In a notice published in the August 21 Federal Register, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is requesting public input on the latest set of results from a multiyear project to study risk at a two-unit nuclear power plant site.

Five pronuclear organizations—the Breakthrough Institute, Clean Air Task Force, ClearPath, Nuclear Innovation Alliance, and Third Way—have together penned a letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, calling on the agency to take action on its emergency preparedness for advanced reactors rule—which, despite the explosion of interest in these technologies over the past few years, has yet to be finalized.

There are two open positions on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS). To fill these positions, the NRC is looking for candidates who have extensive experience in nuclear reactor safety issues—especially in the engineering and safety aspects of new light water and non–light water reactor designs and technologies, or in similar areas of nuclear reactor and fuel cycle safety.

The 1957 amendment to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 established the Advisory Committee On Reactor Safeguards as a statutory committee with an independent advisory role and the responsibility to “review safety studies and facility license applications” and advise the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission “with regard to the hazards of proposed or existing reactor facilities and the adequacy of reactor safety standards.” With the enactment of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the ACRS was assigned to the newly established Nuclear Regulatory Commission with its statutory requirements intact.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking input from the public regarding the first set of results from its multiyear Level 3 Probabilistic Risk Assessment Project to analyze risk at a reference two-reactor nuclear power plant site.

The project, which began in 2012, updates risk insights obtained from work done more than 30 years ago, according to the NRC. The project examines a reference site with two large pressurized water reactors and associated spent fuel. It builds on Level 1 (possible reactor core damage scenarios) and Level 2 (possible radioactive material release scenarios) analyses to estimate potential health effects and economic impacts.

Two GOP lawmakers are calling on the Government Accountability Office to undertake an assessment of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s preparedness to review and approve advanced reactor applications.

In a February 4 letter to the GAO, Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R., W.Va.), ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R., Wash.), ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, wrote, “Recent NRC actions concerning certain licensing activities raise questions about the agency’s capability to manage effectively first-mover applications for new, advanced technologies.”