Photo Credit: Lisa Hupp
The federal government is creating a regulatory pathway for potential nuclear energy projects in offshore waters, including the waters surrounding Alaska.
On July 22, the Marine Minerals Administration and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced a new Memorandum of Understanding outlining how the two agencies would coordinate if a company proposes a civilian nuclear energy project on the Outer Continental Shelf.
No offshore nuclear project has been approved, and the agreement does not identify a proposed location, technology, or applicant. But it establishes which agencies would control leasing, licensing, environmental review, inspections, and eventual decommissioning.
For Alaska, where coastal communities depend on healthy marine ecosystems and much of the state’s shoreline is remote from emergency-response infrastructure, the agreement deserves close public attention.
What does the agreement do?
Under the MOU, the Marine Minerals Administration would issue any federal offshore lease, easement, or right-of-way needed for a nuclear project. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission would oversee the licensing, construction, operation, inspection, and decommissioning of the nuclear facility.
The NRC would also serve as the lead agency for the project’s Environmental Impact Statement and other required environmental and government-to-government consultations. MMA could request to participate as a cooperating agency in that process.
The agencies also agreed to coordinate as early as the pre-application stage, share technical information, and develop guidance for future applicants. They will notify one another about permits, leases, licenses, and enforcement actions before those actions are publicly announced.
The agreement does not approve a project, expand either agency’s authority, or create new legal rights. But it does lay the foundation for companies to pursue offshore nuclear development through a more coordinated federal process.
Can the public engage?
The MOU itself does not establish a public-comment period, public hearing, or formal role for communities in shaping the agreement.
Public participation would most likely occur after a company submits a proposal and the agencies begin environmental review and licensing. Depending on the project, opportunities could include public scoping, comments on a draft Environmental Impact Statement, agency meetings, and NRC licensing proceedings.
That means communities may not receive formal notice until after a developer has already selected a technology, identified a potential location, and begun working with federal regulators.
The MOU specifically calls for coordination between the agencies during the pre-application stage, but it does not require them to notify affected Tribes, local governments, subsistence users, fishermen, or the broader public at that same early point.
What could this mean for Alaska?
The agreement applies to the federal Outer Continental Shelf and could potentially be used for projects in Arctic and other offshore waters surrounding Alaska.
The impacts would depend on the reactor design and location. A project could involve a floating facility, a system attached to the seafloor, a submerged reactor, or another emerging technology. The MOU does not limit which designs could be considered.
Read the MOU: MOU-MMA-and-NRC.pdf
Northern Center will continue to monitor this issue, please sign up for our email updates for calls to actions.
