• Prolonged Regulatory Delays: Delays in finalizing emergency preparedness regulations for small modular reactors and advanced nuclear technologies have raised concerns, with the anticipated rule publication date pushed back, leaving developers and industry stakeholders grappling with regulatory uncertainty.
• Dual Planning Dilemma: Developers are caught in a dual-planning dilemma, forced to prepare both proactive emergency strategies based on the assumption of a finalized rule and contingency plans in case the rule remains pending, underscoring the complexity of navigating evolving regulatory landscapes.
• Industry Implications and Advocacy: Pro-nuclear groups stress that the prolonged wait contradicts efficiency principles, straining applicants, NRC staff, and pre-application engagement. Advocates emphasize the importance of timely action, aligning with Congressional directives, to provide regulatory clarity and reduce burdens for the nuclear industry’s future development.

The proposed rulemaking, titled “Emergency Preparedness Requirements for Small Modular Reactors and Other New Technologies,” seeks to establish enhanced emergency preparedness regulations tailored for small modular reactors (SMRs) and other cutting-edge technologies, including non-light-water reactors. These regulatory updates are designed to accommodate the distinct characteristics of these innovations, such as their smaller sizes, lower power densities, and reduced likelihood of severe accidents.

Originally introduced for public comment in May 2020, the comment period was extended slightly before concluding in September of the same year. Following this stage, the final rule package was submitted to the NRC commissioners for approval in January 2022.

However, a collective letter from five pro-nuclear groups has highlighted a concerning trend: repeated postponements of the final rule’s publication date without transparent explanations. While the customary timeline for commissioners to vote on final rules is typically around 60 days, the ongoing extensions have prompted apprehension within these pro-nuclear groups. The current information on the NRC rulemaking page suggests that the anticipated publication date for the final rule is now set for January 3, 2024. Should this timeline persist, it would mark a waiting period of over two years since the rule was presented to the Commission for approval.

The extended delay has introduced what the pro-nuclear groups term “regulatory uncertainty” for developers who are diligently preparing licensing applications. This uncertainty compels prospective applicants to develop two distinct emergency preparedness plans: one based on the assumption that the rule will be enacted by the time they submit their applications, and an alternative contingency plan should the rule remain pending.

Already, this uncertainty has prompted shifts in applicants’ emergency preparedness strategies during the preliminary pre-application engagement phase. Some have even opted to delay engagement until greater clarity is achieved regarding the procedural landscape. This situation not only places an additional burden on NRC staff but also diminishes the efficacy of pre-application engagement for both applicants and the NRC. Moreover, it discourages potential applicants from advancing their plans.

The pro-nuclear groups also underscore the contradiction with the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act of 2019. The Act explicitly instructed the NRC to devise and implement strategies for heightened utilization of risk-informed and performance-based licensing techniques within a two-year period. Regrettably, the NRC has surpassed this statutory deadline by more than two and a half years.

In response to these concerns, the groups assert that a timely resolution regarding the final emergency preparedness rule is imperative. Such a decision holds the potential to enhance regulatory predictability while simultaneously alleviating the regulatory burden on applicants and NRC staff members. Furthermore, expediting the approval of the final rule and updating the associated Regulatory Guide 4.7 would align with the Congressional intent and contribute to streamlining licensing procedures. In the larger scope, this would aid in advancing national environmental and energy security objectives. In the best interests of the public and the nuclear industry, the pro-nuclear groups fervently urge the Commission to accelerate the final rule’s approval process and facilitate the revision of Regulatory Guide 4.7.