Playbook: adopting Advanced nuclear (SMRs & Gen IV) in 90 days

A step-by-step rollout plan with milestones, owners, and metrics. Focus on licensing, FOAK-to-NOAK cost curves, and supply chain readiness.

In 2024, global SMR pipeline capacity surged to 22 GW across 56 tracked designs—a 65% increase since 2021—yet fewer than 5% of projects have reached advanced development stages (NEA SMR Dashboard, 2024). Meanwhile, private investment in nuclear fission hit record highs with over $1.3 billion in equity funding by Q3 2025, driven by landmark deals including TerraPower's $650 million Series C and X-energy's $700 million Amazon-backed round (Net Zero Insights, 2025). This playbook distills the regulatory, economic, and operational imperatives for organizations evaluating SMR and Gen IV reactor adoption, providing a structured 90-day framework to move from exploratory assessment to project initiation.

Why It Matters

The energy transition demands reliable, carbon-free baseload power that can complement intermittent renewables like wind and solar. Advanced nuclear technologies—encompassing Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) typically producing under 300 MW and Generation IV designs featuring passive safety systems and advanced coolants—offer a compelling pathway to grid decarbonization while providing industrial process heat for hard-to-abate sectors.

The International Energy Agency projects SMR installed capacity could reach 190 GW by 2050 under accelerated deployment scenarios, requiring cumulative investment of $900 billion globally (IEA Nuclear Energy Analysis, 2024). More immediately, corporate power purchase agreements are reshaping the landscape: Google's October 2024 commitment to purchase 500 MW from Kairos Power and Amazon's $500 million investment in X-energy signal that data center operators view advanced nuclear as essential infrastructure for AI-driven electricity demand growth.

For utilities, industrial corporations, and municipalities, the strategic question is no longer whether to engage with advanced nuclear, but how to structure evaluation, site selection, regulatory engagement, and supply chain partnerships within realistic timelines. This playbook addresses that "how" with actionable milestones calibrated to the current licensing environment and technology readiness levels.

Key Concepts

SMRs vs. Gen IV Reactors: Understanding the Distinction

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) are defined primarily by their output capacity—typically under 300 MWe—and modular factory fabrication that enables economies of serial production rather than traditional on-site construction. Most near-term SMR designs use proven light-water reactor (LWR) technology, reducing licensing uncertainty while sacrificing some of the efficiency gains possible with advanced coolants.

Generation IV reactors represent a more fundamental departure, employing coolants such as molten salt, liquid sodium, helium gas, or lead-bismuth that enable higher thermal efficiencies (up to 45% versus 33% for LWRs), passive safety without active cooling systems, and in some designs, closed fuel cycles that reduce long-lived waste. The tradeoff: Gen IV technologies face longer licensing timelines, limited operational track records, and nascent supply chains for specialized components like TRISO fuel particles or sodium pumps.

FOAK-to-NOAK Cost Dynamics

First-of-a-Kind (FOAK) reactor projects carry substantial cost premiums reflecting design maturation, regulatory iteration, and one-time engineering expenses. Industry estimates place FOAK capital costs at $8,000–$12,000 per kW for Western SMR designs, compared to target N-th-of-a-Kind (NOAK) costs of $4,500/kW in the US/Europe and $2,500/kW in China by 2040 (World Nuclear Association, 2024). Understanding where a given technology sits on this learning curve is critical for project economics.

Licensing Pathways and Timelines

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) offers multiple pathways for advanced reactors, including the traditional two-step (Construction Permit + Operating License), combined license (COL), and the newer 10 CFR Part 53 framework specifically designed for non-LWR technologies. Kairos Power's Hermes reactor received the first Gen IV construction permit in December 2023, with nuclear construction commencing in May 2025—a timeline of approximately 18 months from permit issuance to nuclear work initiation.

KPI	Target Range	Measurement Frequency
Regulatory pre-application engagement milestones	3-6 months before formal submission	Monthly
NRC review timeline (design certification)	42-60 months	Quarterly
Construction permit to nuclear work	12-24 months	Milestone-based
FOAK capital cost ($/kW)	$8,000-$12,000	Project-specific
NOAK target cost ($/kW)	$2,500-$4,500	Technology-specific
Capacity factor (operational target)	>90%	Annual
Levelized cost of electricity (target)	$60-$90/MWh	Project lifecycle

What's Working and What Isn't

What's Working

Regulatory Pre-Engagement and Iterative Review: Vendors that invest heavily in NRC pre-application engagement consistently achieve faster formal review timelines. Kairos Power's early-and-often approach with NRC staff enabled the Hermes construction permit in under two years from application. Similarly, NuScale's investment of over $500 million in design certification created precedent documentation that other LWR-based SMRs can reference.

Corporate Power Purchase Agreements: The Google-Kairos and Amazon-X-energy partnerships demonstrate that long-term offtake commitments de-risk project finance and accelerate deployment. These agreements provide revenue certainty that traditional utility procurement cannot match, enabling developers to commit to factory capacity and long-lead component orders before regulatory approvals are final.

Modular Factory Fabrication: Designs optimized for factory production rather than stick-built construction show meaningful cost compression in repeated deployments. Rolls-Royce SMR's modular approach targets 90% factory fabrication, reducing on-site construction labor—typically the largest variable cost driver—and enabling parallel module production during site preparation.

DOE Cost-Sharing Programs: The Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP) has catalyzed commercial-scale development by covering 50-80% of FOAK costs. TerraPower and X-energy each received over $300 million in federal cost-sharing, substantially improving project-level returns and investor confidence.

What Isn't Working

Supply Chain Bottlenecks for Specialized Components: The global supply of nuclear-grade forgings, HALEU fuel (high-assay low-enriched uranium required for many Gen IV designs), and specialized instrumentation remains constrained. As of Q1 2025, only one commercial HALEU enrichment facility operates in the US (Centrus Energy's Piketon, Ohio plant), creating fuel supply uncertainty for Gen IV deployments planned beyond 2030.

First-of-a-Kind Cost Overruns: Despite rigorous vendor estimates, FOAK projects consistently experience 30-50% cost escalation versus initial projections. The NuScale UAMPS project's 2023 cancellation after projected costs exceeded $9 billion illustrated how even certified designs face execution risk when customer consortia lack deep balance sheets.

Interconnection Queue Delays: SMR developers increasingly compete with renewable projects for grid interconnection capacity. In MISO and PJM territories, interconnection queue backlogs exceed 1,500 GW, with wait times averaging 4-5 years—potentially exceeding reactor construction timelines and forcing developers to negotiate costly transmission upgrades.

Workforce Constraints: The nuclear workforce aged significantly during the two-decade lull in new construction. Skilled craft labor for nuclear-quality welding, pipe fitting, and quality assurance remains scarce, with industry associations projecting 15,000+ unfilled nuclear construction positions by 2030 without aggressive training investments.

Key Players

Established Leaders

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy: Developer of the BWRX-300, a 300 MWe boiling water reactor design with passive safety systems. GE Hitachi holds letters of intent for deployments in Canada, Poland, and the United States, with Ontario Power Generation's Darlington site targeting first operation by 2029.

Westinghouse Electric Company: The AP300 SMR builds on Westinghouse's AP1000 technology with reduced output and enhanced modularity. Westinghouse's installed base of 440+ operating reactors globally provides unmatched reference experience for regulators and customers.

Rosatom (Russia): Operates the world's only floating nuclear power plant (Akademik Lomonosov) and has deployed RITM-200 reactors for icebreaker propulsion, representing the most operational SMR experience globally despite geopolitical constraints on Western market access.

China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC): Connected the world's first Gen IV commercial reactor—the HTR-PM pebble-bed design—to the grid in December 2023. CNNC's integrated supply chain and domestic demand position China as the global leader in operational advanced reactor deployment.

Emerging Startups

Kairos Power: Developer of the KP-FHR molten-salt-cooled reactor with TRISO fuel. Received the first NRC construction permit for a Gen IV reactor (Hermes) and secured 500 MW of power purchase commitments from Google. Construction began July 2024 at Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

TerraPower: Bill Gates-founded company developing the Natrium sodium-cooled fast reactor with integrated molten salt energy storage. Broke ground on the Kemmerer, Wyoming demonstration plant in June 2024 and closed a $650 million Series C in early 2025.

X-energy: Developer of the Xe-100 high-temperature gas-cooled reactor targeting industrial heat applications. Partnered with Dow Chemical for deployment at the Seadrift, Texas chemical complex and received $500 million in direct investment from Amazon in October 2024.

Natura Resources: Received NRC construction permit for a 1 MW molten salt research reactor in September 2024, with plans to submit commercial MSR-100 applications by end of 2025.

Key Investors & Funders

U.S. Department of Energy: Committed over $2 billion to advanced reactor development through ARDP, the Civil Nuclear Credit Program, and the $900 million SMR deployment program reissued in March 2025 under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

Breakthrough Energy Ventures: Bill Gates-led climate investment fund with positions in TerraPower and other advanced energy technologies, providing patient capital aligned with 10-20 year development timelines.

Amazon Climate Pledge Fund & Google Ventures: Both technology giants have made direct strategic investments—Amazon's $500 million in X-energy and Google's Kairos PPA represent first-mover corporate commitments to nuclear-powered data center operations.

Examples

Kairos Power Hermes Reactor (Oak Ridge, Tennessee): In December 2023, Kairos received the first NRC construction permit issued for a non-light-water reactor in over 50 years. The Hermes project is a 35 MWth demonstration reactor designed to validate the KP-FHR technology before commercial-scale deployment. Nuclear construction began in May 2025, with operational testing targeted for 2027. The Hermes experience provides a regulatory template for subsequent Gen IV applicants and demonstrates that pre-application engagement can compress licensing timelines significantly.
TerraPower Natrium Project (Kemmerer, Wyoming): TerraPower selected a retired coal plant site for its 345 MWe Natrium demonstration, leveraging existing transmission infrastructure and workforce. Groundbreaking occurred in June 2024 with non-nuclear site preparation, while the NRC construction permit review is expected to conclude by late 2025. The integrated molten salt thermal storage system enables the plant to flex output from 345 MW to 500 MW during peak demand—a capability uniquely suited to grids with high renewable penetration.
Ontario Power Generation Darlington SMR Cluster (Canada): OPG committed CAD $20.9 billion (approximately $15 billion USD) for a four-unit GE Hitachi BWRX-300 cluster at the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station. The project received environmental assessment approval in 2023 and represents the largest announced SMR deployment in the Western Hemisphere. By clustering units on an existing licensed nuclear site, OPG reduces per-unit licensing costs and leverages established emergency planning zones.

Action Checklist

Week 1-2: Establish executive steering committee with representatives from operations, legal, finance, and external affairs; define evaluation criteria including load requirements, site characteristics, and carbon reduction targets
Week 3-4: Conduct technology screening to shortlist 2-3 reactor designs based on technology readiness level, vendor financial stability, licensing status, and alignment with intended use case (grid power vs. industrial heat)
Week 5-6: Initiate site suitability assessments including seismological analysis, cooling water availability, transmission access, and community engagement requirements
Week 7-8: Issue request for information (RFI) to shortlisted vendors covering project structure, cost estimates, timeline, fuel supply arrangements, and owner's engineering requirements
Week 9-10: Engage with NRC pre-application process (or relevant national regulator) to identify design-specific licensing requirements and establish preliminary review schedule
Week 11-12: Develop preliminary project financing structure including cost-sharing applications to DOE programs, utility rate base treatment options, and corporate PPA structures
Week 13: Synthesize findings into board-ready recommendation with go/no-go decision criteria and Phase 2 detailed engineering timeline

FAQ

Q: Can SMRs realistically be deployed within a 90-day evaluation window? A: The 90-day framework addresses project initiation—moving from exploratory interest to informed go/no-go decision—rather than deployment itself. Actual construction timelines from permit issuance to commercial operation range from 3-7 years depending on technology and regulatory pathway. The playbook accelerates the front-end work that often stalls advanced nuclear projects in indefinite study phases.

Q: How do FOAK cost premiums affect project economics, and when will NOAK costs materialize? A: FOAK projects typically run 2-3x target NOAK costs due to design iteration, one-time engineering, and supply chain mobilization. Industry projections suggest NOAK cost levels ($2,500-$4,500/kW) require 3-5 deployed units per design. Organizations with long investment horizons may accept FOAK economics in exchange for strategic positioning; others should consider joining multi-party consortia to share risk or wait for nth-unit projects in the 2030s.

Q: What differentiates NRC Part 50, Part 52, and Part 53 licensing pathways? A: Part 50 is the traditional two-step process (construction permit then operating license) with design review occurring in parallel. Part 52 enables combined licenses (COL) with upfront design certification, reducing construction-phase regulatory uncertainty. Part 53, finalized in 2024, provides a technology-inclusive framework specifically for advanced reactors with performance-based safety requirements rather than prescriptive LWR-specific rules. Gen IV developers generally favor Part 53 or hybrid approaches.

Q: How should organizations approach HALEU fuel supply constraints? A: High-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) is required for most Gen IV designs but currently has limited commercial availability. The DOE's HALEU Availability Program aims to establish domestic production capacity, while Centrus Energy's Piketon facility represents near-term supply. Project developers should secure fuel supply memoranda of understanding early in the evaluation process, as fuel availability may constrain deployment timelines more than reactor construction.

Q: What role do corporate power purchase agreements play in SMR project viability? A: Corporate PPAs provide the long-term revenue certainty that traditional utility ratemaking cannot guarantee, enabling project financing against contracted cash flows rather than merchant market exposure. The Google-Kairos and Amazon-X-energy agreements establish precedent deal structures and signal to capital markets that creditworthy counterparties view advanced nuclear economics favorably. Organizations without direct offtake needs can participate through clean energy certificates or green tariff structures offered by utilities with SMR capacity.

Sources

International Energy Agency, "The Path to a New Era for Nuclear Energy" and SMR capacity scenario analysis, 2024. https://www.iea.org/reports/the-path-to-a-new-era-for-nuclear-energy
OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, "NEA Small Modular Reactor Dashboard," 2024 edition tracking 56 SMR designs globally. https://www.oecd-nea.org/jcms/pl_73678/nea-small-modular-reactor-smr-dashboard
World Nuclear Association, "Small Modular Reactors" and "Generation IV Nuclear Reactors" information papers, updated 2024. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-power-reactors
Net Zero Insights, "Nuclear Fission Investment Surges in 2025," tracking $1.3B+ in equity funding through Q3 2025. https://netzeroinsights.com/resources/nuclear-fission-investment-surges-2025
U.S. Department of Energy, "$900M SMR Deployment Program" funding opportunity announcement, March 2025, funded through Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. https://www.ans.org/news/2025-03-26/article-6894/smr-doe-funding/
Kairos Power official project updates on Hermes reactor construction permit and Google partnership, 2024-2025. https://www.kairospower.com/
TerraPower official announcements on Natrium project groundbreaking and $650M Series C funding, 2024-2025. https://www.terrapower.com/