Efforts have been underway for some time to modernize U.S. reactor regulations. A chronology is helpful.

From the inception of the modernization effort, many in industry advised that incremental improvement of the parent regulations offered the most expeditious and cost effective route. That advice was ignored.

Historically, NRC regulations have been highly prescriptive. Depressingly, the proposed 10CFR53 continues that tradition. While various motives can be theorized, "bureaucracy" readily springs to mind.

Undue and inefficient regulatory licensing costs (recently NUSCALE at ~½ billion dollars) are dwarfed by similar excesses involving the design, manufacture, construction, and operation of new nuclear plants. Energy costs for such plants are estimated at about 2-1/2 times those associated with similarly sized conventional power plants, in large measure due to extensive NRC overregulation. Absent the NRC taking a more reasonable path, the demise of the U.S. nuclear industry is inevitable. The loss of nuclear power is strategically troubling. Fortunately the U.S. is blessed with abundant natural gas reserves utilized by efficient and low-cost power plants.

In passing, major policy objectives of the new Administration include reducing and simplifying regulations, right-sizing government agencies, and U.S. energy dominance. The NRC is subject to Executive Branch efficiency reviews. Also, issues involving regulatory compliance with Congressional law are now subject to legal challenges as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court's recent Chevron doctrine decision.