mr. victor mccree. the executive director of operations and nuclear regulatory commission. welcome. >> thank you and good morning. ranking members, chairman and members of the subcommittee i push it up or to need to testify this morning ip before you today representing the technical staff of the u.s. nuclear regulatory commission. to briefly discuss the undersea's current and planned activities to prepare to review an application for an advanced non-light water reactor design and to offer nrc staff on senate bill 279 five, the nuclear energy and modernization act. a number advanced, non- light water reactor design that employee innovative design feature are under development. they have the authority over commercial advance reactors and is ready to work with applicants and to prepare for and review applications for these reactors. however, the undersea is also considering the extent to which enhancements to the existing licensing framework could increase the efficiency, timeliness and, timeliness and predictability of our safety and environmental reviews. our objectives for

mr. victor mccree, the executive director of the operations. >> thank you and good morning. chairman, ranking member, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, i appreciate the opportunity to testify this morning. i appear before you today representing the technical staff of the u.s. nuclear regulatory commission. i plan to briefly discuss the n.r.c.'s current and planned about tivelts to review an advanced design and to offer nrc staff views on senate bill 2795 the nuclear energy innovation and modernization act. a number of advanced nonlight water reactor designs that employ innovative design features are under development. the nrc has the licensing and oversight authority over commercial advanced reactors and is ready to work with potential applicants to prepare for and review applications for these reactors. however, the nrc is also considering the extent to which enhancement to the existing licensing framework could increase the efficiency, timeliness and predictability of our safety and environmental reviews. our objective force the activities i will discuss with

victor mccree and his staff does. i think further reductions of the staffing are appropriate, and i think the involvement of this committee in overseeing is welcome. >> thank you, mrield. >> thank you, senator inhofe. senator whitehouse? >> let me say first how happy i am that the chairman had a twinkle in his eye when he made that comment about senator booker and myself. let me, second, say to dr. lyman that it is very much not our intention in this bill to short circuit the safety review of any nuclear facility. the concern that i have is that the review process of the nrc has become so reactive, getting through that obstacle course is facing hazards that have nothing to do with short-circuited or long circuitedness but simply not being appropriate to the technology in the same way that if you had to pass a test for how solid the canvas was on the wings of your proposed aircraft when you are actually proposing an aluminum winged aircraft or where the pilot's goggles needed to be and what they needed to be made of when, in fact, you are proposing a closed cockpit aircraft, it's an issue of relevancy not of shortcuts. what i would invite you to do and any other me

victor mccree and his staff does. i think further reductions of the staffing are appropriate, and i think the involvement of this committee in overseeing is welcome. >> thank you, mr. merrifield. >> thank you, senator inhofe. senator whitehouse? >> let me say first how happy i am that the chairman had a twinkle in his eye when he made that comment about senator booker and myself. let me, second, say to dr. lyman that it is very much not our intention in this bill to short circuit the safety review of any nuclear facility. the concern that i have is that the review process of the nrc has become so reactive, getting through that obstacle course is facing hazards that have nothing to do with short-circuited or long circuitedness but simply not being appropriate to the technology in the same way that if you had to pass a test for how solid the canvas was on the wings of your proposed aircraft when you are actually proposing an aluminum winged aircraft or where the pilot's goggles needed to be and what they needed to be made of when, in fact, you are proposing a closed cockpit aircraft, it's an issue of relevancy not of shortcuts. what i would invite you to do and any