NRC Moves to Scrap 50-Year Radiation Safety Rule Amid Nuclear Push

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is proposing to eliminate a foundational radiation safety principle that has protected American workers and communities for half a century, even as the Trump administration pushes to dramatically expand nuclear power generation across the United States.

Under the proposed rule, announced July 1, the NRC would remove the “As Low As Reasonably Achievable” (ALARA) principle — the cornerstone of U.S. radiation protection since the 1970s — from its regulations. The agency would replace it with a “graded approach” that ties protection requirements to fixed dose limits rather than requiring continuous minimization of exposure. The NRC insists the change is about regulatory clarity, not reducing safety. AP News

What Is ALARA and Why Does It Matter?

ALARA requires facilities using radioactive materials — nuclear power plants, hospitals, research labs — to keep radiation exposures as low as is reasonably practical, balancing cost and feasibility. It works alongside fixed dose limits: while dose caps set the maximum allowed exposure, ALARA pushes exposures well below those caps whenever possible. The principle has been adopted internationally and is embedded in radiation protection frameworks worldwide.

The change comes as President Donald Trump pursues an ambitious goal to quadruple U.S. nuclear energy capacity from roughly 100 gigawatts in 2024 to 400 GW by 2050. In May 2025, Trump signed Executive Order 14300, which called the scientific model underpinning ALARA “flawed” and directed the NRC to adopt “science-based radiation limits.”

What the Proposed Rule Changes

The NRC’s July 1 proposal, detailed in an official agency release, would eliminate the term “ALARA” from agency regulations and replace it with a graded approach specifying required actions based on potential radiation dose levels. More rigorous measures would be required when approaching dose limits to ensure they aren’t exceeded. Licensees would gain more flexibility to use modern dose evaluation methods, and caregivers of patients receiving radioactive treatments could voluntarily accept higher doses.

The actual numerical dose limits — 100 millirem per year for the general public (a chest X-ray delivers roughly 10 millirem) and 5,000 millirem per year for adult radiation workers — would remain unchanged. However, the NRC also proposes increasing the radionuclide emissions standard from 10 millirem per year to 25 millirem per year for a hypothetical person living at a nuclear plant’s property line.

Supporters: Clarity for a Growing Industry

NRC Chairman Ho Nieh said the commission is “not lowering the bar on safety standards” but rather removing ambiguity for licensees. Energies Media reported that Nieh described the rule as providing much-needed structure for new reactor designers who currently face a “moving target” in regulatory requirements.

The nuclear industry’s trade association agrees. Doug True, chief nuclear officer at the Nuclear Energy Institute, said the industry will continue its existing practices of dose minimization regardless of the regulatory change. “It’s not like we’re just going to throw open the doors and let everything run up to the limits,” True told AP.

Critics: A Dangerous Weakening of Protections

Public health advocates warn that eliminating ALARA could lead to increased radiation exposure for workers and communities, even if dose limits remain unchanged. Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said there is “absolutely no technical or practical basis” for abandoning ALARA or the linear no-threshold (LNT) model of radiation risk that underlies it. Lyman urged the NRC to improve ALARA rather than eliminate it.

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) called ALARA “a foundational safeguard that protects workers and surrounding communities” and strongly opposed any effort to weaken radiation standards.

Kathryn Higley, president of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, offered a mixed assessment. She acknowledged that some aspects of the proposal — such as allowing flexibility for workers who might face heat stress from full protective gear — have merit. But she expressed concern that maintaining the 5 rem annual limit without ALARA’s downward pressure could allow doses to creep toward the cap over time.

Broader Context: A Regulatory Overhaul

The ALARA rule is one of two major proposals released simultaneously by the NRC. The second would overhaul reactor licensing, extending renewal terms from 20 years to 40 years — supporting up to 100 years of operation — and introducing risk-informed, flexible safety analysis options, expanded siting flexibility, and emergency preparedness modernization.

The Department of Energy had already removed ALARA from its own regulations in January 2026 via an internal memo from Energy Secretary Chris Wright, as reported by E&E News.

What Happens Next

The proposed rules are subject to a 45-day public comment period following publication in the Federal Register. The NRC has committed to reviewing all input before finalizing the rules. While the executive order set a November 2026 deadline for final rules, the NRC projects a more realistic timeline of March 31, 2027.

Critics have warned the rule could face legal challenges on grounds that the NRC moved forward without a formal regulatory basis document, potentially leaving it vulnerable to “arbitrary and capricious” claims. The debate over ALARA’s fate — and what it means for the safety of workers, communities, and the environment — is far from settled.