WATCH: In Senate EPW Hearing, Kelly Presses NRC on Nuclear Permitting Progress and Domestic Fuel Supply Gap

This week, during a Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee hearing on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) budget, Arizona Senator Mark Kelly questioned NRC Chairman Ho Nieh and Commissioner Douglas Weaver on how the agency is moving faster on nuclear permitting without cutting corners on safety and on the urgent need to close America's domestic uranium enrichment gap.

Kelly, an engineer himself, pressed Chairman Nieh on how the NRC has managed to speed up licensing while maintaining safety standards: "There's been a lot of attention on the NRC's work to improve the permitting process for nuclear reactors, and it looks like we've already seen some results. TerraPowers' reactor permit was completed in less than 18 months, nine months ahead of schedule. That matters. We need to get clean, reliable power on the grid faster."

"This is not an area where we can cut corners. Safety always has to be the top priority."

Kelly also raised the alarm on domestic uranium enrichment being reliant on Russia: "Our fuel supply is in a precarious place. More than 80% of enrichment happens overseas. Ultimately, that means the utility bills of millions of Americans depend on a global supply chain that we can't control. And notably, about 20% of enriched uranium comes from Russia. Clearly, that's a problem. Russia is an adversary, and we should not be relying on them for something as important as the fuel that powers are nuclear reactors."

Nieh agreed, committing that the NRC would not stand in the way: "This is a huge gap. It is national security for the United States and NRC will do its part by not being an impediment to getting the fuel cycle up and running on the front end."

Sen. Kelly questions Chairman Nieh and Commissioner Weaver.

Click here to download a video of Kelly's remarks. See the transcript below:

Senator Kelly:

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, gentlemen, for being here today. Chairman Nieh, there's been a lot of attention on the NRC's work to improve the permitting process for nuclear reactors, and it looks like we've already seen some results. TerraPowers' reactor permit was completed in less than 18 months, nine months ahead of schedule. That matters. We need to get clean, reliable power on the grid faster. But as an engineer myself, I know this is not an area where we can cut corners. Safety always has to be the top priority. So, Chairman Nieh, how has the commission maintained the rigorous safety standards the public expects and deserves in the NRC licensing process, while finding ways to move forward faster?

Chairman Ho K. Nieh:

Thank you for the question, Senator. So, for myself as an individual member of the commission, and I believe it's the same for my colleagues on the Commission as well, we are fully committed to the NRC safety mission. That is why we are here. We are here to protect the public from the hazards associated.

Kelly:

Did you have to add more people to the safety part of the organization to be able to do these things faster and still not compromise safety?

Nieh:

Not in all cases, Senator. There was some dialog before you joined the hearing about our focus on what is most important to safety. One of the reasons why we're able to achieve these efficiencies is because in the past, Senator, some of our licensing activities have taken too long and cost too much because we spent too much time looking at matters in a license application that really did not affect safety. They were low safety, significant issues. So, this team is really aligned. They're embracing the enabling mindset to really focus on what's most important in a licensing review. So, that is one reason why we're able to do that. Other instances though, if we don't have a specific skill set, let's say in a very, very focused technical area, maybe like fuels or electrical instrumentation and control, yes, we would have to maybe augment the technical capacity. But the thing that moves the needle the most is really focusing on what matters most for safety.

Kelly:

So, does that mean that you focus the licensing approval process on the areas that affect safety and try to maybe not worry so much about other things?

Nieh:

Yes, sir. And I'll just share you an example from the last time I was here at the agency. There was an application that came in for a particular reactor design. The staff had some really great interest in some non-safety related ventilation system near where the reactor was and spending time looking at that. So, the leadership team had to really focus the staff to say, 'Hey that isn't really going to affect the safety case outcome one way or another. Let's not spend time there. Let's focus on really what is truly most important for the safety case'. So, it's examples like that that are really enabling us to do more disciplined and efficient regulatory reviews for SMRs and other nuclear technologies.

Kelly:

All right. Thank you. And, Commissioner Weaver, you've testified about the need for a strong nuclear fuel cycle to support more nuclear power. I agree with that. Building more reactors does not get us anywhere if we don't have the fuel to operate them. So right now, our fuel supply is in a precarious place. More than 80% of enrichment happens overseas. Ultimately, that means the utility bills of millions of Americans depend on a global supply chain that we can't control. And notably, about 20% of enriched uranium comes from Russia. Clearly, that's a problem. Russia is an adversary, and we should not be relying on them for something as important as the fuel that powers are nuclear reactors. That's why we passed a law banning those imports by 2028. But that leaves us with a real capacity gap. We only have two enrichment facilities in the United States. We need more of those. And we should be making this stuff here at home. Nuclear fuels too important to our economy and our national security to leave it in the hands of foreign suppliers. So, what's the plan?

Commissioner Douglas W. Weaver:

Senator, as you know, Department of Energy is funded a number of enrichments for both low-enrich, high-enrich and high SA, low-enriched uranium. So, our role at the NRC will be to be prepared to review those applications when they come to us. And I've testified in the House a few weeks ago that there are some changes to the Atomic Energy Act that would be useful for the enrichers so they can get constructing a little bit faster.

Kelly:

Have you received applications?

Weaver:

I know we're in pre-application with several. I don't know that we have any enrichment applications under review. I can get back to you.

Nieh:

We received an application from Orano for an emergent facility under their project IKE. And that's undergoing acceptance review now.

Kelly:

Assuming that process proceeds smoothly, is it possible to have an enrichment facility built and operating by 2028? I assume not. And if not, when could we have another enrichment facility here in the US?

Nieh:

Senator, I don't have the exact timeline for this project, but what I would like to share with this committee is another example of how NRC is going to be an enabling regulator. The facility that I just mentioned is it's a facility that operates in the world today. It's in France, same exact technology, and actually builds on a technology we had in the United States a few decades ago, Eagle Rock. So, the NRC staff is looking to how to leverage our previous experience, as well as the experience from the French regulators, so we don't have to reinvent the wheel again. We're not going to rubber stamp anything, but we are going to validate technical information that it meets our regulatory requirements to deliver a more timely regulatory review to get this enrichment facility an application to the applicant so they can start building. Because I agree 100% with you. This is a huge gap. It is national security for the United States and NRC will do its part by not being an impediment to getting the fuel cycle up and running on the front end.

Kelly:

All right. Thank you, gentlemen.