 Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the 36 Regulatory Information Conference. My name is Andrea Vell, and I'm the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, or NRI. It's always a great honor to be here and to have this opportunity to welcome everyone on behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. My office, along with the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, led by Acting Director John Tappert, our co-sponsors of this event. We work closely with all of the other NRC offices to bring you a comprehensive and dynamic program over the course of the next three days. I also wanted to take a moment to welcome John to the fire, I mean to his role as Acting Director in Research, while Ray Firstinale, John's boss, is Acting Executive Director for Operations. Thanks, Andrea. It's an honor to be here, and I look forward to a very interesting conference. And as we begin, I want to thank the Joint Armed Forces Color Guard from the Military District of Washington for being with us this morning, as well as Tuana Ellis, who will be singing our national anthem, and Alicia Mullins, who will be providing our interpretive services, if you'll join us up here. Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early what's so bright at the twilight's last gleaming, Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight, O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming. Always very inspirational. I know you're all anxious to get more details on our program for the next two and a half days, but first I'd like to recognize our distinguished former commissioners who are with us this morning, specifically Jeffrey Merrifeld, NEA Director General Bill Magwood, my old boss Bill Ostendorf, and Jeff Barron. We thank you all for your service and your strong commitment to nuclear safety. The RIC continues to be the largest conference the NRC sponsors. Our ability to host the RIC as a hybrid event allows us to witness unprecedented participation. More than 3,000 participants representing over 50 countries will be actively engaged throughout. The RIC provides an opportunity for government, industry, public, international agencies, and other interested stakeholders to meet and discuss a wide range of topics and to share the latest information on safety initiatives and regulatory developments. Our program for this year includes two and a half days of timely and engaging topics. We will start the mornings with plenary sessions followed by sets of concurrent technical sessions followed by sessions addressing a broad range of topics which will have an impact domestically and internationally. The program provides a wealth of information and features several distinguished speakers. To open the RIC today, we will hear from NRC Chair Christopher T. Hansen. Later this morning, you will also have an opportunity to hear from Commissioner David A. Wright and Commissioner Annie Caputo. And just before lunch, Chair Hansen will engage in a fireside chat with the International Atomic Energy Agency's Deputy Director General, Lydia Everard. Tomorrow, and come back tomorrow, we will lead off with remarks from Commissioner Crowell, followed by a panel that will be moderated by our newly appointed Executive Director for Operations—acting, sorry, Ray—Acting Executive Director for Operations, Ray Furstenau. The panel is entitled Nuclear Regulation in a Changing Landscape, Strategies, Challenges, and Opportunities. And here's a plug. I'll be on that panel. Our last plenary will be a special session entitled, Changemakers, Building a Path to Gender Equity, moderated by NRC's new gender champion, Andrea Cook, who's also Deputy Director of Engineering in my office. Thanks, Andrea. And the technical program offers 24 sessions to choose from. A wide range of topics will be covered, including the fuel cycle for new fuel designs, advancing nuclear safety through global collaboration, implementation of risk-informed emergency preparedness regulations, adoption of artificial intelligence, and development of a regulatory framework for microreactors, just to name a few. Our technical sessions bring together nuclear experts from around the world, offering diverse perspectives on most relevant regulatory topics. Some of those technical sessions will be chaired by our commissioners and our acting EDO, Ray Furstenau. Today at 3.45, Ray will chair a session on advancing small modular reactor safety through global collaboration. Tomorrow at 1.30, Commissioner Caputo will chair the regional session covering current topics involving the NRC's inspection and oversight program. And at 3.45, Commissioner Crowell will chair a session entitled, Environmental Reviews, Increasing Efficiency and Transparency to Meet the Changing Landscape of the National Environmental Policy Act. And on Thursday at 8.30, Chair Hansen will chair the session, No Need to Reinvent the Wheel, How Countries are Leveraging International Regulatory Experience in Their Licensing Reviews. And finally at 10.45, Commissioner Wright will chair the session, Optimizing Pathways for Safe Nuclear Deployment, Innovation and Policy Alignment. In between technical sessions and networking, stop by one of our 18 digital exhibits. I encourage everyone to check out the wide range of topics, including computational tools for advanced nuclear technologies, cybersecurity during decommissioning, advanced reactor readiness, and many more. Feel free to interact with our staff or take down their contact information and follow up with them later. And if you want to do something completely different between technical sessions and visiting our digital exhibits, consider participating in a tour of the NRC's Headquarter Operations Center, where you'll see firsthand the facility the NRC staff uses to respond to incidents and for training. If interested, please stop by the tour desk and note that the tourists will leave from the Marriott. Too many options? We can help. New this year for the RIC is an innovative feature to help you stay on top of the program. I ask that you pay special attention to the TV monitors located throughout the conference floors where you will see Alicia Bone, who is the technical assistant for reactors and Commissioner Wright's office, and she will be providing highlights of the schedule to help you decide where to go next, and the videos are amazing. I've seen them all already, so make sure you pay attention. Now before we get started, let me provide a few housekeeping reminders. The RIC, as last year, is leveraging technology for audience participation. Attendees will participate in cues and aids and live polling directly from their electronic devices. To submit questions to our panelists, in-person attendees should utilize the QR codes from their phones, and virtual attendees should access the Q&A box located on the right side of the screen. Please remember to visibly display your name badges throughout the duration of the conference. Please silence all electronic devices, and all items that are left behind in the conference room and the meeting rooms will be stored in the hotel lobby. Be aware of the fire exits, which are located on the sides and back of the room. In the event that a conference room reaches maximum capacity, attendees will be redirected to other sessions. Also all sessions will be video recorded, and all recordings will be available on the NRC website following the conclusion of the conference. Finally, all presentation materials that are not currently on the website will be posted following the conclusion of the conference. And as always, your participation plays a very important role in making the RIC a success. Your feedback is critical for continuous improvement of the conference each year. We encourage you to complete the evaluation feedback form that's available on the RIC website. It will also be distributed to attendees following the conclusion of the conference. Lastly, I want to recognize the outstanding support of the RIC committees and so many others who have worked tirelessly over the past year. Once the RIC ends, the next planning starts. And that organization and the amazing, I think, ingenuity of people to put on this hybrid conference now for the second time is extremely important to the conference's success. The planning and execution of a conference of this magnitude does not happen overnight without significant commitment, creativity, and attention to detail. And again, the dedication of our NRC staff, our contractor partners, and our panelists and speakers are instrumental to the success of the RIC. And now I'd like to open this year's RIC with an opportunity to hear from our NRC chair, the Honorable Christopher T. Hansen. Christopher Hansen was sworn in as an NRC commissioner on June 8th, 2020. He was designated by President Joe Biden on January 20th, 2021, designated chair, excuse me, on January 20th, 2021. Chair Hansen has more than two decades of government and private sector experience in the field of nuclear energy. Prior to joining the NRC, he served, excuse me, he served in several roles, including staff member on the Senate Appropriations Committee, Senate Advisor in the Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy, and the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, and consultant at Booz Allen Hamilton. Chair Hansen earned a master's degree from Yale Divinity School and Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, where he focused on ethics and natural resources economics. He earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from Valparaiso University in Valparaiso, Indiana. So please join me in welcoming Chair Hansen. Good morning, everyone. Good morning. And welcome to the 36th Annual Regulatory Information Conference. The first regulatory information conference was held in 1989 at the Mayflower Hotel in downtown Washington, D.C. It was attended by fewer than 200 participants. It was seen as an opportunity at that time for utility officials and NRC managers to discuss technical issues and regulatory philosophy in a non-confrontational environment. Then, as today, our aim is to forge a better understanding between the NRC and external stakeholders with the goals of maintaining safety and security and instilling public confidence. Today, we have over 1,900 participants in person and another 1,300 joining us online. To each of you, especially our international counterparts who have traveled from far and wide a warm welcome. A big thank you from me to Lorna and the rest of the RIC team for their tireless efforts in putting together this year's events. Truly, without you, none of this would be possible. I'd like to join my welcome to commissioners Barron, Magwood, Merrifield, and Ostendorf. Welcome back to each of you and thank you for the support and wisdom you've shared with me over the years. In Antigone, the Greek playwright Sophocles said, It is best that people by nature should be wise in all things. But most people find they cannot reach that goal. And when this happens, it is good also to learn to listen to wise counselors. So among my wise counselors, I'd like to thank Molly Marsh, Cynthia Roman, Jesse Contero, Olivia Makula, Tony Nakanishi, Mandy Mauer, Lisa Dimmick, Kathleen Blake, Patti Amenez, Pam Bustagon, and Ken Armstrong. Thank you all. Before I begin, I'd like to acknowledge and honor our Ukrainian colleagues here today. Their country remains in the midst of a terrible conflict many of us cannot even begin to fathom. And they have continued to endure relentless challenges to the safe and secure operation of the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant with a strength that many of us, myself included, deeply admire. Thank you for joining us. And I look forward to continuing to lend support however I can. Of late, I've been reflecting on the legacy of our agency. We're approaching NRC's 50th anniversary, which presents an opportunity for us to look back as we look forward. Twenty years ago, Chairman Nils Diaz said, for the utilization of nuclear technology to advance to a new level of performance in the 21st century, nuclear regulation needs to be better, more predictable, more usable, more consistent across borders, and more risk-informed. Well, that sounds kind of familiar, doesn't it? When Chairman Diaz gave this speech, the agency was working on revisions to the Lightwater Reactor-centric Part 52 framework and evaluating continued operations from 40 to 60 years. Consider the present moment the Commission just provided direction on the proposed technology inclusive Part 53 framework for advanced reactors and is deeply engaged in evaluating subsequent license renewal or operation from 60 to 80 years. The agency's work over the last 20 years has provided us with the substantial experience and wisdom we have today. I recognize the significant strides the agency's made over time, strides that have put us in a fundamentally better place, I think, than we were 20 years ago. As we speak, the NRC is laying the groundwork for things like technology inclusive licensing, and effusion energy, and micro-reactors. And I'm optimistic that 20 years from now, a future chair, perhaps at the 2044 RIC, will be lauding the achievements that are built on the work we're doing today. Last year, I quoted Colin Powell, who said, optimism is a force multiplier. I still believe that. Even more, optimism is a choice to move forward with the confidence that we can overcome the challenges of our day, the belief that we can leverage our history and apply the lessons we've learned to keep striving to build a better future. And that's why today you're going to hear me talk about what we are actively doing to prepare for this future. Now, I can't even begin to assign probabilities to a vast array of possible futures involving nuclear regulation. But even if 20% of the current planning and initial investment comes to fruition, the NRC and other regulators around the world are going to have a lot more work to do than we've had in a while. There was an article in The Washington Post over the weekend that pointed to potential huge increases in electricity needs driven by data centers and clean tech manufacturing, as much as a 50% increase in needs in Virginia over the next 10 years, and as much as 5 gigawatts in Georgia. Another example that I saw recently, Amazon Web Services just purchased a data center adjacent to the Susquehanna nuclear power plant, the first such campus with direct nuclear power access. And we aren't just seeing major demands in power generation either, I mean look at the advancement in medical technologies, including the emergence of theranostics, which takes a personalized approach to treating cancer using both diagnostic and therapeutic nuclear medicine. It's clear that the NRC will play a key role in meeting these and other future needs. Not only do we need to instill confidence that we're up to the task, we need to prove it with our actions. So I'll be speaking today about where I think we are and my vision for the future of the NRC, and by the time I'm done, I hope to have convinced you that confidence in the future is justified and that optimism is the key to getting there. I want to get into the body of this speech by recognizing the sustained strong safety performance of the current operating fleet, on which the future of nuclear power depends. The credibility of the nuclear industry in the United States is linked to this remarkable record of performance, and I'm focused on assuring that this gets the attention it deserves. Even just five years ago, 2019, it appeared that the number of operating plants would continue to decline with projected shutdowns and decommissioning becoming a regular part of the discussion. But the tide turned, and today we're holding at 94 reactors. And for the first time, the NRC is evaluating a request from a previously shut down, a request to return a previously shut down reactor to operation. Our licensees are exploring a range of new technologies in the area of fuel and instrumentation and control with periods of extended operation and power upgrades. Too often in this regulatory space, I think we slip into the habit of business as usual. But the energy sector is far from stagnant, and staying stagnant when there is change all around us does not serve the mission. We need to be ready for emerging needs and seek opportunities for process improvements. Our workload projections are only growing, and efficiency will be critical. Industry interest in extending the life of reactors from 60 to 80 years, or what we call subsequent license renewal, or SLR, has exceeded the NRC's planning. To be blunt, our track record on these reviews hasn't met the mark. Our spent in reviewing license renewal applications should reflect the significant experience we've gained from initial license renewals, and they don't, at least not yet. That's why the NRC is currently revising our approach. We're leveraging risk insights, prior safety and environmental conclusions, and standardized programs to streamline NRC and industry resources, focusing on the differences between reviews of initial and subsequent terms, and concentrating staff time on the most safety significant aspects of continued operation. On the environmental side, the Commission is close to a decision on the final rulemaking package for the updated license renewal generic environmental impact statement. I'm grateful to the NRC staff who did exceptional work on this and dedicated their time to make it happen quickly. Thank you. All changes take a little time to take effect, but I expect to see streamlined reviews completed in less time and with fewer resources. This means substantially fewer staff hours when compared to recent reviews and within the NRC's 18 month review goals. And while I'm encouraged by the management focus on SLR reviews and the changes the staff are making, I'm challenging NRC leaders to go further and take the same approach to all of our work. With congressional action and federal incentives, we're projecting an influx of new power upgrade applications, that is to say getting more power out of existing reactors. Muscles, we haven't exercised in over a decade. I expect the staff to anticipate this work and be ahead of the curve to ensure we will be both effective and efficient. Now we've seen some success with the applications in front of us. Approval timelines for risk informed programs and operating reactors have fallen dramatically. And more complex reviews for risk informed classification of structure, systems and components have held steady. I'm also pleased with the staff's initiatives on more routine license amendments. Our metrics for license amendments were previously based on a standard flat timeframe. One year for the completion of a review. In 2024, we're changing that metric based on actual experience. This will make our data more accurate by appropriately focusing resources and properly tracking our performance. Simply doing things the way we've always done them is simply not going to work. I expect every leader in the NRC to look closely at the why of our policies, processes and procedures and then develop more efficient and effective ways to accomplish our safety mission while making room for the increased scope of our work. Now in case folks hadn't noticed, new reactor regulation and licensing is ramping up. In the next two years alone, the agency is projecting applications for, as the staff tells me, two combined licenses, one design certification, one standard design approval, one manufacturing license, three operating licenses and nine construction permits. That's a lot. We're preparing to meet these challenges and novel issues head on. As many of you have seen by now, the commission issued the staff requirements memorandum for the proposed Part 53 Advanced Reactor Rule. First I want to acknowledge the efforts of the NRC staff in developing this rule, which I think marks a major evolution in risk-informed regulation. The rulemaking process has been unique and from the outset, the agency recognized the need for transparency during its development. Never before have we engaged the public so early and so often. I want to thank the stakeholders who took the time to review draft text on a variety of topics at various points of maturity, asked us hard questions and provided constructive feedback. And finally I want to thank my colleagues on the commission for working closely together to develop clear direction back to the staff. The collegial process I think resulted in an approach that I believe the entire commission can stand behind. The rule puts, the proposed rule would put probabilistic risk assessment and risk insights in a leading role, balancing flexibility and predictability while assuring safety of the public. The rule will give plant designers and plant operators the flexibility in determining how their nuclear power plant will meet safety criteria. I think that's a pretty big deal. As I've said before, we're only in the middle of the process. This is only the proposed rule which will be issued for public comment in the next six months. Further discussions and engagement will be necessary for a final rule that is effective and flexible yet usable. For those stakeholders in the room and online, I look forward to continuing to get your feedback. Now part 53 gets a lot of attention, but it's just one part of NRC's overall effort to address advanced reactor licensing. But last year, we issued the final emergency preparedness rule, which scales emergency planning. The agency is also updating siting guidance to account for safety features of new reactor designs. The limited scope physical security rulemaking being considered by the commission would provide advanced reactor applicants and licensees the flexibility for alternative approaches to security. And I expect that very soon, the commission will issue a decision on the advanced reactor generic environmental impact statement, which will significantly streamline environmental reviews. With all this emphasis on advanced reactor licensing, I think it's important to note that our current frameworks allow for the licensing of advanced nuclear now. If I look back at the agency's history over the last 15 or 20 years, one of the things I think I'm most proud of is that we have learned, is what and how we've learned. I mean, let's start with Vogel. We learned a lot. A lot about timely issue of combined operating licenses. A lot about evaluating design changes. A lot about focused construction oversight. And a lot about how to structure efficient reviews for inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria, so-called ITACs. We learned a lot from our work on new scale, the first SMR design certification approved by the NRC. We learned about the importance of robust pre-application engagement in the form of white papers and topical reports, and hands-on project management and stable core team staffing within the agency. We took all of that experience, and we applied it to the Kairos-Hermes test reactor, and then we learned some more. In December, we issued the construction permit for Hermes, the first non-light water reactor construction permit issued in the United States in 56 years. And we completed the safety and environmental reviews ahead of schedule and on budget. We've got the Hermes II construction permit application under review right now and on a 14-month schedule, and all the reports are positive. I fully acknowledge that sometimes it's hard to go first with applications, but with each review, we're learning and we're growing more ready to take on the next. I just mentioned the importance of robust pre-application engagement. Actual and prospective applicants understand this. Since 2018, we've completed the review on nearly 100 topical reports and white papers. We have 32 topical reports in-house right now and expect dozens more in the next couple of years. It wasn't that long ago when topical report reviews were averaging almost 24 months. But by applying lessons learned, recent data say we're currently around 15 months and I expect that trend to continue. As I said in the mandatory hearing for the Hermes construction permit, the staff has set the bar high and I'm confident they will continue to meet it and aim higher. The opportunity to seek improvement extends to other areas as well. From my first days on the commission, I made it a priority to ensure that our efforts on the fuel cycle are as aggressive as they are on reactors. Indeed, so much of what we're doing in the reactor space relies on all aspects of the fuel cycle seamlessly working together. So what are we doing? In December, NRC issued an amendment authorizing fuel fabrication for up to 8% uranium-235. This is the first fuel facility amendment, excuse me, authorizing production of accident-tolerant fuel with increased enrichment. In the same month, the staff approved a transportation package for unirradiated advanced reactor fuel. As many of you know, last year, we issued the license amendments necessary for centrists to produce initial quantities of high assay, low enriched uranium. And we're currently reviewing another license amendment for enrichment of up to 10% uranium-235. We shouldn't leave any element of the fuel cycle behind when we apply our experience to make process improvements. So given all of this work, all of this ongoing work, the rule makings, the license application reviews, the process improvements, the time is right to start preparing the agency for what I call serial deployment of microreactors and small modular reactors. We're likely to see applications that either have significant similarities, build on one another in an iterative manner, or even seek some form of joint review and approval. The agency has some of the tools in place now, but I think there's more to do. We recognize this, and we have several important efforts underway. First, the NRC has embarked on a new initiative, focused on standardizing our reviews and giving credit for applicants who standardize their designs and licensing approaches and rely on prior NRC safety and environmental decisions. Second, earlier this year, I asked our general counsel to recommend to the commission options for improving the uncontested mandatory hearing process, seeking efficiencies where possible. Third, in a couple of weeks, NRC will be kicking off a joint project with the Idaho National Lab to look at how small and advanced reactor construction costs intersect with our codes and standards so that we can right-size both to better account for enhanced safety of many designs. And finally, the NRC is looking at design-centered approaches to conducting construction oversight to improve the efficiency of inspections. In the context of serial deployment, I want to give a quick shout-out to everyone working on and contributing to the fusion rulemaking. Around this time last year, the commission voted to address fusion energy regulation through what we call a byproduct material framework. And we expect a proposed rule sometime this summer. This is just the beginning for fusion, but we're looking at key issues closely and laying the groundwork now for success in the future. All of the efforts I've just spoken about are focused on appropriately balancing our regulatory footprint while staying grounded in our safety mission as we prepare for deployment of a range of technologies at scale. So far, I've given you kind of my version of a state of the union, a snapshot of our present and the foundation we're laying now to address both the immediate and future needs. I call it a snapshot because it really doesn't even begin to cover all of what we're actually doing day in and day out at the NRC, proving both to ourselves and others that we can meet tomorrow's challenges. So turning now to that future we're preparing for, where do I see the NRC in five or 10 or even 20 years? Well, let's start with the one thing I'm absolutely sure of. We will continue to fulfill our safety and security mission for both nuclear power and radioactive materials and instill public confidence worthy of a strong, independent and technically competent regulator, full stop. Believe me, I'd love to share my wish list to get down in the details of how many factory produced micro-reactors will license or how many multi-unit SMR sites will be constructed or how many fusion devices will see in operation by 2029 or 2034 or 2050. But the future's uncertain. Think of all the things that have happened just in the last five years that no one saw coming. We'll start with a resurgence of nuclear at the scale being currently contemplated, the growth of artificial intelligence, a request to restart a shutdown reactor, to say nothing of global events. Indeed, the stochastic crystal ball has a finite radius. Indeed, there is much outside the NRC's direct control. So how do we build a future within our control? There are four elements I think are most important. Trust, confidence, independence and risk informed thinking. First, in multiple speeches to the NRC staff, I've discussed my vision for building an environment, a culture of high trust and high confidence because culture lasts. We're facing a lot of changes at this agency, technological, policy, demographic and we need leaders that staff can trust to navigate us through this period. And leaders need to trust that the staff will prioritize our health and safety and security mission, will innovate in new ways and will get the job done. And finally, staff need to trust each other. They need to see each other as essential in their roles to accomplishing the mission and they need to know that they can rely on each other as our workload grows. Fostering an environment of high trust begins with the agency's leaders. I recently came across a remarkable speech by former chairman Shirley Jackson. In it, she says, if leaders do not set an example of vision, hard work, commitment to mission, willingness to take responsibility, creative thinking and scrupulous adherence to ethical standards they cannot expect those who work for them to meet those tests. A high trust environment is a two way street. Leaders can build trust by setting an example of the environment that they wish to see in their organization. It isn't enough just to describe the perfect culture and hope it will just appear, we need to listen and we need to lead. We need to make sure that praise for our employees is public and generous, that corrections are constructive, that motivation is commonplace and that trust is paramount. Second, let's talk about confidence. As I said earlier, we're approaching our 50th anniversary here at the NRC, January 2025. Most importantly, a lot about what's critical and we have learned a lot over the last five decades. Most importantly, a lot about what's critical for safety and security. And that body of knowledge should give us confidence in our technical capabilities at all levels so that we can leverage our vast intellectual capital to make better, smarter, more efficient and more durable regulatory decisions. As I frequently tell the NRC staff, we need to have confidence in our abilities and confidence in our ability to change. So while confidence in ourselves is important, we also need to build and preserve the confidence of those outside the agency. This starts with building and maintaining the trust of the public. If the public does not have confidence in our decisions for whatever reason, then we will ultimately fail. Engaging the public substantively, routinely and creatively is critical to our position as a trusted regulator. Further, building external confidence in the agency with stakeholders is important for our credibility. Confidence that we're capable of upholding our obligations to the public while also building clear, reliable and efficient regulatory pathways for not only the variety of technologies under development, but also the volumes at which those technologies may be deployed. Third, independence, but not isolation. We are an independent agency, but as I've said many times, we cannot ignore the significance of our role in the future and its impact on those around us both domestically and internationally. I spoke at the beginning of the speech about the domestic context. So what's the international one? At the Conference of the Parties 28, COP 28, the big climate conference in Dubai in December, 22 world leaders, including the United States signed a declaration to triple nuclear energy by 2050. This display of solidarity is an important reminder that the future we are talking about after all is a shared one. But climate change isn't the only driver. Energy independence, national security, human health, and economic development are all on the table in my discussions around the world. The fact of the matter is that there is too much going on, financial investment, technological advancement, policy, geopolitics for any one regulator to tackle alone. Now is the time for like-minded countries with shared values to work together to ensure safety and security and develop generic pathways that serve our unique contexts. The ongoing joint effort between the US, Canada, and the UK on advanced reactor reviews is just one small example. Finally, risk informing. Risk informed thinking is part of our past and drives our present. But I wanna drive that concept forward because as I've noted many times in this speech, our agency continues to learn and grow over time as we build on our expertise. That means that risk informing is constantly evolving based on the new information the agency receives. It isn't a static concept. We have risk informed, we are risk informing now, and we will continue to risk inform into the future. Our job is to make sure that we have a culture with a questioning attitude focused on safety, not on business as usual. And as I have described in this speech, we're doing this in pockets throughout the agency. Indeed, there are bright spots everywhere. But I wanna see a future where risk informed thinking is baked into every single thing we do. So how do we achieve this vision? By building confidence and trust inside the agency. By cultivating and safeguarding confidence and trust outside the agency. By maintaining our independence while reaching out and bringing in information and perspectives necessary for improvement. And finally, by building on all of this to clearly and reliably apply risk insights to every aspect of our mission to better maintain safety and security and increase efficiency. Chairman Allison McFarland gave a Rick speech almost exactly 10 years ago today, entitled, continued learning, the best defense against an uncertain future. Well, that sounds about right. I started this speech talking about the state of the NRC 20 years ago. Some things have changed, some have stayed the same. But what's clear? We've come a long way and we've learned a lot. Therefore, we can have confidence in our ability to keep evolving to meet future challenges. Every lesson we've learned, whether through success or failure, is valuable. And it is both a part of our legacy and the foundation of our future. President Truman said, an optimist is presented with a problem and sees an opportunity. A pessimist is presented with an opportunity and sees a problem. We have a choice to make, to look at the future of the NRC at nuclear regulation in this country, at the international nuclear landscape with pessimism or with optimism. I choose optimism. I choose to see the future through a lens of opportunity. The people in this room, the people in this room have what it takes to create the future we hope for ourselves and our children. As the history of the NRC has demonstrated, we have risen to meet the challenges of many uncertain futures. And I have every confidence that we will continue to do so. Thank you. I'll let you choose with every chair you'd like to sit in. I'm gonna point me in the right direction. All right. You know, Andrea, I didn't really bring the funny this morning. Well, you don't always bring the funny. It's okay. I think Commissioner Wright has something special planned for us. So I think I was holding out for him to tell you. It was inspirational nonetheless. That's what's important. Thank you. All right, ready to get into it? Fire away. All right. First question. You really covered our reactor activities. Do you have any updates on the material side of the house? Yeah, right. I talked about it as a snapshot because it had a certain focus and there's certainly a lot of energy and interest. I think these days in the reactor side, but there are so many really good things happening in emergency planning and security, the exercises, the things that we do day in and day out. The folks in the transportation and spent fuel, I didn't, you know, didn't get a chance to talk about the low level waste disposal rulemaking ongoing. And I think some other really important things. Of course, our relationships with the agreement states for overseeing the safe use of radioactive materials, you know, almost 20,000 licensees in this country that use radioactive materials safely for industrial and human health uses. I mean, there's just so much going on. And I certainly wouldn't want to leave the staff or anybody else with the impression that the reactors is maybe the only thing going, I guess. And let me do a logistical check. I don't see this timer moving and you don't want to rely on me or me looking at my watch like I'm, you know, rushing you. So if we could get the timer to move so we know how much time we have. All right, next question. You talked about the future five, 10 and 20 years from now, but what are your short term goals to save for this year? Oh, wow, I think, you know, that's a great question. I mean, I think we've got some pretty significant things happening this year. Obviously, you know, I talked about part 53 and the direction that the commission gave back and the direction to the staff to put out a proposed rule that consistent with that direction in the next six months, the fusion rulemaking, I think will be out this summer that will kind of start another conversation both on the commission and kind of further that with stakeholders that I think will be really important. We're looking at really, I think, continuing some of the momentum on license applications and we look forward to getting those in. And so by the time, you know, we kind of get into the holiday season, I can see a number of really important building blocks in place, I think to tee this up. If I remember correctly, based on the schedule, I think we get close to the end of the year, that's when the Kairos Hermes II construction permit should be wrapping up and I think that'll be another milestone for the agency and worth highlighting. Okay, next question. You mentioned NRC's collaboration with Canada and the UK, which have nuclear power. What can you say about countries that want to build their first plans and do it quickly? Well, the first thing I'd say was come to my technical session on Thursday morning, where we'll be discussing exactly this topic. There's a lot of preparation and I think it's really important, even within the US government, that all parts of the government are connected on this, that the promotional part and the regulatory part are talking to each other so that we can embark on that journey with countries who are really interested in pursuing this. And then I think the other thing too is that I think having partner countries where we work together to help third countries in this area is also really important. It is, you know, I mentioned a force multiplier and I think this is another really good example where that can be the case where countries can absolutely benefit from experience in the US, but they're also gonna benefit from experience that the UK has had, Canada, Finland, France, et cetera. So I think there has to be kind of a team approach and I think making sure that there's that time that's built in there to engage for those embarking countries will be really important. Okay, next question, and thank you for the timer. How does the NRC intend to use artificial intelligence to create efficiencies and licensing processes? Ah, great question. I don't know yet. We, you know, I asked the staff, we had an effort ongoing that got started, I wanna say about 18 months ago, to really look externally at how our licensees may be using artificial intelligence in their processes and we developed a strategic plan around that and I thought that that was a very good and forward looking thing to do. But I also thought we needed to be looking at it internal to the agency. And so, you know, what I did was ask the staff to come up with a series of use cases or potential use cases that could be put in front of the commission for consideration so that we could look at those and say, okay, here's how to kind of focus our time and resources, both the physical resources in terms of hardware, but also just the kind of intellectual resources of the agency. And I understand, I've gotten a little bit of feedback here and there, there's a lot of enthusiasm for that effort, a lot of creative thinking that's going into it and I really look forward to seeing what the staff comes up with here. I mean, we're hearing about this all the time now about the ability of these AI modules, these large learning modules to crawl data, you know, to potentially crawl atoms and bring in all that information, integrate it and see what we can really do there. I'm very excited by the possibilities. And I'll have to show you later, if you haven't seen it, myself and my executive team all have them up at Doppelgangers that are AI generated. So I'll show you that. Makes me a little nervous. Yeah, you should be. There's an org chart, so you should be. All right, how would you evaluate the progress, the NRC has made in collaborating with other regulators on advanced reactor license applications? Well, I think one of the things I really like about the, our approach with Canada and now the UK is that it's focused on specific products, it's focused on specific technical areas, right? So safety strategy, right? Classification of system structures and components, fuel qualification, quality assurance, right? These are the building blocks of an overall application that would come either to the Canadian regulator or us. And what we've done is what we're doing is performing a joint technical review. In some cases the Canadians have the lead, in some cases we do, but we've got integrated project teams that are moving those forward. And so the progress in that way, right? How far are you along on the review? What's the schedule for that, et cetera? That way the progress, we can track that and we can see how we're doing. Things like construction technology, et cetera. And so that that stuff is being pre-cleared. I'm really glad, we're getting into some really tough issues about differences and regulatory approach on both sides of the border and working closely with the vendor in this case, GE Etachi, to figure out how to resolve some of those issues. Okay, next question. Is there a concern about the age of the agency staff and handling knowledge management before the staff retires? Well, we have had, I think at one point we had 25% of NRC staff were over the age of 60 and we had another 20 or 25% that were over the age of 50. And so knowledge management has become a priority, I think across the agency, but also among the commissioners, where we focused on this. And I look at it as I'm not an expert in knowledge management. I wanna know that it's happening. I wanna know that it's happening well and I want managers to be able to show the commission what's working, where are we making progress, how do we know we're making progress on that in order to preserve that repository. I think it's gonna be a range of approaches. I think some of it's gonna be specific to various parts of the agency and the way those parts work. And I think all of that is fine, but I think rolling that up and demonstrating real kind of results there is gonna be important. Okay, I think we'll do about two more. So how do you propose to drive the cultural change in NRC necessary for all of its people to adopt a risk-informed approach to regulation? Yeah, it can't just be me or any of the other commissioners. I think we play an important role in communicating about the priorities of the commission and providing each our unique perspectives on where the agency needs to go. But I think this is a task for all of the agency's leaders down to the team leader level. And I think we saw that a little bit in COVID and some of the surveys where there was a lot of trust, people had a lot of trust in their immediate team leader, but as you went higher up the chain, that trust started to erode a little bit. And I think we need, at all levels, to start to rebuild that. And again, this is an area where I'm not gonna necessarily say, leader X, you should be doing this specific thing. I think good leaders know what it is they need to be doing, and they know how to interact and communicate and motivate the people underneath them. I think it's my job and the job of the commission then, but to set those expectations that that's what leaders will be doing and then to hold people accountable. Right, and last question. What are some signs that utilities can look for to indicate that subsequent license for new reviews are gaining efficiency? Well, let's see, I think my first thing was look at your invoices. No, I mean, I think, first of all, I think the review plans that the staff provides, right, where people should be able to see, okay, here's how we're leveraging Pyrr experience. If you've come in, if you have a lot of similarities in your fleet and you've come in with one application already and the subsequent applications, build on that and build on those reviews, then I think that that should be one way. I think the expectation and the commission I think did a good thing when we set this 18-month expectation for the review schedule, but it's not just about the calendar days, it's also about the hours. That's where the efficiency is gonna show up, right? The initial license renewal term to get down in the details, right, had something like 50 technical areas for aging management. For the subsequent license renewal, they're only six or seven new ones. Now they're complicated, and so it's not a matter of just adding 10% or 12% to the review time. I absolutely understand that and appreciate it, but there's also a tremendous amount of operating experience. There's a tremendous amount of knowledge in this agency that should be applied. That's what I'm talking about when I talk about confidence, right, that we're not just kind of ticking the boxes on a review plan, but we're actually accounting for what we know and what our licensees know than to drive the focus for those reviews. There's a lot to be said about all other things being equal, getting a high quality product. Of course, those things are necessary, but what I expect to see from the staff is that, again, that confidence, that leaning in to say, hey, look, we've been at this a long time. We know some things. Let's apply what we know to not just do things the way we've always done it. And that's a great way to end it, three seconds.