[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 109 (Monday, June 8, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34661-34664]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-11451]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2026-2905]
Policy Statement on Mandatory Hearings for Reactor Licensing
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Policy statement; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing a
policy statement entitled ``Policy Statement on Mandatory Hearings for
Reactor Licensing.'' This policy statement sets forth the NRC's plan
for conducting future mandatory hearings on reactor license and permit
applications. The statement explains the rationale for adopting the
process to be used going forward and describes the new process.
DATES: The policy statement is effective on June 8, 2026.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2026-2905 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may
obtain publicly available information related to this action by any of
the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Electronically at https://www.regulations.gov. Search for Docket ID NRC-2026-2905. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Helen Chang; telephone: 301-415-3228;
email: [email protected]. For technical questions contact the
individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``Begin ADAMS Public Search.''
For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room
(PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, at 301-415-4737, or by email
to [email protected]. The ``Policy Statement on Mandatory Hearings
for Reactor Licensing'' is available as an attachment to this document.
NRC's PDR: The PDR, where you may examine and order copies
of publicly available documents, is open by appointment. To make an
appointment to visit the PDR, please send an email to
[email protected] or call 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, between 8
a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if
it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is
mentioned in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Kirkwood, Office of the General
Counsel, telephone: 301-287-9187, email: [email protected]; or
Marcia Simon, Office of the General Counsel, telephone: 301-287-9176,
email: [email protected]; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Pursuant to section 189a. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA),
the NRC is required to ``hold a hearing'' after 30 days' notice on
certain reactor license applications (for construction permits, early
site permits, and combined licenses). The NRC has reassessed and
altered its approach to conducting these mandatory (or ``uncontested'')
hearings several times over the last two decades. For example, during
this time span, the Commission itself (the five-member collegial body
of principal officers that oversees the agency) has delegated and then
reassumed the role of presiding officer at certain mandatory hearings
and has streamlined the process to create a hearing based entirely on
written submittals from the applicant and the NRC staff (see, e.g.,
SRM-SECY-21-0107, ``Selection of Presiding Officer for Mandatory
Hearings Associated with Construction Permit Applications'' (ADAMS
Accession No. ML22083A045), and SRM-SECY-24-0032, ``Revisiting the
Mandatory Hearing Process at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission''
(ADAMS Accession No. ML24200A044)).
Because the AEA does not define ``hearing'' and does not specify
the content of mandatory hearings or particular procedures to be used,
the NRC has considerable discretion to establish the content and
procedures for mandatory hearings. Historically, the NRC has chosen to
structure the mandatory hearing as a confirmation of the sufficiency of
the NRC staff's technical review of the application, held after the NRC
staff review is complete. However, the AEA does not specify when the
mandatory hearing must take place or that it must include a sufficiency
review.
The Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for
Clean Energy Act of 2024 (ADVANCE Act), which was signed into law in
July 2024, establishes requirements to enhance the NRC's timeliness and
efficiency in conducting nuclear power reactor licensing reviews.
Section 207 of the ADVANCE Act specifically addresses the hearing
process, requiring the NRC (for certain combined license applications)
to, among other things, complete ``any necessary public licensing
hearings and related processes'' not later than two years after
docketing the application. Subsequently, in May of 2025, the President
directed a series of reforms to improve the NRC's efficiency and
effectiveness in Executive Order (E.O.) 14300, ``Ordering the Reform of
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.'' As relevant to this policy
statement, section 5(j) of E.O. 14300 directs the NRC to streamline its
public hearing process.
In light of these significant developments, the NRC is revising the
mandatory hearing process for reactor licensing in a manner that
satisfies the
[[Page 34662]]
statutory requirement in the AEA while addressing the directives in the
ADVANCE Act and E.O. 14300. The NRC believes the revised process will
benefit all stakeholders by allowing public participation in the
mandatory hearing and reducing the resource burden of the hearing on
the NRC staff and the applicant.
II. Discussion
The requirement to hold a mandatory (or ``uncontested'') hearing
was added to section 189a. of the AEA in 1957 in response to
Congressional concerns about a perceived lack of transparency in the
reactor licensing process at the time. These concerns were based
primarily on the dual roles of the NRC's predecessor, the Atomic Energy
Commission (AEC), in regulating the safe use of nuclear materials and
technology while also encouraging their development and use. At the
time, commercial nuclear power was a new, unproven industry with many
areas requiring research and demonstration of concept, and the AEC's
mission had recently (in 1954) undergone a fundamental shift from
focusing on government and military uses of nuclear materials to
private commercial uses such as electric power generation.
The nuclear power industry and the way the NRC implements its
regulatory oversight have changed significantly since the mandatory
hearing provision was first enacted almost 70 years ago. Given these
changes and the NRC's accumulated experience with mandatory hearings, a
fresh look at what the provision requires, and how best to implement
it, is appropriate.
As previously stated, the NRC's long-standing practice of
conducting these hearings as a sufficiency review--to confirm the
adequacy of the staff's review--was not compelled by the AEA. Rather,
it was a policy decision by the Commission (see Exelon Generation Co.,
LLC (Early Site Permit for Clinton ESP Site), CLl-05-17, 62 NRC 5, 38-
42 (2005)). We now believe the NRC's mission and the public interest
will be best served by holding the mandatory hearing early in the
review process and allowing public participation in the hearing. The
early public hearing will be a forum for information exchange and
public input, in contrast to the current focus on an independent review
of the staff's review. This change expands the opportunities for
members of the public to participate in NRC licensing processes. The
NRC's revised approach for mandatory hearings does not affect the
opportunity for members of the public to request a hearing to contest
specific safety, security or environmental issues.
Over the past several decades, we have changed the specific
procedures for conducting mandatory hearings several times without
seeking public comment. Issuing this policy statement ensures
transparency about how mandatory hearings will be conducted going
forward, and the changes to the mandatory hearing process will allow
for public participation in each individual hearing. Therefore, we have
determined, on balance, that seeking formal comment on this policy
statement is not in the public interest because of the overall
flexibility that is already built into the new mandatory hearing
process to facilitate public involvement.
III. Plain Writing
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274) requires Federal
agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, and well-organized
manner. The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the
Plain Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, ``Plain
Language in Government Writing,'' published June 10, 1998 (63 FR
31885).
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act
This Policy Statement does not contain new or amended information
collection requirements and, therefore, is not subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
V. Regulatory Planning and Review
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined
that this policy statement is not a significant regulatory action under
E.O. 12866.
VI. Congressional Review Act
This Policy Statement is a rule as defined in the Congressional
Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of Management and
Budget has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the
Congressional Review Act.
The text of the Policy Statement on Mandatory Hearings for Reactor
Licensing is attached.
Dated: June 04, 2026.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carrie Safford,
Secretary of the Commission.
Attachment--Policy Statement on Mandatory Hearings for Reactor
Licensing
The requirement to hold a mandatory (or ``uncontested'') hearing at
the construction permit stage of new nuclear power reactor licensing
was established in 1957 in Section 189a. of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended (AEA). Under this provision, the NRC must ``hold a
hearing'' after 30 days' notice on applications for construction
permits, early site permits (ESPs), and combined licenses (COLs). The
mandatory hearing requirement was added to the AEA in response to
Congressional concerns about the lack of transparency in the reactor
licensing process at the time--concerns that were informed in large
part by the dual roles of the NRC's predecessor, the Atomic Energy
Commission (AEC), in regulating the safe use of nuclear materials and
technology while also encouraging their development and utilization.
Now, nearly 70 years after the mandatory hearing requirement was
enacted, the regulatory and technical landscape has changed
dramatically. First, the concerns about the AEC's dual roles were
eliminated over half a century ago with the passage of the Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974 (ERA). The ERA abolished the AEC and
separated its dual functions, creating the NRC to perform the
regulatory functions previously performed by the AEC and moving the
AEC's other functions to a separate Federal agency. Today, the
Department of Energy is responsible for supporting development and use
of nuclear energy, while the NRC recently celebrated its 50th
anniversary as the independent agency that regulates civilian uses of
nuclear energy.
Second, in the late 1950s, commercial nuclear power was a new and
unproven industry. The AEC was also a new agency, early in the process
of developing its regulatory infrastructure and transitioning from its
original focus on military applications to peaceful uses of nuclear
energy. Now, commercial nuclear power is a mature industry, with a
current fleet of 94 operating commercial power reactors in the U.S.
supplying approximately 20 percent of the country's energy. In parallel
with the growth and evolution of the industry, the NRC (starting with
its predecessor, the AEC) has established a staff with technical
expertise in a wide array of relevant disciplines and has amassed
nearly 70 years of institutional and operating experience to guide the
agency's regulatory process and decisions. Research, operating
experience, and technological developments in the nuclear field have
resulted in numerous safety improvements, and advances in modeling and
simulation technology have made it possible to evaluate and analyze
reactor safety in ways that were unimaginable in the 1950s.
[[Page 34663]]
Finally, the NRC now regularly engages with its stakeholders, and
particularly with the public, in ways far beyond what could have been
envisioned 70 years ago. The NRC proactively seeks public input through
public meetings, open comment periods, webinars, and outreach events
designed to inform and involve the public in its regulatory processes.
With the advent and widespread availability of personal computers and
the internet, license applications, staff safety evaluations,
environmental review documents, and a vast array of other documents and
information about the NRC's regulatory process and decision-making are
now readily accessible on the NRC public website and in the agency's
electronic database, the Agencywide Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS). And, in addition to the NRC's own efforts to engage
with stakeholders, Congress has also enacted several statutes since
1957 that focus on increased openness and accountability in government,
such as the Freedom of Information Act, the Government in the Sunshine
Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
In sum, 50 years after the NRC was created, and almost 70 years
after the mandatory hearing requirement was established, there have
been immense transformations in the nuclear industry and at the NRC. In
light of these changes, the NRC is revising its approach to the
mandatory hearing in a manner that will fulfill the statutory
requirement while supporting an efficient, timely and predictable
regulatory review and enhancing public participation.
The mandatory hearing requirement in Section 189a. of the AEA
states that the NRC ``shall hold a hearing after thirty days' notice
and publication once in the Federal Register'' on construction permit
applications. Because an ESP is a partial construction permit and COLs
contain a construction permit, the NRC interprets the Section 189a.
requirement to apply to these licenses as well. The statute contains no
other direction regarding the process, scope, or timing of mandatory
hearings. Thus, we have broad discretion under the AEA to adapt the
mandatory hearing process to the modern regulatory and technological
landscape.
Our longstanding practice has been to conduct mandatory hearings as
a sufficiency review to confirm that the NRC staff's review has been
adequate. This practice was not compelled by the AEA or any other
statutory requirement but was informed by how we had structured our
regulations. In particular, former 10 CFR 2.104(b), which we removed
from our regulations in 2007, specified certain issues to be considered
even in uncontested hearings. As we have previously explained, the NRC
staff has ``prime responsibility for technical fact-finding on
uncontested matters.'' \1\ Moreover, during the review process the NRC
staff interacts with the Commission and the Advisory Committee on
Reactor Safeguards as needed, particularly when significant new
designs, technologies, or policy issues are presented in the review of
an application. Thus, an additional formal sufficiency check on the NRC
staff's review is simply unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Early Site Permit for
Clinton ESP Site), CLI-05-17, 62 NRC 5, 35 (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since 2007, we have made several revisions to the mandatory hearing
process in an effort to achieve greater efficiency while meeting the
requirement. The recent passage of the ADVANCE Act and the
Administration's issuance of related Executive Orders have placed
intense focus on the nation's nuclear energy capacity and NRC's role in
enabling the safe and secure use and deployment of civilian nuclear
energy technologies, and, in particular, on the efficiency and
timeliness of NRC reactor licensing decisions. Because of these
Congressional and Administration actions and corresponding developments
within the nuclear industry, the NRC expects an influx of new reactor
applications that will require mandatory hearings. And the strict
timelines for completing reviews of those applications have compelled
the NRC to once again reconsider the format and function of the
mandatory hearing. At this time, we believe the NRC's mission and the
public interest will best be served by changing the timing and process
of the mandatory hearing as described below. These changes will make
the mandatory hearing more effective and meaningful to the agency and
the public by restructuring it as a vehicle to share information and
obtain early public input and by maximizing the NRC staff's focus on
reviews to facilitate their completion on schedule without compromising
public health and safety or the common defense and security. The
changes in the mandatory hearing process described in this policy
statement do not alter the NRC staff's responsibility to keep the
Commission informed and to timely seek and obtain Commission direction
about any significant issues that arise during the review process.
We believe the NRC's mission and the public interest will be best
served by conducting the mandatory hearing as a public hearing held
early in the review process, approximately 30 days after a complete
application is docketed. The early public hearing will provide a forum
for information exchange and public input, in contrast to the current
focus on checking the NRC staff's completed review. This approach will
better realize an aim identified in the 1957 Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy study of AEC procedures: to allow members of the public to
provide views early in the process without the encumbrances of seeking
a contested hearing.\2\ This approach will also reallocate the
significant NRC staff and Commission resources currently dedicated to
mandatory hearings held at the conclusion of the NRC staff's review to
focus those resources instead on the timely completion of comprehensive
safety, security, and environmental reviews.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Staff of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, ``A Study of
AEC Procedures and Organization in the Licensing of Reactor
Facilities,'' at 23 (Joint Committee Print 1957).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our current mandatory hearing process has provided appropriate
transparency that is fully consistent with the AEA, giving the public
the ability to view publicly available hearing documents near the end
of the staff's review of a license application. The current mandatory
hearing format does not provide an opportunity for public participation
or feedback. Accordingly, an additional benefit of our revised approach
to the mandatory hearing is that members of the public will have an
opportunity to provide information in areas of inquiry for the staff's
safety, security, and environmental reviews at the beginning of the
review process. Our revised approach does not affect the opportunity
for members of the public to request a hearing to contest specific
safety, security, or environmental issues.
Procedures for Conducting Mandatory Hearings for Reactor Licensing
The Commission hereby delegates its authority to conduct mandatory
hearings for new reactor construction permits, early site permits, and
combined licenses to the Executive Director of Operations (EDO). The
EDO may further delegate this authority to the appropriate office
director. Each mandatory hearing will be conducted by a facilitator
from the NRC In-House Meeting Facilitator and Advisor Program, with at
least one agency
[[Page 34664]]
employee who is a member of the Senior Executive Service in attendance.
The mandatory hearing will be held in a public hearing style format
frequently used by local government bodies to receive input from the
public. Within the parameters laid out in this policy statement, the
NRC staff has the discretion to conduct mandatory hearings in a manner
that the NRC staff finds appropriate to the particular circumstances of
each application and that will best adhere to the NRC's Principles of
Good Regulation (https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/values#principles). The
hearing should be conducted in a location as close to the proposed site
as practicable, but should generally not be held at a licensee's,
applicant's, or licensee/applicant contractor's facility. In deciding
on a location, the NRC staff should consider factors such as weather,
anticipated crowd size, availability of parking, proximity to public
transportation, appropriateness of the venue, infrastructure and
internet accessibility, and security needs, including availability of
local law enforcement, as well as any other considerations as
appropriate.
Our general expectation is that the NRC staff will hold the
mandatory hearing as early as possible in the review process after an
application is docketed. Section 189a. of the AEA requires the NRC to
provide at least 30 days' notice of the mandatory hearing. Accordingly,
after docketing an application for review, the NRC staff will identify
an appropriate location and venue for the mandatory hearing and publish
notice of the hearing in the Federal Register. As appropriate, the NRC
staff may issue a combined notice of docketing of the application,
notice of mandatory hearing, and notice of opportunity to request a
(contested) hearing. The distinction between the mandatory hearing and
the opportunity to request a contested hearing will be explained in the
hearing notice and during the mandatory hearing. In accordance with NRC
policy, the NRC staff will also publish notice of the mandatory hearing
on the NRC public website, and the NRC staff may supplement the Federal
Register and website notices with notices on social media and in local
media as appropriate.
While we intend that the NRC staff has some flexibility in
conducting these hearings, we expect the NRC staff to select a hearing
format that is most suitable for each individual application and that
will best serve the interests of all stakeholders. Initially, we expect
all mandatory hearings to be conducted either in person or using a
hybrid (both in-person and virtual) format. In addition, we expect all
mandatory hearings to include, at a minimum, the following elements:
1. The formal portion of the hearing (see items 2 to 4 below) will
be transcribed.
2. The NRC staff will provide a presentation explaining the review
process, providing a brief overview of the application, explaining
where the public can obtain further information, and explaining the
opportunities for public engagement in the review process. The overview
of the application will include basic information about the project
(e.g., location, important geographical features, type of reactor
technology, whether the project uses a new or already approved design),
key aspects of the application's analysis of potential hazards, and, as
applicable, any novel or unusual aspects of the project of which the
NRC staff is aware.
3. The total time for presentations (including the staff's overview
of the application and review logistics, and the applicant's
presentation, if applicable) would typically be no more than 60
minutes. The applicant will have an opportunity to provide a
presentation of no more than 30 minutes about the project and the
license application.
4. The NRC staff will provide a comment period of up to three
hours, where questions and comments from the public will be heard on
the record. Each member of the public will be allowed to speak for no
more than five minutes at a time in an effort to ensure that all
stakeholders who wish to provide oral comments or ask questions will
have the opportunity to do so. During the comment period, the NRC staff
should respond in real-time to questions about the application and the
review process to the extent practicable. The staff may hold an open
house before or after the comment period to facilitate further
discussion and information sharing.
5. The NRC staff will prepare a meeting summary for the hearing and
place it in ADAMS and on the NRC website. The meeting summary will
include an addendum that provides responses to any questions that could
not be answered at the hearing, based on information known to the NRC
staff at the time of the hearing.
6. The NRC staff will provide a two-week period after the hearing
for the submission of further written comments and questions. Any
written comments or questions received during the two-week period after
the hearing will be placed in a folder in ADAMS and instructions on how
to access them will be posted on the NRC's public website. The
Commission expects that the NRC staff will consider and incorporate
comments and questions received during the hearing into its review as
appropriate.
Conclusion
In sum, the NRC has carefully considered the significant
developments that have occurred in the decades since the mandatory
hearing requirement was established. These changes in the regulatory
landscape and national priorities, across the nuclear industry, and at
the agency, together necessitate further refinement of our hearing
process. By applying these revised hearing procedures, the NRC will
fulfill the statutory requirement while supporting an efficient, timely
and predictable regulatory review and enhancing public participation.
[FR Doc. 2026-11451 Filed 6-5-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P