Near-Term Actions (2025–2030)

Pennsylvania’s near-term actions focus on building readiness through disciplined coordination, shared learning, and clear sequencing. The goal is to reduce uncertainty, align public and private actors, and generate early proof points that inform longer-term decisions. These actions emphasize methods and processes rather than predetermined outcomes, positioning the commonwealth to move decisively as opportunities emerge.

Pennsylvania should develop a shared, data-informed understanding of where nuclear development is most feasible in the near- and medium-term (e.g., existing nuclear facilities, retired or retiring fossil-fuel plant sites, where grid access, talent, and public acceptance already exist).

• Define Pennsylvania’s nuclear energy ecosystem (generation, fuel, enrichment, reactor design, and component manufacturing, supply chain, etc.)
  
  
• Apply a common analytical framework to evaluate potential sites based on grid access, existing infrastructure, talent availability, and community context
  
  
• Prioritize initial screening of existing nuclear facilities and retired or retiring fossil-fuel plant sites, where grid interconnection, skilled labor, and public familiarity may reduce barriers to development or deployment
  
  
• Examine coal-to-nuclear or other brownfield site conversion opportunities as a distinct pathway, recognizing the value of site reuse, repurposing infrastructure, and talent transition
  
  
• Distinguish between near-term viable sites and longer-term opportunities as conditions evolve
  
  
• Translate assessment findings into practical implications for communities, utilities, manufacturers, and policymakers to support shared prioritization

Coordinated state action is essential to avoid duplication, reduce friction, and align with federal processes.

• Formalize a cross-agency coordination mechanism to align timelines, share information, and resolve interdependencies early
  
  
• Reduce barriers to deployment (siting, financing, and talent)
  
  
• Harmonize Pennsylvania’s state engagement with federal agencies to align permitting, funding, and technical assistance timelines 
  
  
• Ensure representation across public sector, energy policy, regulation, utilities, labor, academia, and industry, without prescribing a fixed governance model
  
  
• Provide a consistent interface for industry, communities, and regional partners to reduce fragmentation and mixed signals

Regulatory certainty supports confidence even when it is not the primary barrier to deployment.

• Map state and local permitting processes alongside federal licensing pathways to identify alignment opportunities and sequencing gaps
  
  
• Focus near-term actions on clarity and predictability rather than wholesale regulatory reform
  
  
• Engage early with the Public Utility Commission to clarify how existing regulatory tools apply to life-extension investments, restarts, and future projects
  
  
• Evaluate the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards to assess how nuclear energy is recognized and valued, and identify options to better align AEPS with long-term reliability and investment objectives without disrupting existing market signals
  
  
• Translate regulatory considerations into practical implications for developers, manufacturers, and communities

Early pilots can translate planning into action while limiting risk.

• Focus early pilot efforts on coordination, siting, and process learning rather than new reactor technology development
  
  
• Leverage Pennsylvania’s universities and existing manufacturing base to support pilot activities related to permitting, supply chain readiness, and talent transition
  
  
• Explore public-private partnership models used in other states to align utilities, manufacturers, and public agencies around shared deployment goals 
  
  
• Capture and share lessons from pilot efforts to inform future projects in Pennsylvania and other states

Public understanding and community readiness are critical to durable progress.

• Sequence engagement to align with concrete decision points (e.g, viable site locations), avoiding premature outreach before timing and potential benefits are clear
  
  
• Recognize that existing nuclear host communities, transitioning energy communities, and new potential hosts may require different engagement approaches
  
  
• Frame nuclear opportunities beyond emerging digital or AI narratives, emphasizing reliability, economic stability, and local benefit
  
  
• Align community readiness with talent preparation so residents can see pathways to participate as projects advance

Nuclear energy projects require a combination of financial and policy mechanisms to reduce risk and ensure they are delivered on time and on budget.

• Convene developers, utilities, investors, and public partners to clarify capital timing, risk considerations, and coordination needs
  
  
• Examine how peer states have used grants, credit support, or cost-sharing mechanisms to inform Pennsylvania’s long-term options
  
  
• Explore opportunities to reduce early-stage costs associated with siting and permitting preparation
  
  
• Treat talent readiness as a signal of project viability, recognizing that a strong talent pipeline can reduce financing risk and improve project economics

◄ Important Dynamics & Considerations | Long-Term Strategies (2025-2050) ►