Trump’s nuclear policy favors startups, widening industry rifts

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (second from right) speaks as Interior Secretary Doug Burgum (third from right) listens after President Donald Trump signed an executive order regarding nuclear energy in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington on May 23. Samuel Corum/Sipa USA

The list of companies participating in the Department of Energy’s new nuclear reactor pilot program is the latest illustration of a growing divide in the industry, which is only intensifying as the Trump administration takes more strident action to boost the technology.

Last week, DOE chose 10 small nuclear reactor developers to compete for safety design approvals, aiming to advance the technology quickly and have at least three new pilot plants operating by July 4, 2026. Participants included startups like Terrestrial Energy and Aalo Atomics, but notably absent were established nuclear developers such as Westinghouse Nuclear and GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy.

President Donald Trump signed executive orders in May that set the program in motion. The orders also called for an “expedited pathway to approve reactor designs” that had been tested and certified either by DOE or the Defense Department. Under the Trump order, safety designs for new reactors approved by the two agencies could not be revisited by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Around the same time, a staffer affiliated with the so-called Department of Government Efficiency instructed the NRC to give “rubber-stamp” approval of reactor designs tested by DOE.

Industry watchers say the pilot program participants — companies that generally have less experience and have roots in Silicon Valley — are also more likely to support Trump’s shakeup at the NRC. Indeed, three of the pilot program participants have sued the NRC, asserting it should not have jurisdiction over some small reactors.

In contrast, the older and more experienced firms are more apprehensive about the instability stemming from the Trump administration’s overhaul.

“The companies with actual nuclear reactor experience that have built actual operating nuclear reactors are the ones that have been staying away and that value the regulator,” said Allison Macfarlane, a former chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission who is now director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia.

Participants in the pilot program believe there is room for improvement in the nuclear regulatory process. They characterize the administration’s actions as a positive way to speed up future license applications.

“This is for a pilot reactor. This is to collect data, demonstrate systems. This is not for a commercial plant,” Simon Irish, CEO of Terrestrial Energy, said of the pilot program. Terrestrial is a North Carolina-based developer of molten-salt reactor technology.

“The risk here is a misunderstanding of what the regulatory process is in the United States,” Irish continued. Critics of the administration’s actions, he added, “just see change. They go, ‘Change. Well, it’s going to compromise reactor safety.’”

Firms not in the pilot program still generally express support for the administration’s goals in public.

“We fully support the program’s intent, and the broader goals outlined in the president’s executive order,” said X-energy, a Maryland-based startup partnering with Amazon and Dow Chemical on developing small nuclear reactors, in a statement. X-energy chose not to apply for the program.

But in private, better-established companies that steered away from the pilot program are concerned that sweeping changes to the regulatory process might erode public trust in new nuclear technology. And that could have broader ramifications for future deployment.

“When I look back at the clients that I have, most of them are saying, ‘Yeah, we’re comfortable with the NRC,’” said Jeffrey Merrifield, an attorney with Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman and a former NRC commissioner.

Silicon Valley DNA

Participants in the DOE program share Silicon Valley DNA. Eight of the 10 companies were founded in the San Francisco Bay Area or have tech industry veterans in executive positions.

Macfarlane says the Trump administration has exaggerated this divide by listening primarily to Silicon Valley startups new to the nuclear industry. That includes companies with close ties to politically powerful tech entrepreneurs such as venture capitalist Peter Thiel and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. Both boast close ties to the White House.

Thiel, an influential Trump backer, is helping to finance a California-based uranium enrichment startup called General Matter. He’s long pushed for a speedier deployment of cutting-edge nuclear technology. Altman was board chair at the advanced nuclear company Oklo until he stepped aside in April. Oklo has cultivated close ties to the White House since January.

Oklo was one of the companies chosen for the pilot program.

“I think these nuke bros have gotten the ear of the Trump administration, and they’ve muscled their way into power,” Macfarlane said.

Administration officials also acknowledge the division their policies create within the industry.

Jeff Waksman, acting assistant secretary of the Army for installations, energy and environment, said in July that he expects the Energy Department to be easier for first-of-a-kind reactor developers to work with.

Michael Goff, deputy assistant secretary for DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy, said where a company is in the process of getting a nuclear license probably shapes their view of what regulatory path to pursue.

“I wouldn’t expect a company — TerraPower, X-energy — that has submitted construction permits to the NRC and has been given really aggressive turnaround times … to change and go use a DOE authorization process,” Goff said at a July event at the National Press Club.

DOE and Pentagon authorizations would be alternatives to the traditional NRC process under Trump’s May orders.

But Macfarlane thinks that mixing unseasoned startups and a politically motivated DOE without independent expert review could lead to disastrous consequences. An accident, she added, could sour public opinion and political will and set the industry back by decades.

Goff with DOE insists that the agency has and will continue to ensure the safety of projects under its supervision.

“The Department of Energy does authorize reactors as well for the Department of Energy’s use,” Goff said. “When we look at our authorization process compared to the NRC licensing process, they’re very similar.”