Resources Archive
As the energy transition accelerates across all 50 states, policymakers are recognizing the inherent value of carbon-free, reliable nuclear energy. Governors, legislators and regulators play a critical role in shaping policies that can enhance the development, demonstration and commercial deployment of a wide array of nuclear technologies.
This paper describes the cost trends and drivers for generating electricity using nuclear energy—capital, operations and fuel costs—and the value of the industry's carbon-free electricity in context.
This document summarizes the discussion between the nuclear power industry and NRC staff during meetings on December 11-12, 2025, pertaining to (1) the NRC review approach for power uprate license amendment requests (LARs) and (2) tabletop walkthroughs of the submittal strategies for two specific plants. This document highlights key discussion points from the meeting, states follow-up actions, and provides potential strategies for streamlining review of licensing submittals for power uprates.
Procedures and processes for implementing identification and reporting requirements of 10 CFR 54.37(b) may vary among utilities. This document is intended to provide best practices to ensure potential sources of newly identified systems, structures, and components (SSCs) in scope of license renewal aging management are considered during the 10 CFR 54.37(b) review process. The details of how information is obtained during this review will generally be different from site to site.
The purpose of this document is to identify codes and standards that could provide the greatest benefit for the advanced reactor design types being developed today, and to prioritize them so that the most beneficial codes and standards are developed first. Prioritization is based on the benefit to potential NRC applicants in terms of facilitating the licensing process and reducing design, component fabrication, facility construction and plant operating costs. Prior activities by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), American Nuclear Society (ANS) and NRC identified technical areas that warrant additional research and development to support standards development activities and a lengthy list of standards that need levels of revision to support the deployment of advanced reactors. Building on those activities, the tables contained herein list prioritized codes and standards and include descriptions of their content to explain the rationale of the specific changes needed to facilitate application to advanced reactors.
Screening Review: 10CFR70 + Selected Interim Staff Guidance
Screening Review: 10CFR71, NUREG-1609, NUREG-4775, and Shipping-Related Reg Guides
Screening Review: 10CFR50, NUREG-0800, and Reactor-related Regulatory Guides
In the United States, commercial light water reactors generate electricity using low‐enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. On average, fuel costs comprise approximately 20% of nuclear power plants’ total generating costs. Few other individual cost components have such a large impact on the economics of the nuclear fleet. A site’s fuel costs depend on two factors, the price of the fuel components (uranium feed, conversion, enrichment, and fabrication) and the efficiency of the core design. Fuel component costs are driven by supply and demand and are largely outside the control of a utility. The efficiency of a core design determines the quantity of nuclear material needed to meet a plant’s energy objectives. While a utility can improve the efficiency of the core design, this efficiency is ultimately limited by the specific design constraints of the core design. Two of several constraints that have been shown to directly impact the core design efficiency are the uranium enrichment level and discharge burnup achieved by the core and/or fuel design. A review of the current fuel management practices, based on equilibrium cycle designs, has shown that 99% of the variation in fuel cycle efficiency is attributable to variations in enrichment and burnup. Many sites are currently constrained by the existing regulatory limits on one or both of these parameters. With the increased interest in higher burnup cores, it is likely that within the next decade, both operating and advanced reactors will see a demand for fuel enriched greater than 5 weight percent (wt%) U‐235. This white paper provides a study—including assumptions, economic projections, inflation and financial methodologies—that evaluates the technical, financial and regulatory issues associated with increasing the limits on uranium enrichment and on fuel burnup for current uranium dioxide (UO2) fuel types. Revising these limits impacts a large portion of the nuclear fuel cycle as well as the licensing bases for both plant operators and fuel suppliers. While there are economic advantages to making these changes, they also require long‐term capital investment and regulatory changes. Revising these limits will provide savings through additional cycle length flexibility, reduced high level waste storage and disposal requirements, and a positive benefit on the environmental impact of the fuel cycle. The final decision to pursue new limits must consider not only the expected benefits but the business risks associated with such an undertaking.
FAQ on Part 810 Authorizations
The American economy is increasingly driven by industries seeking reliable, clean and affordable energy that is always available. Nuclear energy is poised to be the engine powering this future. Leadership in three key areas can unlock the potential for U.S. nuclear energy technology to meet domestic and global power needs.
Materials Degradation Research and NEI 03-08 Materials Initiative - Demonstration of the Proven Effectiveness of Existing Materials Management and Inspection Programs