Next-gen nuclear reactors safe enough to skip full environmental reviews, says Trump admin
- Reference: 1770144018
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2026/02/03/nextgen_nuclear_reactors_skip_nepa_reviews/
- Source link:
The DoE announced the "categorical exclusion" for advanced nuclear reactors (ANRs) in a Federal Register [1]filing on Monday, establishing a pathway that can allow ANR projects to proceed without a full environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), provided specific conditions are met. The move follows Trump's executive orders directing agencies to streamline environmental reviews for nuclear reactors in order to accelerate their deployment.
A categorical exclusion means that a covered category of actions "normally does not significantly affect the quality of the human environment and therefore does not require preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement," the filing says. In this case, that's referring to ANRs, which include Generation III+ reactors, small modular reactors, microreactors, and stationary and mobile reactors.
[2]
Authorization, siting, construction, operation, reauthorization, and decommissioning of ANRs are all included in the categorical exclusion.
[3]
[4]
The DoE [5]justified its decision in a written record of support, arguing that safety features of next-generation reactor designs generally limit their potential environmental impact.
"Advanced nuclear reactors have key attributes such as safety features, fuel type, and fission product inventory that limit adverse consequences from releases of radioactive or hazardous material from construction, operation, and decommissioning," the DoE said in the record of support, while conceding that most advanced reactor designs have yet to move beyond experiments and demonstrations.
[6]
"Although past advanced reactor projects have been for solely experimental, testing, and demonstration purposes … these reactors indicate that reactors in this category developed for additional purposes, such as power production and industrial applications, are also appropriate for this categorical exclusion," the document explained.
The DoE's move isn't entirely surprising given Trump's executive orders cited in the Federal Register publication specifically ask the DoE to establish categorical exclusions for ANRs. Additionally, the DoE reportedly [7]quietly rewrote other nuclear safety documents to streamline reactor projects recently, eliminating hundreds of pages of requirements, loosening groundwater protections, and increasing radiation exposure limits for personnel, among other changes.
Nonetheless, the DoE's Office of Nuclear Energy told The Register that, contrary to the definition of a categorical exclusion stated in the Federal Register publication, nuclear reactors would still undergo an environmental review under NEPA.
[8]
"The U.S. Department of Energy is establishing the potential option to obtain a streamlined approach for advanced nuclear reactors as part of the environmental review performed under NEPA," a Nuclear Energy spokesperson told us in an email.
"The analysis on each reactor being considered will be informed by previously completed environmental reviews for similar advanced nuclear technologies," the spokesperson continued. "This methodology is a win for bipartisan supported NEPA reform and will accelerate licensing of advanced reactors while upholding the highest standards of safety and security."
The Union of Concerned Scientists' nuclear power safety director, Edwin Lyman, disagrees, telling us the DoE's move cuts corners that will create a public health and environmental safety risk.
"The test reactor designs currently under construction have primarily existed on paper. This lack of real-world experience with the reactors means that they should be subject to more rigorous safety and environmental reviews before they're built, not less," Lyman told us. "Any nuclear reactor, no matter how small, no matter how safe it looks on paper, is potentially subject to severe accidents."
[9]Amazon, Meta, Google sign pledge to triple nuclear power capacity by 2050
[10]Who made the demo list for Trump's fast-track nuclear reactor scheme?
[11]AI datacenters want to go nuclear. Too bad they needed it yesterday
[12]Energy buffs give small modular reactors a gigantic reality check
As Lyman noted, most of the ANR designs that the DoE wants to exempt are still in the development phase. Only a single pair of [13]Generation III+ nuclear reactors has been constructed in the US, and those came online in 2023 and 2024, respectively, at the Vogtle nuclear power facility in Georgia.
Small modular reactors, microreactors, and other fantasy generators are still the stuff of dreams. Just one SMR design has cleared US regulatory approval, and none has yet been built and operated, with at least one project already [14]abandoned . Nonetheless, Energy Secretary Chris Wright claims the US will have at least one SMR up and running before the 4th of July in 2026.
Given how far behind the nuclear industry is in deploying reactor designs that are still the stuff of dreams, it's going to need as many regulatory rewrites as possible. ®
Get our [15]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/02/02/2026-02071/categorical-exclusion-for-advanced-nuclear-reactors
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aYJ-DQQAU4P7GIN-xSDT0gAAAU0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aYJ-DQQAU4P7GIN-xSDT0gAAAU0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aYJ-DQQAU4P7GIN-xSDT0gAAAU0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.energy.gov/nepa/categorical-exclusion-advanced-nuclear-reactors
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aYJ-DQQAU4P7GIN-xSDT0gAAAU0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/29/us_nuclear_campuses/
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/publicsector&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aYJ-DQQAU4P7GIN-xSDT0gAAAU0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/12/push_for_nuclear/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/14/us_doe_names_firms_that/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/31/nuclear_no_panacea_ai/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/03/small_modular_reactor_criticism/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2023/08/01/us_nuclear_reactor_vogtle/
[14] https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/idaho-smr-project-terminated
[15] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Would anyone be surprised? >>>>>>
From a distance it looks like someone's hair. The bestest, bigliest hair in the world.
Yup, that's the type of hair that prevents conflict, or ends wars*
*No guarantee of conflict avoidance or war-endage is implied, nor should be inferred. Please read the T&C.
By cauliflower? Erm, only if they expected Armageddon, I guess. Oh, wait...
To be fair, Trump bears very little resemblance to most of the Republicans I've seen over the last half century (or for that matter most of the Democrats).
But yeah, adopting the "move fast and break things" mindset on nuclear projects probably isn't wise.
surrounded though by people
Who are as much in contact with past Republicans as with present reality.
It's not Republicans, full-stop (okay, 'period') - the old, statesmanlike, rule of law, 'friends & allies' Republicans must still be out there, somewhere. They've just been overwhelmed by the demi-cult 'Trump Party'®
All this too, shall pass...
Nah, man. Those Republicans have shown us who they are, and I believe them.
I'm with you Ace2. Look at what happened to the Conservative party in the UK - they shat on their own lawn, people withheld their votes, a new (possibly less desirable, quasi-Trumpish, but certainly new) party invaded their space, and the Conservative party barely exists any more. If the orange felon continues on his current track then that'll be the future for the GOP.
USA needs a voting and election system change, so a third and fourth party can emerge. The "The party which wins, by even the slightest magrin per voter area, gets the seat" logic is flawed. The congress should be set up according to the percentages of votes, and not by who won a county.
The current system is okay for the "before telegraph" time, but even with the telegraphs it could have been adjusted. Today it is nonsense and does not reflect the people.
Hey, guys! We're cool, right? That Elon & his Expert DoGE crew have checked everything out - nothing to see here, Bro. Look, it's tech-stuff, okay? Above our heads, man - but, these guys are geniuses!..
Yeah, just look at all of these PowerPoint slides that marketing sent over. The animation proves how safe these babies are!
We haven't tested it
We haven't built it, we haven't in many cases designed it yet... but it's apparently safe.
/me - a known nuclear fan - sighs.
Now going...
...after the Darwin Award, are we?
But that is for removing yourself from the gene pool, not your fellow creatures.
Approval not rejection
The clear intention here is speed up approval of new Nuclear Reactor designs, not to speed up a rigorous and valid assessment process.
How long does it take to fly to New Zealand?
(Aside: I have just noticed the complete absence of any icon depicting the natural world in the Register's selection. Interesting. The 'won't someone think of the children' icon being the closest I could find to the sentiment I wish to express.)
Re: Approval not rejection
Too long for me, I'm almost on the farthest point from NZ on the planet. My antipode location puts me near Australia. https://mapscaping.com/antipode-finder/
By the time I get there, it will be overcrowded.
Sad face for my kid, what a crappy world we're leaving for them.
Re: Approval not rejection
the complete absence of any icon depicting the natural world
???
we only allow the best and brightest to emigrate to NZ...
For example, that extraordinary citizen of the world and outstanding individual Peter Thiel is a now New Zealand citizen. In fact NZ is a popular destination for rich "preppers".
James Cameron just become a NZ citizen and given how crap his recent movies are I probably prefer Peter Thiel.
So I hope you are of a similar standard else it ain't gonna happen for you.
On the upside, we are so far away from everyone else and such a small population that all the crap that other locales suffer (amazon warehouses/drone delivery, data center expansion, nuclear power, fracking etc) doesn't happen here plus we are one of those nasty Social Democracies which abandoned "first past the post" for MMP (Mixed member proportional), have very strong campaign contribution laws (with tiny maximum dollar limits) and are always ranked in the top three countries in the world for government transparency and lack of corruption.
Just a shame our Rugby team sucks... but at least the cancer of Razor has been removed...so there is some hope for the patient to recover but maybe not in time to get steamrolled by the Bokkie 4-0 during this years SA tour.
Bluck
Highly enriched fuel
The smaller a nuclear reactor is, the higher the enrichment of the fuel needs to be (due to neutron loss at the edge of the core).
A large gas cooled reactor (such as the old british Magnox design) can run on non-enriched fuel (0.7% U235).
Small water cooled reactors (such as the ones in nuclear submarines) need highly enriched urainium (from 20% U235 up to 95% U235)
Highly enriched urainium is a terrorists dream target.
This icon seems apt ============>
Re: Highly enriched fuel
That is nonsense. The first Magnox natural uranium reactors output 60 MW of electrical power. This is in micro-reactor range, never mind SMR (the Rolls Royce SMR is close to 500 MW of output) and definitely not "large".
The first Canadian power generating reactor was the NPD-2, built as a demonstration plant. It used natural uranium and generated 20 MW of power. This was the prototype for the CANDU series of natural uranium reactors.
French nuclear submarines use uranium enriched to 7%, which is not far above commercial power reactors. American submarines may use highly enriched uranium, but there is no technical reason relating to reactor size requiring it.
Most SMR designs use normal commercial fuel such as is used in larger reactor today.
Some SMRs use uranium enriched to just below 20% (which is still far below bomb grade). This is generally done in order to make the reactor smaller as the more concentrated fuel will output the same power in a smaller volume. This is typically done so they can transport the reactor in one piece within normal shipping dimensions.
NEPA
National Environmental Policy Act
No Environmental Protections Accepted
Because reducing safety oversight
Worked so well with the 737 Max...
Dammit, I hope they choose the right location...
but please not where I know some good USA-ians live. And > 1000 km distance from them, and > 1000 km distance from the two borders. 'cause the typical "money first" priority, which is currently more than ever before, throws security down the drain. See [1]USCSB for examples which companies could not hide.
Hmm, Oklahoma panhandle / North Texas, East-Wyoming. Though Texas just turned blue when I read the news right - but I am a bit too far away to tell, and it is a bit more complex for sure.
Mar-a-lago and Clearwater (Scientology City) are, sadly, out of question since both is too close to a few good I know...
[1] https://www.youtube.com/@USCSB/videos
Re: Dammit, I hope they choose the right location...
They are to be built at US nuclear research sites, which were mainly involved in the development and testing of nuclear weapons.
They will still undergo review. There are three categories of review, and "categorical exclusion" is one of them. Essentially, the Department of Energy will review the design and if they determine that the risk of the release of hazardous materials is small enough, then they don't have to go through the same review process used when it is assumed that hazardous materials may be released.
Re: Dammit, I hope they choose the right location...
You speak how it should be. I hope for those living over there that they will do it the way they should. But the reality is different.
Unrequested fission surplus
"Controlled nuclear fission is a demanding mistress" - Mr Burns
Isn't it great that Lewis Page is no longer El Reg's reporter in this area?
Provided specific conditions are met
Only untraceable currency, brown envelopes and the most carefully selected pipes behind the gents.
Yeah, and FUCKING WIND TURBINES are too dangerous to build offshore, but we’re gonna fasttrack experimental reactors.
I hate Republicans.