Nuclear specific DCO reforms: Working towards a more standardised delivery model

On 13 March 2026, the Government published Building our Nuclear Nation, its response to the 47 recommendations of the Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce. We summarised the response in an earlier update and also reviewed the detail of the proposed changes to the DCO regime. In this update, we consider the proposals relating to nuclear-specific DCO reforms.

A central theme of the report is that the current framework is fragmented and process-heavy. The proposed reforms are intended to make regulation and consenting more proportionate, coordinated and aligned with a programme of repeated nuclear deployment, while maintaining safety and environmental protections.

Although the response does not set out the specific details of the reforms, it gives a clear indication of the direction of travel. We’ve set out the Government’s conclusions on what is being progressed below.

Recommendation 32: Fleet rollout and standardisation: The current planning framework treats each nuclear project on a standalone basis requiring separate regulatory approvals, design documentation, procurement processes and workforce planning. This is considered an outdated approach as it adds to application time and cost. To address this, National Policy Statement EN‑7 will be updated within 12 months to introduce a new criterion to support fleet rollout, allowing developers to build on standardisation and the repeated deployment of proven designs. This will be subject to consultation and parliamentary scrutiny. This reflects the approach taken in other jurisdictions and should result in a more efficient consenting process.

Recommendation 33: Siting: EN-7 currently includes the Semi-Urban Population Density Criteria (SUPDC) which is a test of whether a potential site is acceptable for a nuclear facility based on how many people live around it and their distance from the site. The Taskforce considered this to restrict the development of sites which could be highly desirable and proposed that it be revised. The Government has not accepted this recommendation, but instead proposes to work with the ONR to bring forward alternatives to the current criteria to increase the number of potentially suitable sites for all reactor classes, including SMRs and AMRs, whilst continuing to prioritise public safety. The timescale will be the same as recommendation 32.

Recommendation 34: Emergency planning: The Taskforce considered that the current methodology for calculating outline planning zones (OPZs) under the Radiation (Emergency Preparedness and Public Information) Regulations 2019 (REPPIR 2019) is outdated and requires revision.  OPZs are areas where high-level planning is required for early emergency preparedness and default distances are based on older reactor assumptions which restrict siting opportunities. The Government has confirmed that experts commissioned by DESNZ have identified alternative arrangements for determining  OPZs and will be discussing options with stakeholders. The Government will also make the necessary amendments to the REPRIR 2019 and associated guidance to implement these changes. They will introduce a new appeals process if local authority determinations on detailed emergency planning zones (DEPZ) are disputed.  DEPZ are site specific, refined zones determined from detailed hazard and consequence assessments. They can impose onerous burdens on new nuclear development so the appeals process is proposed to provide an avenue to resolve these.

Recommendation 35: Regulatory justification: The Taskforce highlighted the concerns with the requirement for regulatory justification under the Justification of Practices Involving Ionising Radiation Regulations 2004 as this duplicates work conducted during other nuclear regulatory processes such as site licensing, environmental permitting, generic design assessment and the DCO consenting. The Government agrees with the intent of the recommendation but proposes to work with GBE-N to submit a regulatory justification application to Defra within the next 6 months seeking a determination under Regulation 12 for all Light Water Reactors. It then proposes to streamline the process for other classes of reactor. In the alternative, it will consider changes to legislation.

Recommendation 36: Socioeconomic benefits: The Government has raised concerns about legislating to make community benefits a material consideration as it could remove flexibility surrounding provision and introduce new grounds for legal challenge. The Government’s intention is instead to update EN-7 to strengthen policy expectations on socioeconomic benefits within the NPS framework and consider any relevant changes to s106 guidance to provide further clarity within 12 months.

If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact Alex Minhinick or Paula McGeady.