Public Record Service

Energy and permitting policy, read from the public record.

Register entry No. 0032RulePub. L. 118-67, sec. 505(b)

NRC sets fixed deadlines for contested licensing hearings in final rule, 91 FR 69446, effective Dec. 3

The rule in Docket NRC-2025-1501 sorts most licensing hearings into Standard, Focused and Expedited tracks with binding decision deadlines. It drops the proposal's 30-day filing window for every case, its separate standing round and its limit on non-attorney representation.

Entered by
Public Record Service
Date
Sources
8 cited

Summary

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s last major overhaul of its hearing procedures came in 2004, when it expected a wave of new reactor, renewal and waste-storage applications [1]. On November 3, 2026, the NRC published its replacement for the parts of that framework covering contested licensing cases: a final rule at 91 FR 69446, Docket NRC-2025-1501, that puts most licensing hearings on one of three tracks with binding deadlines for each step [1]. The Commission affirmed the rule 5-0 on October 30 under authority it traces to section 505(b) of the ADVANCE Act of 2024 and to Executive Order 14300 [1, 4]. It takes effect December 3, 2026, for proceedings noticed on or after that date [1].

What the record shows

Why the NRC says it acted. The preamble states that the existing model milestones in 10 CFR part 2 are not binding, “are sometimes exceeded in practice,” and “would collectively exceed the timeframes specified in E.O. 14300,” which calls for final decisions within 18 months on new reactors and one year on continued operation [1]. The ADVANCE Act amended Atomic Energy Act section 181 to require “efficient and timely reviews and proceedings” for licenses, construction permits and transfers [7]. For certain combined license applications at existing sites, section 207 asks the NRC to complete “any necessary public licensing hearings and related processes” within two years of docketing [7].

Three tracks. New definitions in 10 CFR 2.4 sort applications by complexity [1]:

Track Examples in the rule Hearing request period Answer period Initial decision due after hearing trigger Standard Hearing Completion Date
Standard Proceeding New commercial reactor construction permits, operating licenses and combined licenses that do not reference a design certification or manufacturing license; uranium enrichment; part 70 subpart H fuel facilities; new part 61 low-level waste disposal 60 days 25 days 135 days 262 days after notice
Focused Proceeding Reactor license renewals; licenses referencing a certified design; early site permits; limited work authorizations; license amendments; Nth-of-a-kind reactors 45 days 20 days 110 days 217 days after notice
Expedited Proceeding Measurement uncertainty recapture and stretch power uprates; CLIIP technical specification amendments; applications citing both a categorical exclusion and a design-finality approval 30 days 15 days 80 days (65 with both) 162 days (147 with both)

Replies to answers are due in 7 days on every track, and a Licensing Board must rule on standing and contentions within 35 days of replies on the Standard and Focused tracks and 30 days on the Expedited track [1]. Transfer proceedings keep their 20-day filing window, move from subpart M to subpart L, and get completion dates of 152 or 182 days depending on the transfer [1].

When hearings start. Evidentiary hearings must begin “as soon as practicable” after contentions are admitted, rather than after the NRC staff finishes its review, and a board must set a schedule that does not run past the staff’s review date “to the greatest extent practicable” [1]. Presiding officer decisions take immediate effect by default, and appeals sit outside the executive order’s deadlines [1].

Late contentions. A new or amended contention filed after the initial deadline is not treated as pending until a board finds good cause [1]. One that raises a new issue after the Standard Hearing Completion Date must meet the stricter standards for reopening the record in 10 CFR 2.326 [1].

Pleading, discovery and appeals. Petitioners must now name the legal requirement a contention rests on and say whether it alleges an omission or an inadequacy [1]. The staff’s hearing file under 10 CFR 2.1203 is eliminated; internal instant messages, texts and voicemails are excluded from mandatory disclosure absent exceptional circumstances [1]. The time to petition the Commission for review falls from 25 days to 20, and the reply period from 10 days to 7 [1].

What changed from the March proposal. The proposed rule at 91 FR 10450 would have set a 30-day hearing request deadline for all but transfers, cut answers to 10 days, and decided standing on a separate, faster track before contentions [2]. It projected completion in 8 to 14 months [2]. The final rule drops the standing split and proposed section 2.309(k), which would have required applicants’ answers to carry merits material and expert declarations. Without 2.309(k), the NRC added time to the Standard track’s evidentiary hearing schedule, and the final rule’s stated target is 11 to 13.5 months [1]. The final rule also keeps the staff’s own disclosure duties under section 2.336(b), which the proposal would have removed [1].

Where it sits in the process

Which NRC hearings does the new rule cover?

Only those noticed on or after December 3 [1]. Enforcement cases, challenges to denials, a high-level waste repository proceeding, and hearings under 10 CFR 52.103 and 53.1452 are outside the three tracks [1]. Microreactors get no category of their own yet; the NRC asked in its May 1, 2026, proposal for a new 10 CFR part 57 whether some of those applications belong on the Expedited track, and it says it can move an application to a faster track by order [1].

Hearing notices will now state each case’s Standard Hearing Completion Date [1, 3]. Two current matters show how the categories could sort. A combined license that references the AP1000, whose design certification the NRC renewed this fall (earlier coverage), falls in the Focused track [1]. Last Energy filed the first part of a phased construction permit application on October 20, seeking a limited work authorization for foundation work for its PWR-20 reactor in Caldwell County, Texas, Docket ID NRC-2026-5116 [8]. Limited work authorizations are Focused Proceedings under the new definitions [1]. The NRC says later notices will address docketing and “opportunities for participation of the public” [8].

Is the rule subject to Congressional Review Act scrutiny?

It is a rule under the Act, but the Office of Management and Budget found that it does not meet the “major rule” criteria in 5 U.S.C. 804(2) [1]. The NRC certified that it will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and will issue no implementing guidance [1, 4].

What the record does not show

The rule does not show how often boards will invoke the “extraordinary circumstances” exception that lets them miss a decision deadline [1]. The NRC declined to define “microreactor,” calling that question outside the rulemaking’s scope [1]. The scope of environmental contentions may shift again: the preamble notes a separate NRC proposal to revise its NEPA regulations (91 FR 42086, July 7, 2026) “which could impact the scope of issues that may be permissible for adjudication” [1].

The cost figures are projections. The NRC estimates undiscounted net savings of $67.4 million over 2026 through 2030 [1]. That rests on roughly 15 proceedings a year drawing hearing requests, 9 granted, and about 5 reaching an evidentiary hearing [1]. The agency itself says extrapolating from past cases “will be subject to substantial uncertainty” [1].

Positions on the record

“This rule preserves public participation while making the hearing process more efficient,” Chairman Ho K. Nieh said in the NRC’s announcement [3]. No commissioner offered separate comments at the affirmation session [4]. General Counsel Matt Pociask told reporters that “Not all hearings are alike,” and that “the contested hearing will never be the long pole in the tent,” according to Nuclear News [5]. Nuclear News also reported that public input changed the NRC’s plan to bar non-lawyers from representing entities [5].

The NRC received 33 unique comment submissions [1]. The preamble credits several commenters with pushing for faster tracks for limited work authorizations, Nth-of-a-kind reactors and enrichment plants using licensed technology, and it adopted each [1]. The Breakthrough Institute supported faster hearings but warned in April that the rule “risks locking in a hearing framework before the surrounding procedural and substantive assumptions are stable.” It asked the NRC to revise section 2.309(k) “so full merits showings occur after admissibility” and to keep the attorney-only requirement for non-individuals [6]. The final rule dropped 2.309(k) entirely and declined the attorney-only requirement [1].

Reading-room questions

Questions readers bring to this record, answered from the documents cited below.

When does the NRC contested hearing rule take effect?
December 3, 2026 [1]. It applies only to contested proceedings noticed on or after that date, so hearings already underway keep the old procedures [1, 3].
How long do I have to request a hearing on an NRC license application under the new rule?
It depends on the track: 60 days for Standard Proceedings, 45 days for Focused Proceedings, 30 days for Expedited Proceedings and 20 days for license transfers, counted from the Federal Register notice [1].
Does the new NRC rule shorten the hearing window for reactor license renewals?
Yes. Operating reactor renewals are Focused Proceedings with a 45-day hearing request period, and the rule deletes the 60-day reference in 10 CFR 54.27 [1].
Can non-lawyers still represent groups in NRC licensing hearings?
Yes. The final rule did not adopt the proposed limits on non-attorney representation, and the NRC kept the latitude it gives non-attorney pleadings [1, 5].
How long will an NRC contested hearing take under the new rule?
The NRC says most cases should finish in about a year and the simplest in roughly six months [3]. The rule itself describes completing adjudications generally within 11 to 13.5 months, or faster for Expedited Proceedings [1].

Note on sourcing

The NRC's separate document responding to the 33 comment submissions on the proposal is referenced in the rule but is not drawn on here, and this report does not draw on individual comment letters in Docket NRC-2025-1501; positions of commenters other than the Breakthrough Institute are described only as the rule's preamble summarizes them. Remarks by General Counsel Matt Pociask come from a media call as reported by Nuclear News. The affirmation-session transcript is marked unofficial and unedited by the NRC. The time savings and cost figures are the NRC's own projections in its regulatory analysis. When Last Energy's limited work authorization request will be noticed for hearing, and so whether the new rule governs it, is not stated in the record cited here.

Sources

  1. Streamlining Contested Adjudications in Licensing Proceedings; Final Rule, 91 FR 69446 (FR Doc. 2026-22443), RIN 3150-AL58U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, November 3, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  2. Streamlining Contested Adjudications in Licensing Proceedings; Proposed Rule, 91 FR 10450 (FR Doc. 2026-04187)U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 3, 2026 · govinfo.gov
  3. NRC Finalizes Contested Hearing Rule, Will Resolve Simplest Cases Within Six Months (No. 26-082)U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, October 30, 2026 · nrc.gov
  4. Transcript, Affirmation Session, SECY-26-0102: Final Rule Streamlining Contested Adjudications in Licensing Proceedings (RIN 3150-AL58)U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, October 30, 2026 · nrc.gov
  5. NRC finalizes rule setting time limits for contested hearingsAmerican Nuclear Society (Nuclear News), October 30, 2026 · ans.org
  6. NRC Should Streamline Adjudications, not Shift the BurdenThe Breakthrough Institute, April 17, 2026 · thebreakthrough.org
  7. Public Law 118-67, including the ADVANCE Act of 2024, secs. 207 and 505U.S. Congress, July 9, 2024 · govinfo.gov
  8. Last Energy, Inc; Phased Construction Permit Application-Limited Work Authorization, 91 FR 69895 (FR Doc. 2026-22577)U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, November 5, 2026 · govinfo.gov

Subject headings

Cross-references

Other register entries filed under the same subject headings.

  1. No. 0016 · Report · 2 shared headingsNRC sets Sept. 22 mandatory hearing on Long Mott Xe-100 construction permit, 91 FR 53900
  2. No. 0006 · Authorization · 2 shared headingsNRC proposes reactor licensing overhaul with 40-year renewals and smaller emergency zones, 91 FR 44560
  3. No. 0027 · Rule · 1 shared headingNRC renews AP1000 design certification by direct final rule, adopting Revision 20, 91 FR 65091