But the fate of other projects in the United States and abroad
that plan to use the Westinghouse reactor, known as the AP1000, are in doubt, along with the role of the United States in the future of nuclear energy.
The Japan disaster prompted regulators to revisit safety standards, slowing approval of the Westinghouse designs
and resulting in new requirements even after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission gave the go-ahead for the Georgia and South Carolina projects.
And, perhaps most significantly, attempts to square two often-conflicting forces — the desire for greater safety,
and the need to contain costs — while bringing to life complex new designs have blocked or delayed nearly all of the projects planned in the United States.
As part of an effort to get the delays and escalating costs under control, Westinghouse acquired part of the construction company, which set off a series of still-unresolved disputes over who should absorb the cost overruns
and how Westinghouse accounted for and reported values in the transaction.
The projects, more than three years late and billions over budget, are what pushed Westinghouse — one of the last private companies building nuclear reactors —
and its parent, Toshiba, to the brink of financial ruin, resulting in Toshiba’s chairman stepping down.
“You can make it go fast, and you can make it be cheap — but not if you adhere to the standard of care
that we do,” said Mark Cooper of the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School, referring to the United States regulatory body, which is considered one of the most meticulous in the world.
Both projects, which plan to use a novel reactor from Westinghouse, have been plagued by delays
and cost overruns, some stemming, paradoxically, from an untested regulatory system intended to simplify and accelerate their development.