Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Marine Minerals Administration Sign Nuclear Energy Projects MOU

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Marine Minerals Administration (MMA) – an agency within the U.S. Department of the Interior – have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to delineate their respective roles and establish a framework for coordination regarding civilian nuclear energy projects on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).¹ The MOU reflects growing interest in offshore deployment of advanced nuclear technologies, including floating nuclear power plants and marine-based small modular reactors, and aims to provide regulatory clarity to the development community.

Jurisdictional Framework

The MOU clarifies the division of authority between the two agencies. The MMA retains jurisdiction under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 43 U.S.C. § 1337(p)(1)(C), to grant leases, easements and rights of way for energy activities, other than oil and gas, on the OCS. The NRC retains exclusive authority over the licensing, permitting, construction, operation, inspection and decommissioning of civilian nuclear facilities under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and its implementing regulations at 10 C.F.R. Chapter I.

NRC Designated as NEPA Lead Agency

Significantly, the MOU provides that the NRC will serve as the lead agency for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) purposes, including preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement and any other required environmental and government-to-government consultations with cooperating federal, state and local partners for the licensing, permitting, construction, operation, inspection and decommissioning of civilian nuclear projects on the OCS. MMA will conduct NEPA reviews associated with its own discrete actions (i.e., issuing OCS leases, easements or rights of way under OCSLA Section 8(p)) and may request cooperating agency status in the NRC's environmental reviews.

The NRC designated the Division of Advanced Reactor Programs within the Office of Advanced Reactors as the office charged with implementing the MOU. This leaves open the question of how NEPA reviews will be handled for projects seeking an NRC source and byproduct materials license when it might otherwise make more sense for MMA to serve as the lead agency.

Looking Ahead: Key Developments for Applicants

Stakeholders considering offshore nuclear deployment should monitor the following developments:

• Forthcoming Applicant Guidance. The NRC and MMA have agreed to develop guidance to inform licensees, applicants and permittees of their relevant obligations under both the Atomic Energy Act and OCSLA for OCS civilian nuclear projects. This guidance has not yet been issued and is still being developed by the agencies. Prospective applicants should anticipate a dual-track regulatory process and engage early with both agencies.
• NRC NEPA Rulemaking. Separately, the NRC has an ongoing rulemaking process to comprehensively overhaul its regulations implementing NEPA. On July 7, 2026, the NRC published a proposed rule that would, among other things, narrow the scope of NEPA reviews to impacts within the NRC's statutory authority, expand categorical exclusions and codify firm review timelines. Public comments are due August 21, 2026. The outcome of this rulemaking may significantly affect the environmental review process for offshore nuclear projects going forward.
• NRC Maritime Nuclear Licensing Whitepaper. In May 2026, the NRC held a public meeting and presentation to kick off the process of developing a white paper describing how the NRC's existing licensing frameworks can be applied to maritime nuclear applications. A draft of the white paper is targeted for release in fall 2026.

For more information or questions on these developments, please contact the authors.

Notes

¹ The MMA was formed in 2026 by merging the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement.

Information contained in this alert is for the general education and knowledge of our readers. It is not designed to be, and should not be used as, the sole source of information when analyzing and resolving a legal problem, and it should not be substituted for legal advice, which relies on a specific factual analysis. Moreover, the laws of each jurisdiction are different and are constantly changing. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. If you have specific questions regarding a particular fact situation, we urge you to consult the authors of this publication, your Holland & Knight representative or other competent legal counsel.