I wrote an article for the June issue of Nuclear Power International on the strategy being followed by US nuclear projects. Most projects are proceeding toward a potential first wave construction start, even though only a few (perhaps only those that get acceptable DOE loan guarantees) will actually start construction in the first wave.

Waiting until 2012 (when COL approvals should come) to decide to postpone a nuclear project may be much more expensive than moving to a thoughtful second-wave strategy now. Some companies, including Entergy and Ameren, seem to have decided to shift to the second wave already. A second-wave project developer could have much more information on the relative success of the competing reactor designs and might want to switch designs.  In this scenario, a second wave strategy with a banked ESP (Early Site Permit) might have spent much less money than a second-wave project with an approved COL (combined construction and operating license).  While an approved COL may be valid for a decade or more (the Part 52 rules are not clear on how or how long a construction permit can be banked), a change in reactor design would require a new COL application. 

The complete article is at
http://pepei.pennnet.com/display_article/363984/140/ARTCL/none/none/1/First-Wave-or-Second-Wave?/