10 NRC Rulemakings to Watch

Updated on September 2, 2026. Originally posted on April 23, 2026 by Nicholas McMurray and Natalie Houghtalen

A sweeping modernization effort is now underway at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The agency is advancing dozens of rulemakings touching nearly every aspect of the licensing process: hearings, environmental reviews, fusion, fee recovery, radiation protection, microreactors and more. This moment is not just a burst of regulatory activity. It is the convergence of sustained efforts across multiple timelines driven by years of bipartisan policy, recent executive action and more than a decade of internal NRC Commission and staff modernization activities.

That convergence matters for three reasons. First, it helps explain why the rulemaking docket feels so crowded. Second, much of the current rulemaking reflects the need to be more efficient, effective and predictable. Third, most of these rules have broad, longstanding consensus and have been in process across multiple Congresses and Administrations.

Seen that way, the current moment is about more than regulatory housekeeping. It is a test of whether the United States can translate nearly 10 years of bipartisan legislative and policy momentum into a licensing system capable of enabling predictable deployment timelines and project costs. Many of the rules initiated by one piece of legislation were also affected by subsequent legislation or executive direction. Here are the 10 rules to watch most closely:

Initiated by Federal Legislation

These rulemakings largely establish regulations for new commercial technologies such as advanced reactors, fusion machines and microreactors. A predictable, durable pathway for these technologies is necessary to enable broad deployment.

Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act of 2019 (NEIMA)

1. Risk-Informed, Technology-Inclusive Regulatory Framework for Advanced Reactors (NRC Rule Page)

What it is: The creation of a modern licensing pathway for advanced reactors, 10 CFR Part 53, that can accommodate different technologies, designs and operating models.
Why it matters: The new Part 53 of the NRC’s regulatory code is the opportunity for the NRC to turn risk-informed regulation into a workable path for advanced reactor deployment.
What’s next: The NRC published the final rule in March 2026.

2. Regulatory Framework for Fusion Machines (NRC Rule Page)

What it is: A proposed rule to establish a dedicated licensing approach for fusion machines rather than regulating fusion like fission.
Why it matters: Fusion and fission are inherently different technologies, and accordingly require different regulatory frameworks.
What’s next: The NRC published the proposed rule in February 2026. The final rule is expected by the end of 2027.

Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (FRA)

3. Implementation of FRA of 2023 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Amendments (NRC Rule Page)

What it is: A proposed rule, resulting from a legislatively directed review of the NRC’s environmental review process to align NRC’s regulations with current NEPA requirements.
Why it matters: The process improvements under the FRA should reduce the review’s timeline and cost by focusing the NRC’s analysis on what falls within the scope of the agency, authorizing the applicant to prepare their own environmental report and only requiring the appropriate level of environmental review.
What’s next: The NRC published the proposed rule in July 2026. The final rule is expected in early 2027.

Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy Act of 2024 (ADVANCE)

4. Licensing Requirements for Microreactors and Other Reactors with Comparable Risk Profiles (NRC Rule Page)

What it is: A proposed rule that would modify many parts of NRC regulations to create a new, more flexible regulatory framework with licensing options for microreactors and other smaller, factory-built, low-risk reactors.
Why it matters: Microreactors and similar reactors, whose manufacturing and operating profiles do not fit within the traditional large-reactor licensing process, should have a regulatory framework that ensures safety and provides flexibility for that business model.
What’s next: The NRC published the proposed rule in May 2026. The final rule is expected early 2027

5. Streamlining Contested Adjudications in Licensing Proceedings (NRC Rule Page)

What it is: An effort to restructure the contested hearings process at NRC so legal challenges reach timely resolutions that benefit the public, applicants and other stakeholders.
Why it matters: Contested hearings ensure that major safety and environmental issues are fully considered; process improvements could significantly increase licensing predictability while maintaining the integrity of that process.
What’s next: The NRC published the proposed rule in March 2026. The final rule is expected late 2026.

Initiated by Executive Order 14300

These rulemakings, initiated by EO 14300 signed in May 2025, reflect the administration’s interest in the widespread deployment of new nuclear reactors.

6. Modernizing Reactor Licensing, Safety Oversight, and Siting Practices (NRC Rule Page)

What it is: An umbrella modernization effort to revisit how a multitude of NRC rules and guidance documents interact across the full reactor lifecycle.
Why it matters: A holistic rewrite could matter more than any single rule if it successfully reduces friction or differences between licensing, oversight and siting requirements.
What’s next: The NRC published the proposed rule in June 2026. The final rule is expected in early 2027

7. NRC Reviews of Reactor Designs Previously Authorized by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) or Department of War (DOW) (NRC Rule Page)

What it is: An effort to allow the NRC to better leverage safety reviews and operational data from existing DOE or DOW reactor authorization records when licensing through an NRC process.
Why it matters: Leveraging prior technical reviews and operational experience could reduce duplicative review activities and enable commercial applicants to move through the licensing process more efficiently.
What’s next: The NRC published the proposed rule in April 2026. The final rule is expected late 2026.

8. Reforming and Modernizing the NRC’s Radiation Protection Framework (NRC Rule Page)

What it is: A broad reevaluation of the NRC’s radiation protection framework, including the assumptions and standards that shape design and operation requirements for all radiation-related activities required by the NRC.
Why it matters: Because radiation protection underpins many NRC regulatory requirements, this rule could affect the cost, operations and public perception of all activities regulated by the NRC.
What’s next: The NRC published the proposed rule in June 2026. The final rule is expected early 2027

9. A Focused Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) (NRC Rule Page)

What it is: The ACRS is another layer of safety within, but separate from, the NRC staff that reviews reactor license applications and other regulatory activities. A focused ACRS process would reduce the number of routine reviews and concentrate committee attention on novel or safety-significant issues.
Why it matters: Without focusing the ACRS on the most consequential issues related to new reactor licensing, the committee’s expertise and resources would be spread too thin and the committee’s review process could become a procedural bottleneck to new reactor deployment.
What’s next: The NRC is expected to publish the final rule in October 2026.

Initiated Internally by the NRC

The NRC is not just reacting to outside mandates. It is also trying to reshape the broader regulatory framework on its own terms.

10. Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors

What it is: For any new reactor, a GEIS addresses the recurring environmental issues for all plants and enables the site-specific analysis to focus only on unique issues.
Why it matters: Initiated in 2020, the NRC staff estimate that this would significantly reduce analysis, increase predictability and reduce the costs of environmental reviews by between 20% and 45%, depending on the project.
What’s next: The NRC published the final rule in April 2026.

Amping Up the Grid: The Role of High Ampacity Conductors in Transmission Expansion

Could Enhanced Mineral Recovery Solve America’s Critical Minerals Bottleneck?

For decades, CO₂ has helped America produce reliable energy here at home, reducing reliance on foreign resources and transforming the United States into a global energy leader.

You’ve probably heard of enhanced oil recovery, or “E-O-R”. E-O-R is a method used to produce more oil from mature reservoirs. The primary approach for E-O-R is injecting carbon dioxide, also known as CO₂, underground to unlock oil that would otherwise be left behind.

But what if CO₂ could also help us recover something else we need: critical minerals?

Critical minerals are essential to America’s economic, energy and national security. They are used in everything from energy infrastructure and data centers to advanced manufacturing and military technologies.

And demand for minerals is growing fast. By 2040, global demand for cobalt and rare earths could grow by 50 to 60 percent, graphite and nickel demand could double, and lithium demand could more than quadruple. At the same time, many of the world’s highest-grade mineral deposits are being depleted, increasing the need for new sources of supply.

Today, critical mineral supply chains are heavily concentrated overseas. China is the top producer of 20 critical minerals and commands a 70 percent market share of global refining capacity for strategic minerals that underpin modern energy technologies.

That means finding new ways to reshore critical mineral supply chains is essential to America’s resource independence and global competitiveness.

Luckily, American innovators are up to the task.

U.S. national labs, universities and private companies are developing new ways to use C-O-2 to recover critical minerals from unconventional domestic resources, including low-grade ores, industrial wastes, and other underutilized mineral bearing assets. These technologies are known as Enhanced Mineral Recovery, or “E-M-R”.

E-M-R can work in a few different ways; it can happen either below ground, “in-situ” (IN SEE-CHEW), or above ground, “ex-situ” (EX SEE-CHEW).

For below-ground methods, CO₂ rich fluid is injected below the surface. The CO₂ reacts with the rock, freeing the minerals and bringing them above ground. Sub-surface E-M-R could help unlock underground resources that are currently stranded, inaccessible or too low in concentration to economically recover.

Above-ground E-M-R uses CO₂ to recover minerals from mined rocks or materials above the surface, like mine tailings, red mud or steel slag. These materials are often treated as waste, but actually still contain valuable minerals. In above-ground processes, a CO₂-based fluid reacts with the material, dissolves the targeted minerals and allows them to be separated and recovered while converting the CO₂ into a solid rock.

Enhanced Mineral Recovery can do for critical minerals what fracking and the U.S. Shale Revolution have done for oil and gas: unlock previously inaccessible resources and establish resource independence for the United States by strengthening critical mineral supply chains.

Think of it this way: The resources are here in America, the technologies are ready, and now we must unlock E-M-R at scale.

Federal programs like the Department of Energy’s ARPA-E MINER program are supporting research into CO₂-based mineral recovery methods. Across the private sector, American companies are also advancing early-stage technologies that would expand access to critical minerals at home. One example is Travertine (TRA-VER-TEEN) Technologies out of Colorado, which is using CO₂ to turn industrial byproducts into valuable industrial materials.

Bringing these innovations to commercial scale will require continued federal support for research, development and demonstration. Expanded deployment of carbon capture and removal technologies could provide CO₂ at scale, while additional infrastructure, such as CO₂ pipelines, would enable that CO₂ to be transported to where it can be put to productive use.

Investment in American innovation can leverage CO₂ to recover more oil for energy production, extract critical minerals and materials needed for advanced manufacturing and defense, strengthen domestic supply chains and reduce reliance on foreign countries. CO₂ is a valuable resource, and with Enhanced Mineral Recovery, American innovators are showing how today’s untapped and overlooked resources can become tomorrow’s energy, manufacturing and national security strengths.

250 Years In, America Still Builds Here: Congressional Staff Visit Philadelphia’s Grid and Nuclear Fleet

America is asking its grid to do more than ever, and a two hundred and fifty year old tradition of innovation is how we will meet this moment. Data centers, advanced manufacturing and a wave of reindustrialization are driving the fastest jump in electricity demand in decades. As Congress considers options to address this growing demand, ClearPath’s educational series, the Clean Energy Innovation Academy (CEIA), took nine U.S. House Republican staff to the Philadelphia region to see firsthand the infrastructure powering America: the grid that moves power across state lines and the plants that generate it around the clock. At every stop, the lesson was the same. For America to lead, we must innovate fast, build here and sell globally.

The grid is where reliability is won or lost: The delegation started at PJM Interconnection, the largest power grid in North America. From its control room outside Philadelphia, PJM balances supply and demand in real time for more than 67 million people across 13 states and D.C., coordinating roughly 180 gigawatts of generating capacity, 1,400 generating sources and 88,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines. First, staff received an overview of PJM’s operations, including their role in planning the regional transmission system and how they are responding to surging demand growth. Then, the group moved to the control room to observe PJM’s grid operators in action, and learned about their complex responsibilities. Following the tour, staff participated in a discussion offering insight into how PJM’s transmission planning process works, including the role of competition in driving creative solutions and deployment of innovative grid technologies. Watching PJM staff run their system in real time drove home a point that rarely makes headlines: having transmission lines capable of bringing more power online and moving power to where it is needed can make or break grid reliability. The interconnection queue and pace of transmission development now sit at the center of whether America can meet rising demand. That makes getting the process right one of the highest-impact moves in energy policy today.

America’s nuclear fleet is a platform to build on: Following the visit to PJM, staff traveled to Constellation’s Limerick Clean Energy Center in Pottstown, PA. The nuclear power plant runs two Boiling Water Reactors that produce a combined 2.3 gigawatts of carbon-free power (enough for more than 1.7 million homes) 24/7. Constellation is the nation’s largest producer of emissions-free energy, operating 21 reactors across the country, and plants like Limerick are increasingly central to conversations about serving data centers and new factories. Limerick staff briefed the group on the basics of nuclear energy, how the plant operates, its planned uprate and Constellation’s efforts on the Three Mile Island restart. Then, they toured the plant, beginning with the outside grounds, which included the facility’s two cooling towers, spent fuel dry casks, emergency operations areas and transmission interconnection substation. They were then led inside to see the plant’s generators, turbines and control room, where they were able to discuss directly with operators on how to advance nuclear energy in the United States. With energy demand projected to grow 35 to 50 percent by 2040, plants like Limerick show how far American ingenuity can expand on a proven asset. That same expertise is the launchpad for what comes next: the new large reactors and advanced designs that will power the next era of American growth.

Innovation means modernizing the rules, not just the hardware: Technology is only half the equation. Staff also heard from innovators like Tapestry and an industry expert at R Street Institute on how the best technology in the world stalls if the rules around it do not keep up. Getting transmission planning, cost allocation, siting and interconnection right, as well as navigating an archaic permitting process, often decides whether a project ever breaks ground. Without swift action to match the speed of permitting to American innovation, the country risks leaving new generation and transmission stuck waiting rather than on the grid.

The opportunity ahead

Philadelphia is a fitting place to make the point. Two hundred fifty years after the country was founded, the question is the same one it has always been: can America build what it needs to power the next era? Constellation’s Limerick Clean Energy Center and PJM Interconnection are proof that we can, if we let America build.The path forward is to let them work, to modernize the rules and invest in the fleet and wires already delivering power, keeping American energy leadership strong at home and abroad. Innovate fast, build here, sell globally: the demand is real, and the opportunity has never been greater.

Powering the Next Generation of Energy Talent

Since 2014, ClearPath has existed to strengthen American innovation and develop solutions that reduce energy emissions. In addition to groundbreaking, forward-looking ideas, progress depends on people who can turn those ideas into tangible, durable policy.

The ClearPath Conservative Leadership Program (CCLP) aspires to help foster, educate and place rising professionals in the offices and organizations shaping America’s energy future across Capitol Hill. Cultivating the next generation of emerging energy talent complements ClearPath’s mission to advance America’s energy leadership and deliver clean power worldwide.

CCLP marked its third year of professional development programming with “Powering Your Energy Career: Connections and Conversations for Young Energy Professionals in Washington,” bringing together interns, fellows and early-career staff working in and around clean energy policy. Throughout the event, attendees were able to hear directly from leaders across multiple agencies and energy institutions who shared advice and lessons from their own experience in the energy sector, along with the range of career possibilities available throughout the field.

Programming throughout the morning included a full agenda of a fireside chat, hands-on activities and an expert panel discussion. All of the sessions were designed to give the participants different perspectives on a career in energy and the importance of pursuing a career in the field.

Rep. Celeste Maloy (R-UT) and former Congressman Greg Walden opened the day with a fireside chat on their own paths to energy leadership. Both emphasized that success as a young professional in Washington depends on a strong work ethic and the ability to adapt within an environment as fast-paced as Washington, D.C. In the discussion, Rep. Maloy reminded the audience that they do not need to have their full career path figured out, but rather show up for the work in front of them and stay open to what the journey might present.

Zack Roday, a Partner at Ascent Media, presented on professional presence and the art of the elevator pitch. He walked participants through the fundamentals that shape a strong first impression to prepare for any networking opportunity. Participants practiced these skills during a networking session which featured the opportunity to connect with representatives from ACC, CRES, AEI and C3 Solutions.

Hillary O’Brien, Managing Director of Clean Power, Natural Resources and Research at ClearPath, led the third session, Demystifying AI, which broke down data centers in plain terms: what they are, how they function and why they’ve become central to the conversation around rising power demand. This understanding will serve participants well as data centers continue to shape energy policy debates.

The day closed with a panel of speakers who have built careers across different corners of the energy field: Matthew Middleton, Principal Deputy Communications Director and Director of Research at the Department of the Interior, Lahra Walker, Special Advisor at the Advanced Research Project Agency – Energy (ARPA-E) at the Department of Energy; and Emily Johnson, Managing Director of External Affairs at ClearPath. Each spoke to their own path in and out of Capitol Hill, and the group’s consistent message was that there’s no single route into this line of work, what matters more is staying grounded in the moment and clear on what drives you once you are in it.

All three panelists started in a different place, on the Hill, in a fellowship and in the private sector, yet all three have gone on to make a real mark in the energy field. Overall, the clear message participants were able to take away from the day is, there is a space for you in the energy sector, and the spot for you is more attainable than you think.

CCLP seeks to find and place the next wave of energy talent and give them a start at turning their interest in clean energy into a career. This event and the CCLP program aim to accelerate the careers of America’s most capable emerging talent. And that is how America leads on energy innovation.

If you are on the Hill and your office would benefit from having a ClearPath fellow in your office, reach out to Dana Faught at dana@clearpath.org to learn more.

The Reactor Pilot Program is Just the Beginning

On July 4th, 2026, America celebrated its 250th birthday. Meanwhile, the nuclear industry celebrated something else: it met and exceeded a deadline many believed it couldn’t–and made history in the process.

In May 2025, President Trump directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to get at least three advanced reactors critical by Independence Day 2026. The nuclear industry is often measured in decades, not months, so this ambitious goal was met both with skepticism and excitement.

The goal turned out to be conservative. The program overshot. Four DOE-authorized test reactors achieved criticality by the deadline. Over the last month, the Antares Mark-0, Valar Atomics Ward 250, the Deployable Energy Unity and Aalo Atomics Aalo-X achieved criticality. This makes the United States the first country in history to achieve criticality in multiple unique advanced microreactor designs in a single month.

While the criticality goal made the headlines, the Reactor Pilot Program demonstrated something even more important: that private-industry-led, government-enabled programs are the fastest way to move from design to demonstration. The national labs were empowered by the May 2025 executive order to take advantage of existing statute in the Atomic Energy Act and more recent Congressional authorizations signed into law near the end of President Trump’s first term within the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Capabilities Act (NEICA).

The Reactor Pilot Program demonstrated a new model for how the government can accelerate private innovation. The leap straight from the design table to commercial operations is one of the reasons why commercial nuclear is often plagued by technology and construction risk. Testing and iterating can mitigate these risks. These test reactors can help bridge the gap to deployment by establishing a foundation for supply chains, construction and operating procedures, fuel qualification and operating data. The reactor criticality goal, strong DOE leadership and industry-funded user facilities brought these first four test reactors online.

Criticality is just the start.

Zero-power criticality was technically first achieved with a pile of bricks in 1942 and many steps away from reliably delivering commercial power. It simply demonstrates that the nuclear chain reaction behaves as expected and is a milestone after the first leg of the race. The true value of these demonstrations is in the journey to achieving that milestone–reducing technological uncertainty in a way that only real-world experience can.

These reactors are not expected to be a commercial product. Historically, reactor designers have felt pressure to pursue a commercial project too early and therefore carry technical, regulatory and financial risk simultaneously into their first project. This program offered the ability to progressively derisk technology in phases.

Instead of jumping straight to commercialization, companies now have a dedicated pathway to build, operate, test, modify and improve first-of-a-kind designs under DOE authorization before pursuing commercial deployment. The main product of this program isn’t reactors, but data, experience and confidence. Validating designs, collecting operational data, training operators, and gaining project management and construction experience are all invaluable to new companies working on innovative technology, nuclear or not.

So what’s next?

The Reactor Pilot Program itself was intended as a sprint. An ambitious, time-boxed goal that would build confidence and move the ball forward on technological readiness. The next phase of this effort is the new, sustained Launch Pad initiative administered by the National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC) at Idaho National Laboratory (INL).

Launch Pad isn’t a replacement for the pilot program, but an evolution of its philosophy of innovation. Across three capabilities, Launch Pad will feature even greater opportunities for innovative companies to prototype their technology:

Launch Pad INL, 2,000 acres to site at INL;
Launch Pad USA, covering other national labs and non-federal lands; and
DOME, a microreactor test bed that opened at INL in April 2026.

Starting in 2026, the U.S. will have a dedicated platform to provide reactor developers with access to national lab expertise, dedicated testing infrastructure, and a framework for demonstrating prototypes.

Each company will have different goals and objectives through these programs. Some developers may sprint toward criticality, while others may spend more time developing a closer-to-commercial design. Not every one of these efforts will ultimately succeed, which is fine. That’s exactly how innovation should work.

Measuring Success

The achievement of this program wasn’t just meeting the criticality goal. There is, after all, still a significant amount of work to be done before that translates into commercial results. The greatest achievement is unlocking America’s ability to innovate and build.

The revitalization of the nuclear industry has the makings of a hallmark accomplishment of the Trump administration. But to get there, eventually, prototypes will need to become commercial offerings. Companies must demonstrate reliable operation, develop repeatable manufacturing methods, build supply chains, attract private capital and secure customers. Ultimately, they need to prove they can put electrons on the grid reliably and at a competitive cost.

As these companies progress toward commercialization, the July 4, 2026 goal will be remembered not as the end of a successful program, but as the revitalization of the American nuclear innovation engine.