Transparency
← Back

Transparency · Major projects

LOW COST NUCLEAR PROGRAMME (ROLLS ROYCE SMRS CHALLENGE)

DESNZ · BEIS_0001_2122-Q2 · Last reported March 2025

Department page: Department for Energy Security and Net Zero

Data as atRatingEnd dateWhole-life cost
March 2024Green (the department's own assessment)31 March 2025£468m (price basis not stated)
March 2025Green (the department's own assessment)31 March 2025£468m (price basis not stated)

Each year’s cost is shown with its price basis. Costs are not compared between years: the March 2024 and March 2025 reports state no price basis, and from March 2026 costs are in 2024/25 prices.

The department’s commentary

This is the department’s own commentary. It may use different prices from the table above, so its figures may not match.

March 2025

Rating: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the Infrastructure Project Authority's Delivery Confidence Assessment rating at 24/25-Q4 remained at GREEN. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ Active work has been completed by Rolls Royce SMR Ltd against the latest version of the project plan. A final significant PCR stabilised project finance and milestones in the last few months of the programme. Work on the project during the final year has shifted and gone beyond the completion of Step 2 of the Generic Design Assessment (GDA) to maintaining the consistency of work as part of a much larger industry led programme.

Schedule: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's end-date at 24/25-Q4 remained at 31/03/2025. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ Key drivers for the timeline of the project were the need to reach design maturity points and progress through Generic Design Assessment (GDA). Step 2 of GDA was completed by 31/07/2024 with the remainder of the objectives and benefits progressed by 30/03/2025. It should be noted that development of the RR SMR design including further GDA progress continues after the end of grant funding.

Cost: Compared to financial year 23/24-Q4, the project's departmentally agreed Whole Life Cost at 24/25-Q4 (measured in £m) remained at 468. This is primarily due to the following factors‚ The project has delivered key outcomes on design maturity, supply chain requirements and completion of Step 2 of the Generic Design Assessment (GDA) regulatory assessment within the timeframe. Costs were driven by staff resource needed to mature the design and work required to progress GDA to Step 2 and beyond.

Source: NISTA Annual Report 2024-25 (data)

March 2024

Rating: Compared to financial year 22/23-Q4, Senior Responsible Owner's Delivery Confidence Assessment rating at 23/24-Q4 decreased from Amber to Green. This is primarily due to the following factors. Implementation of the re-profiled project plan (v7) was executed well with some additional small corrections to resourcing in Q3. Investor confidence and the flow of matched funding has improved with RR SMR Ltd interaction with the Great British Nuclear Technology Selection Process. High-level milestones have been met across the year with mitigation plans in place for secondary milestone movement. Risks remain in regards to transition from this project to full delivery but further clarity on their impacts will not crystallise until Q1 24/25.

Schedule: Compared to financial year 22/23-Q4, the project's end-date at 23/24-Q4 remained schedule to finish on 2025-03-31. This is primarily due to the following factors. The overall timelines are driven by the desired outcome of completion of Step 2 of the Generic Design Assessment regulatory process by 31/03/2025. Progression from Step 1 of GDA to Step 2 undertaken in Q1 23/24.

Cost: Compared to financial year 22/23-Q4, the project's departmental-agree Whole Life Cost at 23/24-Q4 remained at 468m. This is primarily due to the following factors. The project is currently on track to deliver the desired outcome within the timeframe, with costs driven by the key innovation and work to complete Step 2 of GDA.

Source: IPA Annual Report 2023-24 (data)

Names, figures, dates, ratings and commentary are as the department reported them. Where a rating, cost or date is withheld, the file’s wording is shown. Every major project →