"Power NJ Act"; establishes advanced nuclear energy procurement program in BPU.

New section 4(f) requires the board to assess whether energy offtake agreements include provisions where the buyer pays above the RCC price, shares construction risk, holds an equity stake, or otherwise provides ratepayer benefits before granting provisional qualification.

New section 6(c) requires the board to consider the cumulative ratepayer impact of multiple qualified projects in totality and prohibits approving a subsequent project if the combined impact is unaffordable to ratepayers, even if each project individually appears affordable.

New section 5(d) requires board staff and the authority CEO to review all public comments within 30 days of the comment period closing and discuss potential amendments with the parties.

New section 7(e) prohibits a qualified project from receiving an RCC for any megawatt-hour for which it also receives a zero-emission certificate under P.L.2018, c.16, preventing double-counting of environmental attributes.

Section 6(a) adds two new conditions for final approval: (6) there must be a net benefit to ratepayers, and (7) any energy offtake agreement must not provide a per-MWh price lower than the RCC price unless the buyer contributes equity capital or assumes construction risk such that their total cost contribution equals or exceeds the RCC price.

Section 6(e) (modification petitions) now requires consultation with the Division of Rate Counsel and a public hearing before granting modifications, adds a finding that the change 'was reasonably unforeseeable,' and requires an express finding that there is still a net benefit to ratepayers.

Section 5(f) now requires that the stipulation be presented to the board along with a cost benefit analysis of the stipulation.

Section 5(c) was replaced: stipulations must now be made public with a 30-day public comment period and a public hearing in the host municipality before board consideration, replacing the prior provision that simply stated the stipulation would not be binding until board approval.

Section 8 was rewritten to replace blanket confidentiality with a structured framework: confidential information must follow procedures under N.J.A.C.14:1-12.1 et seq. and C.48:2-16.4, including designation, challenge, and review procedures. The Division of Rate Counsel or PJM's independent market monitor may enter NDAs to access confidential information for oversight purposes.

Section 5(b)(10) was substantially rewritten: instead of simply excusing developers from passing along tax credits that exceeded projections due to cost overruns, the developer may now retain unanticipated tax credits to cover administrative costs plus up to 10 percent (or a negotiated percentage) of any new unanticipated tax credits, subject to an absolute cap set in the stipulation.

Section 7(d)(1) and (2) now require revenues from PJM sales and direct power purchase agreements to be returned to the electric power supplier or basic generation service provider within 60 days of receipt, with those entities having no more than 90 days to pass the revenues through to ratepayers.

The definitions of 'aggregate output,' 'existing nuclear reactor baseline,' and the 1,100 MW program parameter in section 7(a) were all changed from measuring in megawatt-hours to 'megawatts of capacity, as defined in the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff,' aligning the bill with PJM's capacity market terminology.

Multiple provisions now add 'or any other procurement program operated by PJM' alongside references to the RPM capacity market and Fixed Resource Requirement, broadening the scope of recognized capacity markets beyond just those two programs.

Section 2(b) now conditions the Legislature's determination on affordability: it finds it is in the public interest 'when affordable' to promote advanced nuclear reactors, and section 4(a) adds 'affordable' as a descriptor for the projects the program promotes.

Several legislative findings were softened: 'unmatched' changed to 'higher,' 'reasonably priced' to 'affordable,' added qualifiers like 'potentially' and 'have the potential to,' removed 'dispatchable' from a description of advanced nuclear output, and removed the clause about continued service during severe weather events.

Section 4(c)(7) changes the required cost estimate from 'Class IV' to 'Class IV or better,' allowing developers to submit more precise estimates. Section 4(c)(13) adds that bill impact projections must cover the entire term of the proposal.

New section 5(h) exempts consulting engagements under this act from P.L.2005, c.92 requirements, provided they comply with federal export control laws, facilitating engagement of specialized nuclear consultants.