Trump administration quietly rewrites nuclear safety framework to speed new reactor program

The Trump administration has quietly rewritten key nuclear safety directives inside the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), significantly reshaping how a new generation of experimental nuclear reactors will be regulated. The revised rules were shared with selected companies participating in a fast-track reactor program but were not made publicly available, according to internal documents reviewed by NPR.

The changes were introduced over the fall and winter as part of a broader effort to accelerate the deployment of advanced nuclear reactors, including small modular reactors (SMRs) and microreactors. The DOE is currently overseeing a pilot program aimed at bringing at least three experimental commercial reactors to criticality by July 4, 2026—an unusually aggressive timeline by nuclear industry standards.

At the center of the controversy are revisions to DOE “orders,” internal directives that govern nearly every aspect of reactor design, construction, operation, and oversight. These orders cover safety systems, environmental protection, radiation exposure, physical security, waste management, and accident investigations. Unlike federal regulations, DOE orders can be revised internally without a formal public notice-and-comment process.

NPR obtained more than a dozen of the revised orders. None are currently accessible through the department’s public database.

Hundreds of pages removed, requirements narrowed

An analysis of the documents shows that more than 750 pages were removed from earlier versions of the same orders, leaving roughly one-third of their original length. Entire sections detailing security procedures, environmental safeguards, and documentation requirements were either condensed or eliminated altogether.

Among the most consequential changes:

• Security requirements for reactor sites were reduced from seven separate directives totaling more than 500 pages to a single 23-page document.

• Environmental protections governing groundwater and radioactive discharges were softened.

• Record-keeping and reporting requirements were scaled back.

• Thresholds that trigger formal accident investigations were raised, allowing higher radiation exposure before mandatory review.

• At least one long-standing safety oversight role was removed.

These changes arrive as billions of dollars in private capital flow into advanced nuclear projects. Major technology companies, including Amazon, Google, and Meta, have publicly expressed interest in nuclear energy as a future power source for energy-intensive artificial intelligence data centers.

Safety changes made without public review

Outside experts who reviewed the revised rules expressed concern not only about their substance, but also about how they were adopted.

“I don’t think revising nuclear safety and security standards behind closed doors is the way to build public confidence,” said Christopher Hanson, former chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), who led the agency from 2021 until his dismissal in 2025. “Public trust has always been essential to nuclear power’s viability.”

Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, was more direct. “This dismantles decades of carefully constructed oversight,” he said. “It increases the risk of serious accidents by weakening systems that were specifically designed to prevent them.”

The Department of Energy defended the changes in a written statement, arguing that the revisions eliminate outdated or redundant requirements while preserving safety. “Reducing unnecessary regulatory burden allows innovation to move forward without compromising safety or security,” the statement said.

DOE officials also said the revised orders would be published later this year. However, the versions reviewed by NPR were labeled “Approved” and did not appear to be draft documents.

The push begins at the White House

The regulatory overhaul traces back to a series of executive orders signed by President Trump in May 2025 aimed at revitalizing the U.S. nuclear industry. During a signing ceremony at the White House, Trump described nuclear energy as “very safe” and “100% environmental,” calling it a critical industry for America’s future.

One of those orders directed the Department of Energy to establish a Reactor Pilot Program and explicitly instructed the agency to approve at least three experimental reactors capable of achieving nuclear criticality by July 4, 2026.

That directive gave the DOE just over a year to review reactor designs, complete safety assessments, authorize construction, and oversee startup—tasks that typically take several years.

“To call that timeline aggressive would be an understatement,” said Kathryn Huff, a professor of nuclear engineering at the University of Illinois and former head of DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy. “Very few reactors, even small research units, have ever been built and approved on that schedule.”

A faster path around traditional regulators

Normally, commercial nuclear reactors in the United States are regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an independent agency known for its formal public processes and extensive documentation requirements.

But the DOE occupies a unique position. Since the NRC’s creation in the 1970s, the Energy Department has retained authority to regulate its own reactors—historically limited to government research facilities and weapons-related installations.

Under the Reactor Pilot Program, that internal authority is being extended to privately developed reactors built under DOE contracts, including facilities located outside national laboratories.

In June 2025, DOE officials briefed nuclear industry executives at a closed-door meeting hosted by the Nuclear Energy Institute. Audio recordings reviewed by NPR show senior officials emphasizing that the program would not provide funding, but instead offer something many companies have long sought: a faster regulatory pathway.

“Our job is to make sure government is no longer the barrier,” said Seth Cohen, a DOE attorney involved in implementing the executive orders.

Core safety principles removed

One of the most notable changes is the removal of the long-standing “As Low As Reasonably Achievable” (ALARA) principle from several revised orders. ALARA requires radiation exposure to be minimized whenever practicable, even when levels are below legal limits.

ALARA has been a cornerstone of U.S. nuclear safety policy for decades.

Without it, reactors could be built with less shielding, and workers could be exposed to higher cumulative radiation doses, said Tison Campbell, a former NRC attorney now in private practice. “That can reduce costs,” he noted, “but it also changes the risk calculus.”

Some industry voices have argued that ALARA has been applied too rigidly over time. Huff said the principle may deserve reassessment, but questioned why such a change would occur without public debate.

The DOE said ALARA remains part of its overall safety philosophy, even if no longer explicitly required in certain orders.

Other removals include the elimination of the requirement for a “cognizant system engineer” assigned to each critical reactor safety system—a role intended to ensure individual accountability for components whose failure could lead to severe accidents.

Security and environmental safeguards scaled back

The revised orders also sharply reduce detail in areas related to security and environmental protection.

In the new security directive, requirements for firearms training, guard staffing limits, emergency drills, and physical barriers have been condensed or removed. Experts reviewing the document said the language is now broad enough to give operators wide discretion in how they meet security obligations.

This is particularly sensitive because several advanced reactor designs plan to use higher-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), which presents additional proliferation and theft concerns.

Environmental protections were also softened. In earlier orders, radioactive discharges into public sewer systems were prohibited except in limited cases. The revised language states such discharges “should be avoided.”

Similar wording changes appear in rules governing groundwater protection and environmental monitoring.

“Changing ‘must not’ to ‘should avoid’ isn’t cosmetic—it’s substantive,” said Emily Caffrey, a health physicist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. “Those words matter.”

Oversight under pressure

The revised rules are now being applied by roughly 30 DOE reviewers, supported by experts temporarily detailed from the NRC, to assess 11 reactor designs submitted by 10 private companies.

Each applicant is also assigned a “Concierge Team,” composed of representatives from senior DOE offices, to help guide projects through the approval process. According to an internal memo, these teams report directly to the secretary of energy.

DOE officials say the teams are intended to improve efficiency, not influence safety decisions. Critics worry the structure could blur the line between facilitation and pressure.

Transparency as the core issue

Some experts question whether the regulatory rewrites will even achieve their stated goal of speeding approvals. Removing detailed guidance, they argue, may actually create uncertainty for companies trying to comply with overlapping federal laws.

But the larger concern may be public trust.

“Nuclear energy has always depended on transparency,” Huff said. “If rules can be shared privately with companies but not with the public, people will naturally ask why.”

As the administration pushes to deliver new reactors on a politically symbolic timeline, the debate over speed versus scrutiny is likely to intensify—both inside the industry and far beyond it.

FONT: NPR