A Republican bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Efficient Nuclear Licensing Hearings Act aims to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. The bill focuses on making the hearings for nuclear facility construction applications more efficient. It allows the Commission to issue various licenses or amendments without a mandatory hearing if no person with an affected interest requests one. In such cases, the Commission must provide thirty days notice and publication in the Federal Register. The Act also introduces informal adjudicatory procedures for hearings that are held.
Yes
- Scored +5
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill streamlines licensing procedures, which reduces regulatory hurdles and time for nuclear energy developers.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The bill allows agencies to bypass hearings unless an interested party proactively requests one, potentially limiting due process opportunities.
- Scored -2
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill reduces mandatory public hearings for nuclear facility licensing, which may limit oversight of environmental impacts.
- Scored -1
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The shift toward informal hearings and reduced mandatory public hearings may decrease administrative transparency.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Efficiency in Licensing: The Commission can issue construction permits, operating licenses, or amendments without a mandatory hearing if no interested party requests one (Section 2(a)(1)(A)(i)). This could lead to faster processing of applications.
-
Streamlined Amendment Process: The Commission may dispense with the thirty-day notice and publication requirement for certain amendments if it determines the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration (Section 2(a)(1)(A)(i)).
-
Use of Informal Procedures: The bill directs the Commission to use informal adjudicatory procedures for any hearings held (Section 2(a)(1)(A)(i)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Reduced Mandatory Public Hearings: The Commission may issue permits or licenses without a hearing provided they give thirty days notice and publication in the Federal Register, provided no interested person requests a hearing (Section 2(a)(1)(A)(i)). This means a hearing is not guaranteed unless a person whose interest may be affected asks for one.
-
Changes to Uranium Enrichment Licensing: For the licensing of uranium enrichment facilities, the requirement for a hearing is now contingent upon a person whose interest may be affected requesting one (Section 2(c)(1)(A)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill streamlines licensing procedures, which reduces regulatory hurdles and time for nuclear energy developers.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill allows agencies to bypass hearings unless an interested party proactively requests one, potentially limiting due process opportunities. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The shift toward informal hearings and reduced mandatory public hearings may decrease administrative transparency.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill reduces mandatory public hearings for nuclear facility licensing, which may limit oversight of environmental impacts.
- 4/28/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/18/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/8/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/14/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Christopher CoonsDemocrat · Delaware
John CurtisRepublican · Utah
Mark KellyDemocrat · Arizona
David McCormickRepublican · Pennsylvania