Nuclear Safety Rules Revised in Secret Now Available to Public

Lean Thomas

CREDITS: Wikimedia CC BY-SA 3.0

Share this post

Secretly rewritten nuclear safety rules are made public

Rush to Meet Ambitious Reactor Deadline (Image Credits: Flickr)

The Department of Energy released a batch of rewritten nuclear safety directives this week, one month after an NPR investigation exposed their hidden overhaul.[1][2]

Rush to Meet Ambitious Reactor Deadline

President Trump signed an executive order in May 2025 directing the department to approve at least three experimental reactors for operation by July 4, 2026. Officials responded by launching the Reactor Pilot Program at Idaho National Laboratory. This initiative expanded the department’s regulatory authority to cover private companies building small modular reactors outside government sites.[1][2]

DOE staff rewrote internal orders over fall and winter 2025 to streamline approvals. The changes targeted safety systems, environmental safeguards, and site security. NPR obtained early copies shared only with ten participating companies. The revisions cut roughly 750 pages, or two-thirds of the original directives.[2]

Major Cuts to Security and Environmental Standards

Security requirements saw the deepest reductions. A previous 500-page safeguards order shrank to 23 pages of bullet points. Detailed protocols for guard training, firearms handling, and physical barriers vanished. Protections against theft of nuclear material also simplified significantly.[2]

Environmental rules softened as well. Groundwater protections shifted from mandatory safeguards to considerations of avoidance where practical. Discharges into sewers moved from prohibited to something that should be avoided. Radiation protection dropped the longstanding ALARA principle, which aimed to minimize worker exposure as low as reasonably achievable. These alterations aimed to cut costs and burdens while claiming no loss in core protections.[1][2]

  • Security: Consolidated directives eliminate specifics on emergency drills and officer procedures.
  • Radiation: Higher exposure thresholds before investigations trigger.
  • Environment: Waste management manual reduced from 59 to 25 pages.
  • Safety roles: No longer requires dedicated engineers for critical systems.

Program Progress Fuels Innovation Push

Companies advanced quickly under the new framework. Antares Nuclear and Radiant Industries completed preliminary safety analyses for summer startups. Aalo Atomics finished its final design review. Valar Atomics shipped a prototype reactor to Utah via military transport for potential military use in Project Janus.[1]

Energy Secretary Chris Wright highlighted the momentum at a recent Utah press conference. He predicted multiple reactors would reach criticality before the deadline. The department posted the Nuclear Energy Orders and Standards on the Idaho National Laboratory website, accessible here, following NPR’s Freedom of Information Act request.[1]

Debate Over Risks and Benefits Intensifies

The DOE maintained that reductions targeted unnecessary burdens without compromising safety. A spokesperson noted the moves foster industry innovation. Critics, however, raised alarms. Edwin Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists called the rewrite long overdue for public view but worried about rushed procedures.[1][3]

“They’re taking a wrecking ball to the system of nuclear safety and security regulation,” Lyman stated earlier.[2] Former NRC officials echoed concerns over lost public trust and potential accident risks. The changes coincided with a NEPA exemption for environmental reviews, further streamlining the path forward.[4]

Key Takeaways

  • Rules now public at Idaho National Laboratory site after NPR probe.
  • 750 pages cut to speed experimental reactors by July 2026.
  • Security, radiation, and environmental standards significantly loosened.

These developments signal a bold pivot toward rapid nuclear expansion, balancing innovation against longstanding safeguards. As reactors near operation, questions linger on whether speed trumps caution. What do you think about the trade-offs? Tell us in the comments.

Leave a Comment