Home/Politics/Article
Politics

California challenges NRC's nuclear decommissioning proposal

The proposed rule would extend decommissioning timelines for nuclear plants and relax oversight of uranium mining contamination.

SK
Steve Kim
Source: This report is based on an official public release from California Attorney General's Office. PULSE organizes and summarizes public government communications.

California Attorney General Bonta joined a multistate coalition opposing a proposed Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) rule that would alter oversight of nuclear plant decommissioning and uranium mining contamination. The NRC published the proposed rule, "In Situ Recovery Monitoring and Decommissioning Timeliness," on September 10, 2026.

For nuclear power plants, the proposal would give operators more flexibility in when to start and complete decommissioning after plant shutdown. Current regulations require operators seeking deadline extensions to demonstrate the extension would not harm public health and safety. The proposed rule would eliminate this requirement.

"Californians deserve power generation that achieves reliability without sacrificing public health and environmental integrity," Attorney General Bonta said. "These proposed changes would make it easier for industry to delay completion of decommissioning and they also would risk long-term groundwater contamination in states with ISR uranium mines."

The proposal also addresses groundwater contamination rules at in situ recovery (ISR) uranium mines. California does not have ISR uranium mines because it lacks significant uranium deposits. However, Bonta joined the coalition to support other states concerned that the rule's streamlined processes would allow mining operators to leave groundwater contamination at legacy sites while potentially preventing host states from taking cleanup action.

The coalition includes attorneys general from New Mexico, Colorado, Illinois, and Massachusetts. In their comment letter, the coalition argued that the proposed rules violate federal environmental and administrative laws, inadequately consider health and safety risks, and fail to provide sufficient consultation with affected states and tribes.

SHARE: