Comment on FR Doc # 2026-08550, NRC-2025-0379-0011, from LaShell Thomas
LaShell ThomasOpposeIndividual
Summary: LaShell Thomas, a concerned citizen, opposes the proposed rulemaking because it prioritizes rapid, scalable deployment of microreactors over adequate analysis of cumulative risks, multi-unit accidents, and environmental impacts. The commenter argues that the NRC should maintain robust site-specific oversight, tribal consultation, and public participation requirements rather than moving toward a high-volume, fleet-based licensing model before operational experience is established.
I am submitting the attached comment letter regarding the proposed 10 CFR Part 57 rulemaking for microreactors and other reactors with comparable risk profiles.
My primary concern is that the proposed framework appears to prioritize rapid, scalable deployment of advanced reactor fleets before many key questions regarding cumulative risk, multi-unit accident scenarios, environmental review, emergency preparedness, tribal consultation, transportation risk, and long-term operational oversight have been adequately resolved.
While I understand the need for regulatory modernization for advanced reactors, I am concerned that the proposed rule substantially reduces site-specific review and individualized oversight while simultaneously enabling broad deployment models involving remote operations, generalized siting assumptions, and centralized fleet management structures.
I respectfully urge the NRC to strengthen cumulative-impact analysis requirements, preserve robust site-specific environmental review and public participation opportunities, maintain strong tribal consultation requirements, and avoid reducing longstanding oversight structures before substantial operational experience with these technologies has been established.
Please see attached comment letter for additional detail.