Nuclear Siting Reforms are critical for India’s plan to achieve 100 GWe of nuclear power capacity by 2047. However, project developers continue to face challenges related to regulatory approvals, land acquisition, water allocation, and climate resilience. Therefore, stakeholders at INEF 2026 proposed several reforms to speed up project development and reduce uncertainty.
Faster Approvals and Ready-to-Develop Sites
Developers noted that reviewing foreign-licensed reactor designs from the beginning can increase project timelines. Therefore, stakeholders recommended a Design-Acceptance Pathway that allows AERB to consider reviews already completed by credible foreign regulators. At the same time, AERB would continue to make independent decisions based on Indian requirements.
Land acquisition remains another major challenge. Large nuclear projects require significant land, and acquisition processes can take several years. To address this issue, stakeholders proposed creating a National Nuclear Site Bank. These pre-characterised and pre-cleared sites could be developed jointly with state governments and made available for future projects.
In addition, stakeholders called for clear siting guidelines, faster approval mechanisms, and better support from government agencies during site selection and planning.
| Policy Area | Concern | Expectation / Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| Design-Acceptance Pathway for Foreign-Licensed Reactor Designs | A full de novo review of reactor designs already licensed by credible foreign regulators duplicates regulatory effort, increases timelines, and does not fully leverage established international safety assessments. | Establish a Design-Acceptance Pathway under which AERB provides structured credit for prior reviews conducted by recognized foreign regulators. The Indian review should focus on localization, site-specific factors, and India-specific requirements while retaining AERB’s independent and final regulatory authority. |
| Nuclear Plant Siting and Land Acquisition | Large exclusion zone requirements impact land acquisition. Lack of clarity on minimum separation distances between nuclear plants creates uncertainty in site planning. Developers also face public acceptance challenges, limited access to siting-related testing infrastructure, and insufficient clarity on the roles of DAE, licensing authorities, and safety regulators. | Notify clear siting guidelines, including minimum separation distances between nuclear power plants. Provide DAE support during site selection, establish a fast-track siting mechanism, issue early clarification on exclusion zone requirements, create an SPV-led land bank of pre-cleared sites, and develop siting-related testing infrastructure in academic institutions and private industry. |
| Creation of National Nuclear Site Bank | A large multi-unit nuclear site requires around 800–1,200 acres of land. Land acquisition under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 can take three to five years, causing significant project delays. | Notify nuclear power generation as a public purpose under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, subject to a valid siting-consent application and a signed PPA or term sheet. Establish a National Nuclear Site Bank of pre-characterised and pre-cleared sites in partnership with state governments, initially using land already available within DAE and NPCIL holdings. |
| Priority Water Allocation & Standard Coastal Pathway | Water allocation is a state-level decision and can delay projects. Coastal intake and outfall approvals are often handled individually, creating uncertainty and longer approval timelines. | Develop a standardised clearance protocol for nuclear water allocation and CRZ intake/outfall approvals in coordination with the Ministry of Jal Shakti and MoEFCC. Create a predictable approval framework and enable beneficial use of waste heat, including desalination, through a transparent revenue-sharing mechanism. |
| Coastal-Site Resilience & Climate Adaptation | Coastal nuclear projects face growing risks from sea-level rise, storm surges, cyclones, and other climate-related events. A published, long-term design basis is currently lacking. | Develop an AERB Coastal Nuclear Site Design Basis Guide covering site elevation, tsunami and storm-surge protection, Category-5 cyclone wind loading, and salt-spray protection. Update the framework every five years using future climate projections. Establish coordinated disaster-preparedness plans, standard marine-outfall regulations, emergency-response infrastructure, and complementary guidance for inland sites covering drought resilience and water-stress protection. |
Nuclear Siting Reforms: Water Security and Climate Resilience
Water availability is essential for nuclear power plants. However, water allocation approvals can vary across states and often delay projects. Therefore, stakeholders recommended a standardised clearance process for water allocation and coastal intake and outfall approvals. This would create greater predictability for developers and investors.
Climate resilience was also identified as a priority. Coastal nuclear sites face risks from cyclones, storm surges, sea-level rise, and extreme weather events. As a result, stakeholders proposed a dedicated AERB Coastal Nuclear Site Design Basis Guide covering site elevation, tsunami protection, cyclone resistance, and salt-spray protection.
They also recommended regular reviews of climate-related safety requirements, stronger disaster preparedness plans, and guidelines for inland sites facing drought and water-stress risks.
Together, these reforms can improve project readiness, reduce development timelines, and support India’s long-term nuclear energy ambitions.
The recommendations reflect stakeholder discussions at INEF 2026 on creating a stronger, faster, and more predictable framework for nuclear project development.
