UK nuclear regulation needs overhaul

An independent expert taskforce reports that UK nuclear projects are being held back by costly and complex regulatory system. Radical “once-in-a-generation” reform is needed to remove barriers to faster, cheaper nuclear development, while maintaining safety standards

The taskforce was announced by Prime Minister Keir Starmer in February and is led by John Fingleton, former CEO of the Office of Fair Trading. Its first report calls for a “radical reset” to speed up vital nuclear projects and encourage more companies to build in the UK. The findings reveal an “unnecessarily slow, inefficient and costly” system which is hampering the delivery of clean energy infrastructure needed to power Britain’s future, as well as increasing costs of the UK’s vital nuclear deterrent.

Radical reform could transform nuclear delivery in several critical areas including: overly complex and inconsistent regulatory processes; risk-averse cultures that prioritise bureaucracy over proportionate safety measures; and outdated planning frameworks that fail to support new technologies such as small modular reactors (SMRs).

It comes after Chancellor Rachel Reeves in March unveiled an action plan to deliver on the pledge to cut the administrative cost of regulation on business by 25% to accelerate growth.

The 48-page report said: “Over time, the regulation of civil and defence nuclear programmes has become increasingly complex and bureaucratic, leading to huge delays and ballooning costs, often for marginal benefit. With the UK’s ambitious civil and defence programmes set to expand to meet energy security, net zero, and deterrent demands, a reset is needed.”

The report “not only examines whether regulation can be streamlined to reduce cost and timescales, but also whether the UK State has the regulatory capacity and correct regulatory priorities to deliver this substantial and ambitious programme of civil and nuclear defence projects”.

The Taskforce received over 100 responses to a call for evidence, including from regulators, operators, industry experts, academia, developers, investors, and groups from wider civil society. It also met with experts and visited nuclear sites.

The feedback revealed “fundamental concerns about how regulation operates in practice, with the most prominent being that the system is perceived to be unnecessarily slow, inefficient, and costly”. The Taskforce identified six areas with the greatest opportunities for a radical reset.

• Risk management and proportionality: Many stakeholders believe a re-evaluation of the application of the ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable) principle is necessary. Interpretation currently fosters a culture of risk aversion and reluctance to challenge and debate, impacting costs and time. Similar issues of proportionality, costly processes, duplication, and inflexibility are concerns in the application of environmental assessments.
• Complexity of the regulatory and planning landscape: There is clear evidence that regulation in the nuclear sector has become unnecessarily complex and inconsistent. This creates problems for both established and new participants in the sector, ultimately limiting potential to deliver projects on time and within budget, or even deliver them at all.
• Enabling delivery in planning regime: The current nuclear planning regulatory framework in the UK presents unnecessary challenges, particularly for emerging technologies such as Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and Advanced Modular Reactors (AMRs).
• Capacity, capability, culture: The scarcity of nuclear expertise is a concern across both the defence and civil sectors, and more so in a period of substantial planned growth. This is not just the number of people but also the range and depth of experience and expertise. In addition, there is compelling evidence that organisational culture across the sector negatively impacts the effective and efficient delivery of nuclear programmes. These include a culture of risk aversion irrespective of cost, increasingly complex processes and procedures, and excessive bureaucracy.
• International harmonisation: Nuclear technology is ideally placed to benefit from international collaboration through the harmonisation and standardisation of industry and regulatory approaches. This potential has not been achieved. Each regulatory system has its own approach, interpretation of international standards, and legal framework, which adds substantial complexity, costs, and delays when seeking approvals.
• Insufficient understanding of the cost of delays: As with any large-scale infrastructure project, delays to nuclear projects have enormous financial, labour and material cost implications. These indirect costs are often not adequately considered by regulators.

Areas of focus for the next stage of the Taskforce include:

• Development of a strategic steer from government to duty holders and regulators to ensure the effective and efficient delivery of safe nuclear programmes so that the societal, environmental, and defence benefits of nuclear technology are realised at a measured pace, while maintaining independent regulatory decision-making.
• A series of engagement sessions and workshops will be conducted with industry, regulators, government, and other interested groups.
• An in-depth analysis undertaken to determine the similarities between the UK regulatory system and key international partners to understand where harmonisation could deliver most benefit.
• An in-depth analysis to understand the costs and benefits which will underpin the economic case for change in the nuclear sector.

“The Taskforce intends to build on the emerging thinking set out in this Interim Report and will work with stakeholders to continue fleshing out potential recommendations. These recommendations will be published in Autumn 2025.”

The final report and recommendations will be published in the autumn. As a first step, the government will work with the taskforce to develop a new strategic direction for nuclear operators and regulators to prioritise quick, effective and safe delivery of nuclear programmes.

The final report’s recommendations will focus on:

• Tackling a culture of risk aversion and reluctance to challenge and debate, impacting costs and time, to ensure that risk management is proportionate;
• Addressing complex and inconsistent regulations, with processes often duplicated across multiple overlapping regulators;
• An outdated planning framework that doesn’t support innovative technologies such as small and advanced modular reactors;
• Maintaining a range and depth of expertise across the workforce;
• The potential for greater standardisation across international regulators, which could cut down complexity, costs, and delays when seeking approvals; and
• Improving the regulatory understanding of the cost of project.

“For too long, big British infrastructure projects have been held back by needless bureaucracy,” said Minister for Energy Consumers Miatta Fahnbulleh. “It’s time for a new approach to getting nuclear projects off the ground more quickly, and at a lower cost. We look forward to working with the expert taskforce to modernise outdated regulations so we can unlock growth, jobs and energy security for the British people.”

Nuclear Taskforce lead John Fingleton noted: Nuclear energy is safe and reliable and can contribute to net zero goals. It is also vital to the UK’s strategic deterrent. However, over recent decades, nuclear regulation has become more complex and costly without always delivering commensurate safety and environmental benefits. Our interim report identifies our main concerns with the current system which we think is not fit for purpose. With a view to recommending a once-in-a-generation reset, we now invite views from interested parties on what solutions will better enable the UK to achieve the huge benefits nuclear power offers.”

ONR Chief Executive and Chief Nuclear Inspector Mike Finnerty said: “Our discussions with the taskforce have been extremely productive. We will continue to work with the team, providing further requested regulatory expertise, to help inform the final report in a way that supports innovation.”

Nuclear Industry Association CEO Tom Greatrex said: “If the UK is serious about energy security and creating good jobs, we need a regulatory framework that is more proportionate and built for delivery – one that upholds safety and public trust while giving investors the confidence to move at pace. Smarter regulation will mean projects are approved faster, built more efficiently, and delivered at lower cost to consumers. The nuclear industry stands ready to work with government and regulators to make that happen.”