requirements to ensure adequate protection to the public. I urge my colleagues to support HR 3978, and I yield back the balance of my time. Are there other members seeking recognition on the bill? For what purpose does the gentlelady from California seek recognition?
I move to strike the last word.
The gentlelady is recognized for five minutes to speak on the bill.
Mike Levin
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last word and speak in support of this bill. When it comes to nuclear energy, I think everyone on this committee knows that my number one priority is nuclear waste. As a country, we cannot continue to develop nuclear power without a plan for the waste. It's not fair to communities like my district that's left to deal with the waste on their own for like 30 years, and who are forced to repeatedly sue the federal government to cover the cost of dealing with the waste.
I support the Nuclear Refuel Act because recycling could play an important role in reducing nuclear waste. And this bill would make it easier to build a nuclear waste recycling facility. But it remains to be seen whether recycling of spent nuclear fuel will scale in the United States, and it remains to be seen how much waste can realistically be recycled. And even then, recycling won't fully eliminate the waste problem. There will still be waste that needs to be disposed of.
So I want to reiterate: recycling cannot be another excuse to kick the can down the road and avoid our responsibility to authorize an effective federal nuclear waste program. I urge my colleagues to recognize this fundamental problem and to work with me to advance bipartisan legislation that would authorize a federal nuclear waste program. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Robert Latta
Thank you very much. The gentlelady yields back. Are there any other members wishing to be recognized on the bill? Seeing none, are there any amendments to the bill? The chair has an amendment at the desk, HR 3978-01, and offer that amendment.
Speaker 6
Amendment to HR 3978 offered by Mr. Latta. Section two is amended to read as followed: Section two.
Robert Latta
If you would report the amendment.
Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with, and I will recognize myself for five minutes in support of the amendment. This amendment reflects suggested clarifications provided by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and stakeholders who are working to develop reprocessing and extract important isotopes from the reprocessing. As drafted, HR 3978 may be interpreted to limit the extraction of certain important isotopes critical to American space exploration and other security missions.
The amendment addresses this by revising the definition to make clear spent fuel reprocessing under this law will apply to the processes that isolate plutonium for non-proliferation purposes. The amendment also clarifies that Congress does not intend to change any of the existing requirements pertaining to the export of spent fuel processing technologies. We must make maximum use of our nuclear fuel resources, including the resources in spent fuel, and license the necessary reprocessing facilities efficiently as we do with other fuel cycle facilities. The amendment helps perfect the bill and I urge support for the amendment and support for H.R. 3978, the REFUEL Act. Are there any members wishing recognition on the amendment?
Any further discussion on the amendment? If there's no further discussion on the amendment, the vote occurs on the amendment. All those in favor shall signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed, nay.
The ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. Are there any other amendments on the bill? Hearing none. The question now occurs on adopting H.R. 3978 as amended. All those in favor shall signify by saying aye.
Aye. Those opposed, nay. The ayes have it and the bill is adopted, the bill as amended is adopted to the full committee. The chair calls up H.R. 9612 and asks the clerk to report.
Speaker 6
H.R. 9612, a bill to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to update the licensing procedures...
Robert Latta
Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with and the bill will be open for amendment at any point, so ordered. Does any member seek recognition on the bill? For what purpose does the gentleman from South Carolina's 7th District seek recognition?
Russell Fry
I move to speak on the legislation, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I'd like to speak in favor of H.R. 9612, the American Enrichment Deployment Act, which I introduced along with Ms. Schrier and Mrs. Houchin. This bill would amend the Atomic Energy Act to remove unnecessary provisions for licensing enrichment facilities so that the licensing aligns with the more efficient framework for other nuclear fuel cycle facilities. Namely, for uranium conversion and fuel fabrication.
All these fuel cycle facilities are more akin to industrial chemical facilities than to nuclear reactors and therefore are subject to an efficient one-step licensing process for the possession and use of the special nuclear material that NRC regulates. This bill makes clear, for example, that construction of enrichment facilities would be allowed prior to licensing under the same terms and conditions already applicable to other types of fuel cycle facilities. There would be no impact on safety assessments, no impact on environmental assessments required under NEPA, nor on any of the requirements for safeguards and security to meet the relevant provisions of the Atomic Energy Act. NRC retains all of its authorities to regulate construction, conduct inspections, and deny applications that do not meet its requirements, and the amendment would not deprive any person whose interests are affected by the licensing the right to request a hearing. If we are going to build out our nuclear industry, we need nuclear fuel for that industry.
And we need a secure, abundant supply of that fuel. In the 118th Congress, with strong bipartisan support, we enacted laws that seek to secure our fuel supplies and to end our reliance on enrichment uranium from Russia, which reached almost a quarter of all fuels used in reactors in recent years.
That Russian reliance is coming to an end and fast, by the end of 2027. At the same time, market demand is driving American enrichment expansion, with existing facilities expanding and at least two new facilities planned to be constructed and licensed. In my state of South Carolina, for example, where nuclear power makes up 59% of our power, we are planning a major expansion to meet our power demands for industry and our residents. This American enrichment expansion is essential for our nuclear build-out, and this bill helps pave the way for safe, secure, and more abundant enrichment. I urge my colleagues to support HR 9612, and I yield back.
Robert Latta
Thank you, the gentleman yields back. And for what purpose is the gentlelady from Washington's 8th District seek recognition?
Kim Schrier
Move to strike the last word. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As we work to expand our nation's build-out of nuclear power, we need a steep increase in the production of nuclear fuel right here in this country. Right now, we don't have enough enrichment capacity. Adversaries like Russia own nearly half of the world's uranium enrichment capabilities, and meanwhile, the US just has just one operating enrichment plant.
And with the ban on Russian uranium imports that this committee enacted, we need our own domestic fuel supply chain, especially for HALEU. That is why I've joined Congressman Fry to introduce the American Enrichment Deployment Act that aims to streamline the licensing process for enrichment facilities while preserving NRC's safety mission. And a big piece of that is giving applicants of uranium enrichment facilities the same option to start at-risk construction that applicants of other fuel cycle facilities already utilize. Still, more needs to be done to ensure congressional intent is properly captured in this bill, that we ensure safety, and I look forward to working with Representative Fry and this committee to make that happen. For our own national security and our energy supply and imminent need to fuel our advanced reactors, let's make sure we get this done.
I appreciate Chair Guthrie and Ranking Member Pallone's continued efforts here. Thank you, and I yield back.
Robert Latta
Thank you very much, the gentlelady yields back. Are there other members of the subcommittee seeking recognition on the bill? Seeing none, are there any amendments to the bill? There's no further discussion on the on the bill. The vote occurs and all those in favor will signify by signify by saying aye.
Aye. Those opposed nay. The ayes have it, the bill is adopted and forward to the full committee. The chair calls up 5549 and asks the clerk to report.
Robert Latta
Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with, and the bill will be open for amendment at any point so ordered. Are there any members seeking recognition on the bill? For what purpose does the gentleman from Ohio's 12th District seek recognition?
Troy Balderson
Mr. Chairman, thank you. I'd like to strike the last word and speak in support of the bill. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding this markup today, and Mr. Chairman, for including the Efficient Nuclear Licensing Hearings Act, introduced by my friend Virginian Mr. Griffith, from Virginia, Mr. Griffith, I apologize, along with Ms. Schrier and Mr. Veasey. This bill amends the Atomic Energy Act to remove the requirement for the NRC to expend resources on unnecessary hearings.
Under the current law, the NRC must hold mandatory uncontested hearings on applications to the NRC for construction permits, operating licenses, and licenses to possess or use special nuclear material.
NRC staff and commissioners already offer more than 20 opportunities for the public and affected parties to be heard in the licensing process for new reactors. Removing this mandatory hearing would in no way impact the right of anybody whose interests are affected by the licensing to request a hearing on specific matters. The bill also provides flexibility to the NRC to use less formal procedures if appropriate for hearings that already have an ample record, which streamlines the process for staff, petitioners, and licensees. I also think it's important to note this bill does not weaken the NRC's safety standards or limit public participation for contested issues. Rather, the bill ensures the commission's staff is able to focus on ensuring nuclear facilities meet safety and security requirements.
Our hearing record developed over the last two Congresses shows that removal of this requirement and modernizing the hearing process will remove unnecessary burdens while ensuring safety and promoting public participation. This is a pragmatic and long-overdue reform. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this bill, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Speaker 15
Thank you very much, the gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Washington's 8th District. For what purpose does the gentlelady seek recognition?
Kim Schrier
Move to strike the last word. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am proud to co-lead the Efficient Nuclear Licensing Hearings Act with Congressman Griffith, a bipartisan bill that cuts red tape, lowers energy costs, and brings clean energy onto the grid faster. Even when no one is even contesting a project, nuclear regulators are still required to hold mandatory hearings that take away thousands of staff hours and increase costs when that time could be so much better spent on contested project applications and critical environmental review. Mandatory uncontested hearings have already slowed down the licensing of three advanced reactors where there is absolutely zero opposition.
Three more have submitted license applications and will still need a hearing, again, even if there is no objection to the project. My bill with Representative Griffith solves this issue by only requiring a hearing when the issue is contested, so that our regulators are most effectively serving their safety mission to protect public health and safety. This is a pragmatic move, and it shifts our regulators' focus to the issues that matter more and removes an outdated, obsolete procedural process. I urge this committee to vote yes, and I yield back.
Robert Latta
Thank you, the gentlelady yields back. Are there other members seeking recognition on the bill? Seeing none, are there any amendments to the bill? Seeing none, the question now occurs on adopting H.R. 5549. All those in favor shall signify by saying aye.
Aye. Those opposed, nay. The ayes have it, and the bill is adopted and forwarded to the full committee. The chair calls up H.R. 9613 and asks the clerk to report.
Speaker 6
H.R. 9613, a bill to update the role of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards and the licensing and oversight.
Robert Latta
Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with, and the bill will be open for amendment at any point so ordered. Are there any members seeking recognition on the bill? For what purpose does the gentlelady from Tennessee's 1st District seek recognition?
Diana Harshbarger
Chairman, I'd like to speak on my bill, H.R. 9613. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to speak on the bill 9613, the Nuclear Advisory Committee Reform Act.
The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards is an important independent advisor to the NRC for reactor licensing. And the committee has a long history of assisting Nuclear Regulatory Commission decisions on unique and important safety and technical issues. Issues that arise particularly with new designs and technology. And Congress established the committee in law in the 1950s to assist the commission on the various safety significant issues confronting the commission when it was licensing the first generation of nuclear reactors. Those reactors and technologies are now well characterized and well understood.
And as we've heard in testimony during the legislative hearing, the NRC technical staff is well equipped to deal with licensing issues with a record of some 4,500 years of operational experience of the existing fleet to draw from. However, as we all know, there's a new wave of technologies on the horizon, which would still benefit from ACRS independent review and advice. HR 9613 preserves the ACRS role and focuses its work on where it will provide greatest value for the NRC and the public. It would amend the Atomic Energy Act to direct that ACRS focus on issues that are directly related to reactor design, safety significant and novel, and have not been previously acted upon by the committee. The bill would update term requirements and require diverse background and expertise relevant to the NRC's mission.
And the bill would update when the commission may direct ACRS to take action. I understand the other side of the aisle has some questions relating to NRC's role in ACRS reviews, and I'll commit to work with my colleagues to see if we can address concerns before the full committee. This bill is important to align the mission of this important committee with the mission of the NRC as we outlined in the ADVANCE Act. And I look forward to working to move this bill and urge my colleagues to support it today. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Kathy Castor
Thank you. The gentlelady yields back. Are there other members seeking recognition? The ranking member of the subcommittee seeks recognition.
I move to strike the last word. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to take this opportunity to comment on a potential path forward for this bill. And I appreciate the dedication of many members on both sides of the aisle to removing unnecessary barriers to energy development in America. And I think there is a way to focus this bill on that, but we're not quite there yet.
The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, or ACRS, dates back to 1953, and the Congress codified its existence in 1957. For over 70 years, it has provided the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission, valuable technical expertise and advice on proposed rules and nuclear reactors. Especially as the NRC's commissioners themselves have become less technical and more policy focused, and the number and diversity of proposed nuclear reactors soar, it is vital that we do not limit the NRC's ability to receive impartial technical advice. That isn't to say that there are not ways that the ACRS's operations can be improved. In the last year, the ACRS has focused more on unique, novel, and noteworthy issues, dedicating its valuable time to truly thorny technical problems rather than well-understood problems.
I absolutely think we should codify that focus, and I want to compliment Representative Harshbarger and her team for including that in the bill. However, the bill would also restrict the ACRS to examining issues only when it is explicitly asked by the NRC, and I think that's a mistake. While the ACRS does not need to examine every issue that comes before the commission, especially proposals for reactors that are not unique, novel, or noteworthy, it does need to be able to speak up when it thinks there is an issue worth highlighting. The ACRS is not comprised of bureaucrats.
These are genuine nuclear experts taking time to serve their country by ensuring that nuclear energy is safe energy. While we want them to be efficient in their work, I cannot support any proposal that would silence them, especially in the wake of last month's Supreme Court ruling ending the political independence of commissions like the NRC. I appreciate the chairman and the professional staff, you've indicated you are willing to work with us on these issues as we advance this bill to the full committee. If we can find a path forward, then I think this bill can be a complement to the other bipartisan proposals that we are moving forward today. If not, it will be a missed opportunity.
So with that, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Speaker 18
Well, thank you. The gentlelady yields back. For what other members seeking recognition, for what purpose does the gentleman from Texas's 12th district seek recognition?
August Pfluger
Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word and speak in favor of the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am in support of this piece of legislation. Texas is in the middle of the biggest energy build-out in the country. Our grid operator is projecting demand growth that will require every resource we can bring online, including next-generation nuclear.
Companies are looking hard at Texas because our state is saying yes to new reactors. But federal licensing timelines are still designed for a different era. The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards plays an important role. No one is questioning that reactor safety review matters. But when a mandated committee reviews every license application from scratch with no requirement to focus on what's actually novel or safety significant, you get duplication.
The same issues examined twice by two different arms of the same agency at the taxpayer's expense. I support this bill because it keeps ACRS doing what only ACRS can do: independent technical review of novel safety significant issues without relitigating settled ground. That's not weakening safety oversight, that's improving efficiency. I thank my friend from Tennessee for her leadership on this issue and I urge my colleagues to support the bill and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Speaker 18
Well, thank you very much. The gentleman yields back. Are there others wishing to speak on the bill? For what purpose does the gentlelady from New York's 14th district seek recognition?
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Thank you. I move to strike the last word. Yes, I'd like to associate myself with the comments of the ranking member and the concerns that she's raised. The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, or ACRS, is our independent body of technical experts that include physicists, engineers, and safety specialists. And their sole job is to review nuclear reactor license applications and tell the public what they found.
And, you know, I absolutely share in the sentiment and that we want to reduce bureaucracy and we want to reduce unnecessary obstacles between application and bringing energy online. However, the ranking member's point that this would remove the ACRS's ability to approve in as as the only independent technical check between a reactor application and an approval. And under this bill, it only this independent check only happens when it is being requested by the NRC. Right now, the United States is preparing to license a new generation of advanced reactors that have never been built before. They've never been operated at commercial scale and their risks are not fully understood.
And this is exactly when independent scrutiny matters the most. In fact, we have two real-life examples. During the NuScale small modular reactor review, the NRC staff accepted the company's safety analysis. The NRC did.
And the ACRS, when they conducted their own independent review, they found that in an emergency, the water designed to cool the nuclear reactor core could lose the one ingredient keeping the reactor under control, creating conditions that could lead to a meltdown. They identified this issue, and NuScale was then required to submit design modifications in response. Under this bill and in this kind of circumstance, if ACRS were not specifically asked after NRC had accepted, we could have had an oversight on this detail. And just last year, during the review of the Kairos Power's Hermes 2, a first-of-a-kind reactor that had never been built or operated anywhere, the ACRS also identified that the chemical process used to prevent the salt from corroding the reactor's internal components could itself cause a different form of degradation that had not yet been fully understood. These are not isolated incidents and they highlight the importance of the ACRS's work.
And I don't think that we should be shifting to a model where the ACRS only has an ability to say something if the NRC asks them to. That they are what mandatory independent review is designed to catch and this is how our system is working. Last May, President Trump signed an executive order that severely limited the ACRS's activities, and this bill takes that further. It completely removes ACRS's discretion to review applications and permanently writes that into law. And so, you know, I think that there are other areas of this bill where there's been a lot of progress that's made.
I would urge the committee to work on addressing these concerns before legislation moves to the full committee. Thank you.
Robert Latta
Well, thank you very much. The gentlelady yields back. Are there other members seeking recognition to speak on the bill? Seeing none, are there any amendments to the bill? Hearing none, the question now occurs on adopting HR 9613.
All those in favor so signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed, nay. The ayes have it. The bill is adopted and reported to the full committee.
The chair calls up HR 9614 and asks the clerk to report.
Speaker 6
HR 9614, a bill to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to provide compensation...
Robert Latta
And without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with and the bill will be open for amendment at any point so ordered. Are there any members seeking recognition on the bill? For what purpose does the gentleman from New Jersey's 8th district seek recognition?
Robert Menendez
Thank you, Chairman. I'm grateful that the committee is marking up my bill, HR 9614, the NRC Staff Pay Alignment Act. This bill would increase the pay of Senior Executive Service or SES positions at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to help the commission recruit and retain key staff. This effort builds on the ADVANCE Act, which increased pay for NRC staffers who are not part of the SES. I want to especially thank Congresswoman Wingate, who authored those ADVANCE Act provisions, for laying the groundwork that led to this bill.
Hiring and retaining safety experts at the NRC is essential to keeping our community safe, especially as states, tech companies, and the Trump administration are all turning toward nuclear energy to meet growing energy demands. But since January 2025, over 400 career staff have left the NRC, with teams that handle safety experiencing the most significant staff reductions. This is very alarming, especially given the unique safety risks that nuclear reactors can have on our communities.
Many communities across the country have serious concerns with nuclear reactors being built or reactivated in their backyard, and it's easy to understand why. So it's important that we build trust with communities who are hosting nuclear facilities. That trust is built through institutions that are responsible for ensuring reactors meet the highest standards of safety imaginable. And we need those institutions, such as the NRC, to be fully staffed with the top experts in nuclear safety. This bill helps us do just that.
But I think it's important to take a moment to address some concerning things that have happened at the NRC over the past 19 months. Steve Cohen, who is leading the DOGE charge at NRC, said that the goal was to make the agency a "rubber stamp" for the Trump administration, dismiss safety concerns raised by NRC staff. Career NRC lawyers working on key cases have left the NRC, and in April, the Democratic commissioners testified before this very committee that they were concerned about being fired for not approving a nuclear reactor that the Trump administration wants. And these attacks are actively putting our communities at risk. This bill can help the federal government compete with the private industry and incentivizes top experts to stay at the commission.
And it is a key piece towards rebuilding trust with our communities by giving the commission a tool to hire and retain the best safety experts. I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I yield back.
Robert Latta
Thank you, the gentleman yields back, and the chair now recognizes himself for five minutes to speak on the bill. I want to also speak on the legislation. This level of expertise demanded by the positions at the NRC require highly qualified candidates, candidates which are also desirable for the private sector, creating retention pressures. The special workforce and pay authority this committee established for the NRC in the ADVANCE Act sought to help attract and preserve exceptional employees at the NRC. H.R. 9614 fixes an omission we inadvertently created with our incentive pay provisions in the ADVANCE Act.
Those provisions left out career Senior Executive Service employees, SES, who typically are managers. This created potential issues of pay alignment for exceptional managers that may undermine effective management and retention. It's important for quality personnel at the NRC to ensure efficient licensing and oversight, especially during this time of industrial growth, and that requires good management. H.R. 9614 authorizes the chairman of the NRC to modestly increase the compensation rate of Senior Executive Service employees at the NRC. This authority to modestly increase the rate of compensation for certain employees will help the NRC maintain a strong, specialized workforce as well as the quality management necessary to carry out the NRC's mission.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time. Are there other members seeking recognition? For what purpose does the gentlelady from Virginia's 14th District seek recognition?
Speaker 23
Speaking to the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support this important legislation from Representative Menendez to bring pay for NRC employees in line with their private sector counterparts. We must take concrete steps to retain the crucial expertise needed to properly regulate and oversee nuclear safety in this country. And to that extent, I also implore my colleagues to push back on the harmful actions taken by the Trump administration to push out talented and knowledgeable NRC employees and undermine the commission's independence.
This is particularly important in light of the Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. Slaughter that allowed the president to fire the heads of independent regulatory agencies like the NRC. We have talked at length in this committee about the inextricable link between the NRC's independence and the commission's ability to provide consistent and expert-driven oversight. I urge my colleagues to work in a bipartisan manner to safeguard the independence of the NRC to ensure that we do everything that we can to retain the necessary expertise to keep this growing industry operating in a safe and ethical manner forward. This legislation is an important first step, it cannot be the last. I yield back.
Robert Latta
Thank you, the gentlelady yields back. Is there any further discussion on the legislation?
Are there any amendments to the bill? Seeing none, the question now occurs on adopting H.R. 9614. All those in favor shall signify by saying aye.
Speaker 27
H.R. 9084, a bill to increase transparency relating to the Department... Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with, and the bill will be open for amendment at any point so ordered. Does any member seek recognition on the bill? For what purpose is the gentlelady from Florida, the ranking member of the subcommittee... I move to strike the last word to speak in favor of the bill.
Kathy Castor
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Department of Energy is crucial to advancing American leadership in nuclear energy. Under the Atomic Energy Act, Congress gave DOE the authority to approve reactor authorizations for research purposes. And as I've pointed out many times across the past year, this is separate from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's approval process for a new reactor, new reactor designs for commercial use. The DOE's authority does not, in any way, whatsoever, replace the NRC's approval process.
Yet over the past year, DOE has developed new authorization processes for research and demonstration reactors outside of the typical NRC licensing process. And Secretary Wright has provided very little information about how DOE will preserve safety and transparency in this fast-tracked process. And this should be concerning to every member of this committee. We need to work together on this to make sure that everything is operating with the highest safety standards and transparency protocols. If we want modern nuclear energy to succeed in the United States, we must maintain the public trust in the industry.
Congress and the American people should have full transparency into what the Department of Energy is doing. So my bill, the Department of Energy Nuclear Transparency Act, would provide congressional oversight over these new DOE fast-track processes, would promote transparent safety standards, and boost public confidence in the industry. If done correctly, with the right policy support, nuclear energy can safely power the U.S. economy and lower costs for our neighbors back home. But we have work to do as we move this bill forward, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank, I want to thank everyone for including, my colleague for including an amendment including some technical changes here.
And I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Guthrie and Chairman Pallone and the professional staff on your willingness to work on this in a bipartisan manner. I hope we can make improvements to the bill and move it to the full committee. And I'll yield back.
Speaker 26
Thank you, the gentlelady yields back. Are there other members wishing to speak on the bill? Hearing none, are there any amendments? For what purpose does the gentlelady from Iowa's first district seek recognition?
Frank Pallone
Amendment to H.R. 9084 offered by Ms. Miller-Meeks from strike 24 hours each.
Mariannette Miller-Meeks
Without objection, the reading of the amendment is dispensed with and the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes in support of her amendment.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to speak in favor of the amendment to H.R. 9084, the Department of Energy Nuclear Transparency Act. This amendment reflects suggested clarifications provided by both the Department of Energy's technical assistance and by testimony in our legislative hearing. This amendment adds to the information that may be withheld from disclosure to include classified and otherwise security-sensitive information, information that otherwise would be protected from disclosure under FOIA security exemptions. This amendment also adds additional time to comply with public reporting consistent with practical suggestions provided in the legislative hearing.
This amendment improves the bill. The Department of Energy is very active on nuclear regulatory matters and it makes practical sense for the public and this committee to be timely informed of its activity. I urge support for this amendment and the support for the underlying bill as amended. I yield back.
Robert Latta
Thank you. Is there any other discussion on the amendment? Hearing no discussion on the amendment, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All opposed nay.
The ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. Are there any other amendments to the bill? Hearing none. The question now occurs on adopting H.R. 9084 as amended. All those in favor so signify by saying aye.
Aye. Those opposed nay. The ayes have it and the bill as adopted is amended is adopted and forwarded full committee. Without objection, staff is authorized to make technical and conforming changes to the legislation approved by the subcommittee today. So ordered.
Without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned. Thank you.