Read this post on Josh’s Substack: Powering Spaceship Earth.
Through the Agreement State Program, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission transfers regulatory authority over specific nuclear materials to states that meet federal standards. This includes radioactive sources used in medicine, research, and industry. States oversee the day-to-day use of those materials, and the NRC regulates nuclear reactors and larger facilities.
These agreements are limited in scope, but they demonstrate that states can and do assume significant nuclear regulatory responsibilities. It’s entirely possible that certain states—or even most states—may want to build out more expertise and create a clear runway to enable nuclear development within their boundaries. As Jack Spencer argues in his book on nuclear policy, empowering states could unblock nuclear progress. Already, a coalition of states and nuclear companies is making the legal case that states have rightful authority over some new reactor designs, signaling a future where states could play a much larger role in advancing nuclear energy.
What’s a state lawmaker to do?
In the past, state leaders have mainly hindered and stopped nuclear. One infamous example is then-Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis’ refusal to participate in practice drills that the NRC required before the opening of the Seabrook reactor in neighboring New Hampshire. His refusal ultimately delayed the project for three years and added almost $2.5 billion in costs (in today’s terms) to the project.
Forward-looking states should invest in expertise and establish clear pathways to welcome new nuclear projects:
- End prohibitions on nuclear development and growth: Remove outright nuclear bans or limitations on expansions of nuclear generation (covered in more detail here).
- Facilitate permitting: Streamline permitting and site selection for nuclear generation. Direct state energy offices to provide clear information and assist industry. Clear and open communication of rules and regulations is necessary in every industry.
- Run a transparent and open energy system: Provide clear information about existing sites that have the infrastructure to transmit power. Entrepreneurs can take advantage of opportunities to provide industry and average consumers with power if the system allows them to identify needs and contract with consumers. This is especially important for large loads, like data centers.
- Plug in new generators faster: Consider the entire sequence to build and plug in new nuclear generators. The average interconnection timeline for projects is five years, and it’s common to hear of certain projects taking longer. Because of this, restarting Three Mile Island required Governor Shapiro to personally intervene, which is a sure sign of a broken system. Interconnection reform will be a precondition to successful nuclear expansion.
- Consider opportunities across the nuclear supply chain: Not every state grows bananas, but every grocery store carries them. Similarly, a state’s nuclear opportunities may include workforce development, education, mining, recycling, storage, and enrichment facilities, alongside the more traditional considerations of nuclear power generation. State lawmakers can leverage the resources in their states and ensure that entrepreneurs have open roads to build their businesses.
- Explore regional collaboration: State lawmakers shouldn’t ignore the interregional opportunities as well. States building new, large nuclear plants may be in particular need of transmission improvements to deliver power to customers. Regional associations, such as the Western Governors’ Association, and collaborative organizations like the American Legislative Exchange Council or the National Conference of State Legislatures, will be important hubs for sharing best practices.
- Advocate for better nuclear regulation at the federal level: State leaders may not have direct authority on many regulatory questions, but they certainly hold influence and can work in concert with their federal representatives to improve federal policy.1 These efforts could advocate for (1) increased roles for state-level authorities on nuclear policy, (2) updating how radiation risks are modeled by the NRC (moving away from the linear no-threshold model), and (3) fairly and richly compensating solutions to nuclear waste (on-site storage, long-term storage, and recycling spent fuel rods).
There is much more to do than this list, but these are some of the most important options for state lawmakers. Done well, state-level leaders have opportunities to do the opposite of Governor Dukakis’ stalling.
[1] Our brief on nuclear policy reform is here. The testimony we provided to the House Oversight Committee is here.