Whitehouse Calls Out DOE’s Hostile Takeover of NRC, Withdraws Support for Renomination

Amid ongoing turmoil at NRC, the former Chairman and current nominee confirmed there is a DOE-detailed DOGE staffer in the leadership office that does not “have an NRC supervisor”

Washington, D.C.—At a business meeting this morning, U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW), called out the Department of Energy’s (DOE) “hostile takeover” of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and withdrew his support for David A. Wright’s renomination to the agency.  EPW was voting on the nominations of Wright and Usha-Maria Turner to be Assistant Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for the Office of International and Tribal Affairs.  EPW was also considering 32 Committee Resolutions to approve prospectuses from the General Services Administration (GSA).

Ranking Member Whitehouse initially expressed his support for the former NRC Chairman’s renomination, but conditions at the NRC have worsened in recent weeks, and the Senator has become increasingly concerned that Wright will be unable to deliver on his commitments to EPW to address upheaval at the agency and uphold its independence.

“At no point during the NRC’s 50-year history has there been a greater need for leadership there than today.  I stand by my statement during his nomination hearing: Mr. Wright is qualified to serve on the Commission.  He came before our committee, however, not just as a nominee but as the present leader of the Commission.  I hoped to see Chairman Wright rise to the occasion, but circumstances right now at the NRC continue to deteriorate.  I cannot presently support his renomination,” said Ranking Member Whitehouse.

Despite Wright’s assurances to the Committee that he would maintain the NRC’s independence and prioritize in his senior staff  “strong technical expertise, a commitment to safety, and the ability to inspire and motivate,” there has been a slew of alarming recent developments: dedicated, expert staff—particularly in senior leadership—have been forced out; agency-wide turmoil continues; and a DOE-detailed DOGE employee now sits in the NRC leadership office without reporting to the agency, calling its independence into severe question.

“[W]hat’s happening right now makes me increasingly concerned that [Wright] simply will not execute on his statements,” concluded the EPW Ranking Member.  “If we can turn the tide and shore back up the NRC’s independence, I would be very glad to reconsider my present position on Mr. Wright’s renomination.  I very much want to get to ‘yes,’ but the behavior that we’re seeing at the NRC presently makes that impossible.”

Ranking Member Whitehouse voted against confirming Wright and Turner and urged his colleagues to do the same.  Both nominations passed out of Committee on party-line votes of 10-9 and are now headed to the full Senate for consideration.  All 32 GSA prospectuses were approved.

Ranking Member Whitehouse’s full remarks, as delivered:

Thank you, Madam Chair.

As to Ms. Turner, this administration has turned EPA’s mission from protecting public health and the environment to protecting the pockets and interests of fossil fuel companies.  Ms. Turner comes directly from a fossil fuel company, one that was central to a backroom deal at Mar-a-Lago between then-candidate Trump and major oil and gas companies—a deal now dictating the direction—or misdirection—of EPA. 

The fossil fuel industry and its minions at EPA are behaving particularly disgracefully, and until that changes, I will vote no and urge my colleagues to do the same.  By the way, I don’t see any prospect of that changing.

As to Mr. Wright, at no point during the NRC’s 50-year history has there been a greater need for leadership there than today.  I stand by my statement during his nomination hearing: Mr. Wright is qualified to serve on the Commission.  He came before our committee, however, not just as a nominee but as the present leader of the Commission.  I hoped to see Chairman Wright rise to the occasion, but circumstances right now at the NRC continue to deteriorate.  I cannot presently support his renomination.  Let me say why because I am inclined to vote for him and to facilitate his confirmation.

Licensing the next generation of nuclear reactors requires capable, expert staff who understand and execute the agency’s mission.  The Chairman seems to understand this, saying to Chair Capito and me: “In senior agency leaders, I prioritize characteristics such as strong technical expertise, a commitment to safety, and the ability to inspire and motivate.  I look for individuals who demonstrate an understanding of the nuclear regulatory field...” 

Yet, these are the very staff being forced out of the agency.  This is the toll on that agency already.

In the hearing, I implored the Chairman to “address the current upheaval quickly.”  Upheaval, however, continues now, even since the nominations hearing. 

I asked the Chairman to commit to “uphold NRC independence.”  He nodded that he would; we saw that.

But what’s happening right now makes me increasingly concerned that he simply will not execute on his statements. 

In response to my Questions for the Record, the Chairman acknowledged there is a DOGE staffer at the agency.  This individual sits in an office that reports directly to the Chairman, however, the staffer is—and I quote the QFR from Mr. Wright—the staffer is “on detail from the Department of Energy, and as such, does not have an NRC supervisor.” 

How does that work?  Particularly as what we’re seeing is a Department of Energy hostile takeover of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to expand its scope.

The Chairman defines supervising as “holding the staff accountable for execution of the direction provided by [the Chairman] and those delegated authorities by law from the Chairman.”  So who, then, supervises this DOGE staffer?  Who holds this staffer to account?   Is this staffer above the Chairman?  

If there was any doubt before, let this make clear: there are rogue actors operating within the agency, and its independence is in jeopardy. 

I do not say this lightly.  I have long supported nuclear technology, even before many of my fellow Democrats.  I have worked on a bipartisan basis, including with many of you on this committee, to grow the nuclear share of our energy mix. 

The future of nuclear energy in this country requires a credible, independent regulator.  Efficiency, yes, it’s important, but safety is paramount.  Just one lapse would put our country at risk, unravel our years of bipartisan progress, and set nuclear power backward. 

Under the Trump Administration, that unraveling is happening.

We must head this off now, as a committee, before it is too late.  Let’s work together, as we have before, to ensure that the NRC delivers on its mission—prescribed to it by Congress—and ushers in a long-sought nuclear renaissance.

If we can turn the tide and shore back up the NRC’s independence, I would be very glad to reconsider my present position on Mr. Wright’s renomination.  I very much want to get to “yes,” but the behavior that we’re seeing at the NRC presently makes that impossible.  Thank you, Chairman.