Implementing the ADVANCE Act: Getting the FY25 Fee Rule Right

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) Fiscal Year 2025 Proposed Fee Rule represents a key step in the implementation of the ADVANCE Act of 2024, which aims to accelerate the deployment of advanced nuclear reactors. Among its provisions, the rule introduces a reduced hourly fee for certain licensing and pre-licensing activities—a vital step toward lowering financial barriers for innovative nuclear developers. However, the NRC’s interpretation of eligibility is too narrow and inconsistent with the intent of the law.

The proposed fee rule reduces the hourly fee rate by 55% from $323/hour to $146/hour for eligible advanced nuclear license applicants. Eligible pre-applicants can also receive the reduced rate until it sunsets in 2030.

BTI strongly supports the reduced fee structure and its role in fostering more affordable and efficient pathways for nuclear licensing. Yet, the NRC’s current proposal excludes critical licensing actions—such as construction permits, early site permits, design certifications, and limited work authorizations—from eligibility. These are all statutory licenses under the Atomic Energy Act and essential components of the regulatory process. This restrictive interpretation contradicts decades of NRC precedent, introduces unnecessary regulatory uncertainty, and creates avoidable barriers to early engagement and efficient licensing.

BTI also urges the NRC to clarify and expand eligibility for advanced reactor pre-applicants. The proposed eligibility criteria that determine which licensing activities qualify as pre-application are overly restrictive, and risk excluding key early-stage engagements necessary for successful project development. Licensing Project Plans (LPPs), which are intended to guide future applications, should allow developers to access reduced fees for a broad range of preparatory activities—such as whitepapers, topical reports, and design discussions—without requiring immediate application submissions. Exclusion of some licensing activities, such as design certification, may also inadvertently drive developers to pursue those licenses out of order to ensure eligibility for reduced fees under pre-application.

This is a clear example of the NRC not aligning with its updated mission to enable the safe use of civilian nuclear energy for societal benefit. The proposed fee rule was an opportunity to embrace a more enabling posture without compromising safety—by simply following the plain text of the law and recognizing a broader set of licensing activities. Instead, the staff adopted a narrow reading that places unnecessary financial and procedural burdens on developers, despite the law’s intent to do the opposite.

The ADVANCE Act was designed to support the commercialization of new nuclear technologies, not constrain them. A plain reading of the law makes clear that Congress intended a broader application of fee reductions than the NRC has proposed. BTI recommends the NRC revise and reissue the rule to align with the statutory text and ensure all relevant licensing activities are eligible for reduced fees.

You can read the full text of our comment below: