NRC Proposes First Major Revisions to Its Radiation Protection Framework in 35 Years

Below is a high-level summary of the proposed rulemaking, which we are continuing to evaluate. Please contact the Pillsbury team for more information on the proposed rule.

The proposed rulemaking was prompted by President Trump’s May 23, 2025, Executive Order 14300, Ordering the Reform of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (EO). EO Section 5(b) directs the NRC to “reconsider reliance on the linear no-threshold (LNT) model for radiation exposure and the ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ [ALARA] standard, which is predicated on LNT” and to “specifically consider adopting determinate radiation limits.” We note that, in accordance with the EO, the Department of Energy has already eliminated ALARA from its radiation protection framework in January 2026 without adopting a direct replacement standard, citing concerns about reducing “economic and operational burdens” as part of its rationale for moving away from the long-held standard.

As explained in the proposed rulemaking, the NRC has determined that “certain aspects of its radiation protection standards allow for excessive subjectivity that leads to overly conservative assessments,” which is not consistent with the agency’s principles of good regulation. More specifically, the NRC has determined that, for low radiation doses, use of the LNT may result in conservative implementation of radiation protection measures. In other words, when the NRC’s radiation protection standards are interpreted as requiring continuous dose reductions even to very low doses of radiation, with no stopping point, the standards can lead to outcomes that are “overly conservative” which “can significantly undervalue the benefits of activities when compared to their risks, at great economic costs or stifling of innovation.” As a result, the NRC is proposing to remove references to the ALARA standard from its regulations and guidance to reduce subjectivity and “unnecessary burden” on applicants and licensees.

That said, the proposed changes would not require any changes to licensees’ current practices but would clarify what is required for compliance while allowing licensees to do more. Prior licensing decisions that involved ALARA considerations would remain in effect because of their “inherently conservative nature.”

Part of the NRC’s proposed changes includes employing a “graded approach to dose management” for dose levels below established limits, which the NRC believes will provide clarity and increased objectivity to radiation protection decisions. This would mean that, as doses increase and become closer to established dose limits, “increasingly more rigorous radiation protection measures would be required to ensure that the dose limits are not exceeded.” The NRC has developed guidance on an acceptable means for establishing such a graded approach. The guidance includes radiation protection measures (such as shielding or additional work planning) that correspond to the graded thresholds.

In addition, the NRC proposes to expand options available for managing occupational radiation exposure to workers through a dose limit extension process. This would allow licensees to authorize a worker to receive a dose in excess of annual dose limits so long as the twice the annual dose limit is not exceeded in a year, and sufficient “retrospective dose” (i.e., unused dose exposure below a dose limit from a prior year) to cover the excess dose.

These changes, if implemented, could result in meaningful cost and burden reductions, and increased efficiencies, for nuclear utilities and other NRC licensees. In particular, NRC inspections would no longer focus on ALARA and (for example) whether a licensee’s ALARA goals are sufficiently stringent. Compliance with established limits would instead be the focus.

Of note for individuals undergoing radiation therapy, the NRC proposes to revise Part 20 to include a 2-rem limit for a caregiver and a 500-mrem limit for a non-caregiver member of the public per administration regimen. These limits are independent of the patient release regulations in Part 35. This has been a matter of importance to the medical community and individuals undergoing radiation treatments for quite some time. This change appears to provide a more appropriate balance between protecting public health and safety and the caregiving efforts being undertaken by family members supporting these lifesaving treatments.

The predominant proposed changes to the NRC’s rules are to 10 CFR Part 20, which applies to all categories of NRC licensees. To the extent that the proposed revisions are to regulations that must be adopted by Agreement States to maintain an Agreement State regulatory program that is compatible with the NRC’s requirements, the proposed revisions would need to be adopted by Agreement States. The proposed rule also identifies proposed conforming revisions to other parts of the NRC’s regulations, including to Parts 40, 50, 53, 61, 71 and 72.

We expect that the NRC’s proposed rule will generate significant public comments during the 45-day period, and likely result in future litigation. We encourage clients to reach out regarding potential comments on the rule and legal strategy.