This was initially published in The National Interest.

The NRC’s emerging rule changes could significantly reshape the cost, speed, and competitiveness of advanced nuclear deployment in the United States.

In the coming months, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will finalize a slate of rulemakings that, taken together, represent the most consequential overhaul of America’s nuclear regulatory framework in nearly 70 years. The modernizations will address many significant regulatory cost drivers that have disadvantaged advanced nuclear energy as a reliable, emissions-free, dispatchable source of power. For nuclear energy to be a viable option, it needs to work for the American taxpayer and ratepayer. The NRC’s reforms give all forms of nuclear power a better shot at doing so. 

A Nuclear Regulatory System Built for a Different Era 

The NRC’s licensing and regulatory framework was built for a different era and was primarily designed for large light-water reactors (LWRs), which the agency readily acknowledges. When developers of microreactors and advanced designs apply, they are routed through the most burdensome environmental review pathway by default, subjected to security rules calibrated for facilities they do not resemble. 

Consequently, the requirements written for a 1,000-megawatt (MW) LWR have been applied to a 10-MW reactor through a patchwork of exemptions, each requiring its own analysis and negotiation with NRC staff. This square-peg-round-hole process adds time and cost for advanced reactor companies, all for no meaningful public safety, health, or environmental benefit. 

Other requirements add delay and cost to all types of reactor technologies. Developers must use “nuclear-grade” steel and concrete that can cost up to 50 times more than identical commercial-grade alternatives. Uncontested mandatory hearings, where, by definition, no one is arguing against the application, add four to seven months to a timeline for no demonstrable safety benefit or changes to the license. 

The NRC’s Push Toward Risk-Informed Regulation 

Encouragingly, the NRC has finalized three rules and has 69 active rules on its plate, 24 of them flowing from President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14300. One of the rules finalized this March is the Part 53 framework, which creates a technology-neutral, risk-informed licensing pathway. The new rule maintains rigorous environmental review and safety protections but ensures that the evaluation comports with the technology’s specific risks rather than broad, blanket requirements that have little to no relevance to the technology under consideration. 

Another proposed rule would establish a more flexible, risk-informed licensing framework for microreactors and other low-consequence reactors, particularly factory-fabricated designs. A more tailored framework could reduce unnecessary licensing burden for lower-consequence designs, improve predictability for developers, and better support repeat deployments without compromising safety.

Other notable expected rules that would cut time and cost and welcome more investment into nuclear include:

• Finalizing over the next few months will help reduce the time and cost of deploying nuclear power. Security regulations will be calibrated to reactor size and risk profile rather than imposing armed-guard regimes designed for large light-water reactors. 
• Ending the default assumption that every reactor demands a full Environmental Impact Statement, the most time-consuming and cumbersome environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act. 
• Streamlining contested adjudications so anti-nuclear activists can no longer stretch proceedings through procedural attrition. 
• Reconsidering reliance on the linear no-threshold (LNT) model and the “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) standard that flows from it. Following the Department of Energy’s (DOE) lead, the rulemaking will challenge the core assumption that any radiation dose, no matter how small, carries a proportional cancer risk with no threshold below which exposure is safe.  Overly conservative radiation standards inflate project costs and labor needs without delivering proportional safety gains. 
• Easing foreign-ownership restrictions would let allied capital from countries such as France, Japan, and South Korea flow into US projects without treating them as presumptive security threats. The NRC’s direct final rule implements Section 301 of the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy Act (ADVANCE), which allows OECD countries and the Republic of India, subject to NRC approval, to own and operate nuclear power plants in the United States.
• Allowing the NRC to rely on prior Department of Energy and Department of Defense data and safety evaluations rather than duplicating efforts and restarting the clock 

Nuclear Energy Reform Meets Rising Electricity Demand 

None of these reforms will compromise safety or rigorous technical evaluation. In fact, these rules will improve safety by directing regulatory resources to where they are most needed. 

The reforms come at a critical moment. Electricity demand is rising again after two decades of stagnation. Electricity use alone could nearly triple by 2028, climbing to as much as 12 percent of total US consumption.  That could be anywhere from five to 10 New York City’s worth of new power needed for AI alone. Hyperscalers understand the opportunity, as Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Meta have collectively committed to purchasing and developing more than 20 gigawatts (GW) of nuclear power. 

The policy goal for Congress and the Trump administration should not be to simply build more reactors regardless of the cost and economics of the technology. Rather, it should be to create a framework that enables nuclear energy to compete by fixing costly, ineffective, and unnecessary regulations. The NRC’s suite of reforms takes the most notable step in that direction in decades.

The views and opinions expressed are those of the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of C3.