Nuclear Energy, Uranium & Rural Land in Texas

Why nuclear belongs on Texas Homestead Law

The chain is short and it ends on private land:

Data centers → electric demand → energy development → land & water

Population growth, data centers, AI, industry and electrification are driving electric demand. Demand drives generation, transmission and supporting infrastructure. All of that lands on land, water, rural communities and property: which is this site's subject.

See also: Texas Data Centers & Rural Land.

Texas nuclear policy is running on two tracks at once

Texas nuclear policy can look contradictory until you separate the two things happening at the same time.

• Track one: Texas restricts high-level radioactive waste. State law prohibits the disposal or storage of high-level radioactive waste in Texas outside a limited reactor-site exception.
• Track two: Texas is actively encouraging new nuclear development. The state has created an office, a fund and grant programs to support advanced reactors, fuel-cycle infrastructure and nuclear manufacturing.

Supporting nuclear development did not repeal the waste restrictions. Both bodies of law are in effect simultaneously, and they answer different questions. One governs where spent fuel and other high-level waste may be kept. The other governs how the state promotes building new generation. For a landowner, the practical consequence is that a proposal near your property could be affected by either track, or by neither, depending on what is actually being proposed.

Texas law on high-level radioactive waste

House Bill 7, 87th Legislature, Second Called Session, 2021

Enacted 2021

HB 7 established Texas' prohibition against the disposal or storage of high-level radioactive waste in the state, with a limited exception for storage at reactor sites. It amended Chapter 401 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. For purposes of the statute, high-level radioactive waste includes spent nuclear fuel.

HB 7 also restricted certain state environmental and water permitting. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality was barred from issuing specified Clean Water Act related construction permits, stormwater approvals and Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits for the construction or operation of a facility licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission under 10 C.F.R. Part 72 to dispose of or store high-level radioactive waste.

Andrews County and the Permian Basin

The legislation did not arise in a vacuum. Interim Storage Partners sought an NRC license for a consolidated interim storage facility in Andrews County, near the Texas and New Mexico border. The proposed site sits within the Permian Basin, which is why the proceeding drew sustained attention from rural West Texas.

Concerns raised during that proceeding included ranch land and surrounding land use, oil and gas operations, groundwater and aquifers, transportation of spent nuclear fuel through Texas communities, environmental contamination, emergency planning and long-term land use.

Those were the concerns raised in that specific proceeding. They should not be read as a general statement that every proposed nuclear development creates the same issues. A consolidated interim storage facility for waste generated elsewhere is a different proposal from a power reactor, a research reactor or a manufacturing facility.

2025 law update: House Bill 4112

Enacted, effective September 1, 2025

The legal discussion does not stop with HB 7. Texas enacted HB 4112 in the 89th Legislature, amending Texas Health and Safety Code Sections 401.0525 and 401.072. It did two things.

First, it broadened which reactors can qualify for the exception. The earlier language referred to currently or formerly operating reactors. HB 4112 removed that limitation, so the exception is not restricted to reactors that already exist or previously existed.

Second, and more important for landowners, it added an origination requirement. In plain English:

Read the current statute rather than the 2021 bill text alone, because the 2021 language has since been amended.

Texas is building an advanced nuclear industry

House Bill 14, 89th Legislature, 2025 established the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office (opens in a new tab), or TANEO, within the Office of the Governor.

TANEO's statutory responsibilities include strategic leadership for advanced nuclear development, nuclear industry development, public outreach, permitting and regulatory coordination, development of the nuclear supply chain, nuclear manufacturing, workforce and higher education collaboration, and addressing barriers to nuclear project development.

Texas also created the Texas Advanced Nuclear Development Fund. The Governor's Office describes the fund as a $350 million investment in advanced nuclear development.

Why TANEO matters to Texas landowners

Government Code Chapter 483 specifically contemplates projects that require land, water, reliable infrastructure, site planning, environmental characterization, early site permitting, state permits, federal permits, NRC licensing, construction, and transmission and grid interconnection. Every item on that list touches somebody's property or somebody's water.

TANEO may employ a Nuclear Permitting Coordinator who can identify active or likely siting opportunities and assist businesses through local, state and federal permitting.

There is also an important statutory limitation worth knowing: TANEO may not require an advanced nuclear project to be located in a specific location. The office coordinates and assists. It does not direct where a project must go.

TANEO and the Public Utility Commission of Texas are required to study necessary state regulatory functions related to nuclear generation facilities and submit that study to the Legislature by December 1, 2026. Texas Homestead Law will review this page when that study is published.

State nuclear funding

The fund operates through reimbursement grant programs rather than direct payments to build a plant.

• Project development and supply chain reimbursement. Qualifying expenses can include feasibility studies, site planning, site-specific engineering, environmental characterization, NRC early site permit work, preparation of NRC applications, manufacturing development, fuel-cycle activities, and preparation of state and federal permits. Under Government Code Section 483.203, grants may reimburse up to 50 percent of qualifying expenses, subject to a statutory maximum of $12.5 million.
• Advanced nuclear construction reimbursement. Under Section 483.204, qualifying construction-related grants may reimburse up to 50 percent of qualifying expenses, subject to a statutory maximum of $120 million.
• ERCOT completion incentives. Texas law also provides for a completion-bonus grant program for qualifying advanced reactors interconnected with ERCOT.

A grant program is an opportunity to apply, not guaranteed funding for any particular project. An announced project is not a funded project, and a funded project is not a licensed one.

What Texas law now says about advanced nuclear

Texas Government Code Chapter 483, added by HB 14 and effective September 1, 2025, is the statute behind the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office. A few points in it matter directly to landowners.

The statutory definition is broader than a power plant

An advanced nuclear project under Chapter 483 is not only a traditional nuclear generating station. It includes facilities relying on advanced nuclear reactors for power, steam or heat, and it also includes nuclear fuel-cycle facilities and associated technologies supporting the advanced nuclear energy industry.

That matters because a proposal near your property might be a manufacturing or fuel-cycle facility rather than a reactor, and the two raise different questions. Do not assume every nuclear-related facility is the same thing.

The advanced reactor technologies contemplated include Generation III+ and Generation IV designs, large light-water reactors, small modular reactors, microreactors and nuclear cogeneration.

Permitting coordinator

Chapter 483 authorizes a nuclear permitting coordinator who may act as a point of contact during permitting, identify likely siting opportunities, identify required permits and approvals, and help regulated entities navigate local, state and federal requirements.

Land, water and reliable infrastructure

This is the clearest link between Texas advanced nuclear policy and the subjects this site covers. Under Section 483.206, grant applicants may be evaluated in part on access to resources essential to the project, including land, water and reliable infrastructure.

Two things that provision does not do. It does not give developers authority to take private property. And it does not let the office decide where a project must go: Chapter 483 expressly states that the office may not require an advanced nuclear project to be located in a specific location.

State regulatory study

The statute directs TANEO and the Public Utility Commission of Texas to conduct a study identifying necessary state regulatory functions related to nuclear generation facilities. The statutory deadline is December 1, 2026. That is a natural item for regulatory watch, and we will review this page when it is published.

Uranium, groundwater and Texas land

Uranium is where nuclear policy touches Texas land most directly, and it is a groundwater subject before it is an energy subject.

Exploration is not production

Uranium exploration means locating and evaluating a resource, including drilling exploration holes. Uranium recovery means actually producing it. The two involve different activity, different surface disturbance and different regulatory records. An exploration permit is not authorization to produce.

In-situ recovery

Most modern Texas uranium production uses in-situ recovery, or ISR. Rather than open-pit or underground mining, ISR circulates a solution through the ore body underground and brings dissolved uranium to the surface through wells.

It is a mistake to summarise this as "there is no mining." ISR is a mineral extraction operation. It involves wellfields, pipelines, roads, processing or satellite facilities, surface disturbance and, importantly, direct interaction with an aquifer.

Why groundwater is the central issue

Because ISR works through the groundwater system, the questions that matter most to neighbouring landowners are groundwater questions: what the production area authorization covers, what monitoring wells surround it, what baseline water quality was established before production, and what restoration standard applies when production ends.

If you own a well near a proposed or active production area, baseline water quality data taken before operations begin is worth having. See Texas Water Rights, Groundwater & Private Wells.

Surface land considerations

Wellfields, pipelines, access roads, processing or satellite facilities, restoration, reclamation and general surface disturbance are all land-use matters, and where the mineral estate has been severed from the surface they involve the relationship between mineral and surface owners.

Which agency does what

• Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. TCEQ licenses and regulates uranium recovery, including production area authorizations, associated injection wells and groundwater restoration requirements. Chapter 401 of the Health and Safety Code authorizes TCEQ to regulate the disposal of most radioactive substances in Texas, and Texas operates as an Agreement State under the Atomic Energy Act.
• Railroad Commission of Texas. The RRC has responsibilities relating to uranium exploration and to naturally occurring radioactive material.

Jurisdiction is worth confirming for your specific situation rather than assumed, because which agency holds the record determines where you look.

Researching a specific uranium project

South Texas has seen renewed uranium interest, including discussion of activity in counties such as Live Oak, Bee, Karnes and Duval. We do not publish a project list here, and the reason is a rule we apply generally: a news article can tell you where to look, but only an official record lets you state that a project is permitted or operating.

To check a specific project: identify the project name and operator, identify the county, identify the activity type (exploration or recovery), then locate the corresponding TCEQ licensing or production area authorization record, or the applicable Railroad Commission record. Cite that record. News reporting can then be useful as additional current context, clearly labelled as such.

Nuclear energy and agricultural land

This subject attracts strong claims in both directions, so it is worth being careful about what is actually established.

Land footprint

Nuclear generation can have a comparatively compact generating-site footprint relative to some other forms of utility-scale generation. That is a real point, and it is also easy to overstate.

A responsible comparison distinguishes the reactor and building footprint, the controlled site acreage, exclusion areas, associated infrastructure, transmission, water infrastructure and fuel-cycle activities. One site's fence line is not the same as the land involved across the whole fuel cycle, and any comparative land-use ratio depends entirely on which of those things the person quoting it decided to count.

We do not publish a comparative land-use multiplier, because such figures circulate widely without a stated metric, methodology or comparison basis.

Agricultural coexistence

Agricultural land can and does exist near nuclear facilities. That is a factual observation, not an endorsement. Nuclear development does not automatically "preserve farmland," and proximity to a nuclear plant is not inherently beneficial or harmful to a farming operation. What matters is the specific project, its footprint, its water use and its infrastructure.

Research worth knowing

Peer-reviewed research has examined relationships between nuclear plant proximity and agricultural outcomes, and academic work has also explored potential agricultural reuse of waste heat, for example in greenhouses or aquaculture.

Two cautions. A research finding of an observed relationship in a particular dataset and geography is not the same as a general rule, and a single study should never become the sentence "nuclear plants increase crop yields." And potential applications are not current practice: we are not aware of verified Texas facilities currently supplying agricultural waste heat, and we do not suggest otherwise.

Where we cite research on this page in future, we will identify the study, authors, publication, the geography and data limitations, and the distinction between a research result and settled policy fact.

Nuclear development watch: Texas

Current Developments, Continually Reviewed Last verified August 19, 2026.

Every entry below carries a status. Read it before drawing conclusions. A proposal is not an operating nuclear facility.

Texas A&M RELLIS Energy Proving Ground

Planning and development

The Texas A&M University System announced agreements at its RELLIS campus in Bryan and College Station with Aalo Atomics, Kairos Power, Natura Resources and Terrestrial Energy. The System has described the initiative as the Energy Proving Ground, and has said the proposed site could accommodate multiple advanced reactors with combined electrical output exceeding one gigawatt.

This involves potential NRC permitting and development work. It is properly characterized as development and planning, not completed nuclear generation.

Texas A&M University System announcement (opens in a new tab)

Natura Resources and the Permian Basin

Announced and in development

Natura Resources has announced plans involving its MSR-100 molten-salt reactor technology and the Permian Basin. A related partnership involving Texas Tech University, Abilene Christian University, Natura Resources and the Texas Produced Water Consortium is examining the use of advanced nuclear technology with produced-water desalination.

This matters here because it sits at the intersection of several subjects this site already covers: nuclear siting, oil and gas development, produced water, groundwater and water reuse, rural infrastructure, and agricultural regions. A commercial Permian Basin reactor is not operating.

Texas Tech University announcement (opens in a new tab)

Haskell County microreactor proposal

Proposed

Last Energy announced plans for a 200-acre project in Haskell County involving 30 microreactors of approximately 20 MWe each, potentially totaling roughly 600 MWe, intended to support electricity demand associated with Texas data centers.

This is a planned and proposed development. Thirty reactors have not been constructed or licensed. If official regulatory records later establish a different status, that status will control.

It is worth watching because it illustrates a pattern this site tracks closely: the growing relationship among data centers, private power generation, nuclear development, land acquisition, transmission, water and rural economic development.

Victoria gas-plus-nuclear project

Under development, pre-final-investment-decision

Blue Energy and GE Vernova Hitachi Nuclear Energy announced advancement into engineering design, licensing and safety analysis for a proposed approximately 2.5 GW gas-plus-nuclear project at Victoria, Texas. The planned configuration combines GE Vernova natural-gas generation with BWRX-300 small modular reactors.

The project remains subject to a final investment decision expected in 2027. The proposed reactors are not completed or licensed.

Pantex and the Texas Panhandle

Pantex is not a commercial nuclear power plant and should not be categorized as one.

The Pantex Plant, approximately 17 miles northeast of Amarillo in Carson County, is a U.S. Department of Energy nuclear weapons facility. According to the Texas Department of State Health Services, Pantex is America's nuclear weapons assembly and disassembly facility.

It belongs on a Texas landowner site for reasons that are about land as much as anything else:

• the surrounding area is primarily agricultural;
• the site encompasses approximately 16,000 acres;
• approximately 10,000 acres are owned by the U.S. Department of Energy;
• approximately 6,000 acres are leased from Texas Tech University;
• the leased acreage serves as a safety and security buffer;
• the facility handles uranium, plutonium, tritium and other hazardous materials.

The Texas Department of State Health Services Radiation Control Program maintains emergency-response planning for radiological emergencies at Pantex, and Texas conducts environmental monitoring around the facility. State response capabilities include emergency operations coordinators, health physicists, field monitoring, public information, medical-facility coordination and contamination-control assistance.

Pantex Nuclear Weapons Facility, Texas DSHS (opens in a new tab)

What this can mean for your land

A nuclear development proposed near private or agricultural property can involve questions well beyond the reactor footprint itself. None of these are automatic, and none of them apply to every project. They are the categories worth understanding early.

• Land. Purchase offers, leases, options, access agreements, easements, and neighboring industrial development. See eminent domain and property records.
• Water. Groundwater, surface water, water-supply agreements, produced-water treatment, discharge permitting and environmental characterization. See water rights, groundwater and private wells.
• Infrastructure. New transmission, substations, pipelines, roads, heavy-haul transportation and utility corridors.
• Regulatory proceedings. NRC licensing, environmental review, state permits, local governmental proceedings, public notices and public-comment opportunities.
• Emergency planning. Emergency planning zones where applicable, evacuation information, state and county emergency resources, and radiological monitoring.

Two things this page will not tell you. It will not tell you that you automatically have a right to stop a project, and it will not tell you that nuclear development automatically reduces property values. What legal rights are available depends on the property interest, the project, the permitting authority, the governmental entity involved and the specific facts. That is a question for a qualified Texas attorney, not a website.

Texas's existing nuclear footprint

• Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant: commercial nuclear electric generation, Somervell County.
• South Texas Project Electric Generating Station: commercial nuclear electric generation, Matagorda County.
• Pantex Plant: not an electric generating facility. Pantex is a U.S. Department of Energy / National Nuclear Security Administration site in the Texas Panhandle, the nation's nuclear weapons assembly and disassembly facility, surrounded largely by agricultural land. Environmental monitoring, emergency preparedness and the state's radiation-control role all apply there, but it does not generate power for the grid.

What is "advanced nuclear"?

The term covers a range of technologies: advanced reactors generally, small modular reactors (SMRs), microreactors, and designs cooled by molten salt, gas or sodium rather than conventional water cooling.

Just as important is what stage a project is at. These are not interchangeable:

• Research reactor: operated for research or isotope production, not grid power.
• Demonstration reactor: built to prove a design works.
• Commercial reactor: licensed to generate power commercially.
• Operating reactor: actually running today.

A proposed or research project is not an operating commercial plant, and an announcement is not a licence.

The Texas Advanced Nuclear Reactor Working Group

In 2023, Governor Greg Abbott directed the Public Utility Commission of Texas to establish a working group to study advanced nuclear reactors and recommend strategies to position Texas in that industry. The group's final report informed later legislation. Working group recommendations are not law unless the Legislature enacts them.

House Bill 14 (2025)

Enacted, Effective September 1, 2025

HB 14 passed the 89th Texas Legislature in 2025, authored by Representative Cody Harris and Senator Charles Schwertner, and was signed in June 2025. It established:

• the Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office (TANEO) within the Office of the Governor; and
• the Texas Advanced Nuclear Development Fund (TANDF), appropriated at $350 million.

Jarred Shaffer was named TANEO's first director in September 2025.

What TANEO does

By statute and per its own published description, TANEO provides strategic leadership for the advanced nuclear industry and associated supply chain in Texas; promotes development of advanced reactors for dispatchable generation; identifies barriers to the financial viability of nuclear energy; leverages higher education, industry and regulatory expertise to develop a strategic plan; acts as a permitting coordinator and single point of contact for developers navigating state and local permitting; and administers TANDF. TANEO is also tasked with studying whether the state should assume certain regulatory responsibilities currently held by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The $350 million Texas Advanced Nuclear Development Fund

TANDF operates through reimbursement-style programs. As described by TANEO:

• Project Development and Supply Chain Reimbursement Program: early-stage costs including technology development, university research, feasibility studies: site planning, NRC early site permit work, licensing fees and fuel processing. Individual awards reported as capped at the lesser of 50% of qualifying costs or $12.5 million.
• Advanced Nuclear Construction Reimbursement Program: costs associated with NRC review of construction permit or licence applications, long-lead component procurement, and construction activities.
• Completion Bonus Grant Program: intended to assist with costs of completing operational reactors interconnected with ERCOT, with PUCT coordinating on a per-megawatt basis. As of the most recent public reporting, this program had not been appropriated funding.

Eligible applicants include businesses, nonprofit organizations, governmental entities and higher education institutions. The first application round opened April 1, 2026.

Program terms, caps, deadlines and appropriations change. Verify current figures with TANEO. Last verified August 18, 2026.

Land, water and infrastructure

Advanced nuclear projects can require substantial land; water; roads and construction access; electric transmission; utility infrastructure; security infrastructure; industrial support facilities; and manufacturing and supply-chain facilities. HB 14 expressly contemplates whether projects have access to necessary resources including land, water and reliable infrastructure.

This is not only an energy-policy issue. It is a property, water, infrastructure and rural-development issue, and it is why this page sits inside Land, Water & Development rather than in a separate energy silo.

Where could nuclear projects be built?

TANEO may assist in identifying development opportunities and coordinating state permitting. We do not publish speculative locations as confirmed development. Use this status taxonomy when reading any project claim:

Concept Announced Research NRC Pre-Application Application Submitted Application Accepted Licensed Under Construction Operating Cancelled

Current advanced nuclear activity in Texas

Last verified: August 18, 2026. Status should be confirmed through NRC dockets and developer filings before relying on it.

• Dow / X-energy, Seadrift, Calhoun County. Four Xe-100 high-temperature gas-cooled reactors proposed at the UCC Seadrift Operations site, supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program. A construction permit application was submitted to the NRC in March 2025. Status: application submitted, not operating.
• Fermi America / Texas Tech University, near Pantex, Amarillo area. Four AP1000 units proposed; a combined licence application was submitted to the NRC in September 2025. Status: application submitted, not operating.
• Atomic Alchemy, Lockhart. An isotope test reactor project, DOE-backed. Status: development; NRC licensing process not formally begun as of recent reporting.
• Aalo Atomics, Austin. DOE-backed development. Status: development; NRC licensing process not formally begun as of recent reporting.

Texas research institutions are also active in reactor research, siting agreements and fuel-cycle research. Research and siting agreements are not construction.

Who regulates nuclear in Texas?

• U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC): federal reactor licensing and safety regulation.
• Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ): applicable environmental, water, uranium-recovery and radioactive-waste responsibilities.
• Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS): Radiation Control responsibilities within state and federal authorization.
• Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC): applicable uranium exploration and naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) responsibilities.
• Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Commission: applicable low-level radioactive waste compact responsibilities.
• TANEO: development coordination and state-level permitting assistance.

TANEO does not replace these regulatory agencies.

Uranium and Texas land

Texas has uranium resources and uranium activity, concentrated historically in South Texas. Two things landowners often conflate:

• Uranium exploration: locating and evaluating the resource, including drilling exploration holes.
• Uranium mining / recovery: actually producing uranium. In Texas this is predominantly in-situ recovery (ISR), which circulates a solution through the ore body to dissolve uranium and bring it to the surface through wells, rather than open-pit or underground mining.

Because ISR works through the groundwater system, the issues that matter most to landowners are groundwater related: production-area authorizations, groundwater monitoring, and restoration of groundwater after production. Surface impacts, mineral ownership and whether the mineral estate has been severed from the surface all matter as well.

The Railroad Commission and TCEQ each have roles here. See Texas Water Rights, Groundwater & Private Wells for the groundwater framework, and Land & Energy Research Tools for how to research a specific project.

SB 1061 (2025)

Enacted, 89th Legislature

SB 1061 passed the 89th Legislature and changed procedures involving amendments to uranium production-area authorizations and groundwater restoration values. It is relevant to uranium development, groundwater protection, restoration standards and regulatory procedure.

Supporters describe such changes as streamlining permitting; opponents raise groundwater-restoration concerns. We report that the Legislature enacted it and direct readers to the statute and the agencies for the operative requirements.

Water and nuclear development

Thermal power plants generally need water for cooling, and nuclear plants are no exception. But different designs have materially different water requirements: a large light-water reactor, a gas-cooled design and an air-cooled configuration are not comparable, and it is wrong to assume a single figure applies to "nuclear."

The questions worth asking about any specific project: what is the cooling method; what is the water source, groundwater or surface water; what water right or groundwater district authorization is involved; what is discharged and where; and how does drought affect it.

Related: Water rights & groundwater · 2027 State Water Plan · Data centers.

Nuclear waste

"Nuclear waste" is used loosely in public discussion to mean very different materials. The distinctions matter legally:

• Low-level radioactive waste: contaminated protective clothing, tools, filters, medical and industrial materials. Disposed under the compact framework.
• Spent nuclear fuel: used reactor fuel. Highly radioactive, currently stored at reactor sites in the absence of a permanent federal repository.
• High-level radioactive waste: a distinct statutory category associated primarily with reprocessing.
• NORM: naturally occurring radioactive material, which can appear in oil and gas operations and in some industrial processes.

Not all radioactive material is "nuclear waste," and not all nuclear waste is spent fuel.

Andrews County and interim spent-fuel storage

West Texas has been at the centre of a long dispute over proposed private consolidated interim storage of spent nuclear fuel, storing used fuel from reactors around the country at a site in the Permian Basin region pending a permanent federal solution.

The dispute has involved federal licensing by the NRC, opposition from the State of Texas, participation by landowners and local interests: concerns about transporting spent fuel by rail and road, environmental concerns, and concerns about proximity to oil and gas infrastructure. Political statements on both sides are not judicial findings.

NRC v. Texas, what the Supreme Court actually decided

Do not read the decision as "the Supreme Court ruled the Texas nuclear waste facility is legal." That badly oversimplifies it.

The Court addressed whether Texas and another challenger qualified as parties entitled to seek judicial review under the applicable federal review statute, that is, whether they were properly in court at all under the Hobbs Act framework, given that they had not been admitted as parties to the underlying NRC licensing proceeding.

The decision turned substantially on administrative procedure and party status. The Court did not finally resolve every underlying question about NRC authority over private off-site storage of spent nuclear fuel.

This is a legally important distinction: a ruling that a challenger cannot bring a particular challenge in a particular way is not a ruling that the challenged action is lawful on the merits.

Public participation

Texans can monitor NRC dockets and hearing opportunities: intervention deadlines, environmental review documents, TCEQ permit applications and notices, other Texas agency notices, public meetings, and project-specific notices.

Public records and TANEO

TANEO records are not uniformly public or uniformly confidential, it depends on the record.

• Permitting coordination. HB 14 requires documentation of certain permitting assistance, with provisions addressing public availability.
• Grant applications. Specified information submitted in TANDF applications receives statutory confidentiality protection.

We neither promise that every TANEO record is obtainable nor suggest that the office operates in secret. If you need a specific record, the statute's own terms and the Public Information Act process govern.

Data centers and nuclear development

Data centers can operate around the clock and require substantial, reliable electric capacity. That demand is one factor driving interest in new generation, grid planning, transmission, water infrastructure and land development.

Some advanced-nuclear developers and policymakers are evaluating nuclear generation as one possible source of reliable power for large industrial and data-center loads. That is not the same as saying every data center will use nuclear power, most will not, and the grid serves all loads collectively.

See Texas Data Centers & Rural Land and where Texas data centers are.

Tribal consultation and nuclear projects

Federal nuclear licensing, associated infrastructure, or other federally involved development can potentially trigger historic-preservation and tribal-consultation requirements: including Section 106 review, where a project may affect sacred sites, archeological resources, historic properties, traditional cultural properties or other Native American cultural resources.

A site does not have to be inside a current reservation for these issues to arise. Consultation does not guarantee approval, and it does not give any party a veto.

See Native American & Tribal Rights in Texas.

Emergency preparedness

Texas maintains emergency planning and radiation-monitoring roles around its nuclear facilities. Emergency preparedness information for Comanche Peak (opens in a new tab), the South Texas Project (PDF) (opens in a new tab) and Pantex is published through the Texas Department of State Health Services Radiation Control program, the operators, and county and state emergency management.

If you live near one of these facilities, the practical step is knowing your county's emergency alert system and evacuation information in advance.

Emergency preparedness resources

Emergency planning exists for facilities of many kinds, and its presence is not evidence of an active emergency. For landowners and rural families the practical value is knowing, in advance, which agency publishes what, and where agricultural questions get answered. The resources below are grouped by what each one is actually for.

Texas radiation control and emergency assistance

The Texas Department of State Health Services operates the state radiation control program, including a 24-hour radiological emergency assistance telephone number.

• DSHS 24-Hour Radiological Emergency Assistance (opens in a new tab)

Texas nuclear facility preparedness

DSHS publishes facility-specific state preparedness information covering matters such as environmental surveillance, emergency exercises: state response responsibilities, field monitoring, public information and contamination control. Facility operators publish their own separate preparedness material for people who live nearby.

• Comanche Peak (Somervell County). State information: DSHS Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (opens in a new tab). Operator information: Luminant Comanche Peak Emergency Preparedness (opens in a new tab).
• South Texas Project (Matagorda County). State information: DSHS South Texas Project Electric Generating Station (opens in a new tab). Emergency preparedness booklet: South Texas Project Emergency Preparedness (PDF) (opens in a new tab). Operator and facility information: Constellation Energy South Texas Project (opens in a new tab).

State emergency guidance and operator or facility information serve different purposes. Neither substitutes for the other.

Agricultural and rural radiological preparedness

Radiological emergency planning can also involve farms: ranches, livestock, crops, food processors, water sources and agricultural distribution. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension provides Texas-specific information to help agricultural producers and rural communities understand considerations that may arise during a radiological event.

• Texas A&M AgriLife Extension: Nuclear & Radiological Incidents & Attacks (opens in a new tab)
• Radiological Emergency Information for Farmers, Food Processors and Distributors in Texas (PDF) (opens in a new tab)
• Agricultural Information for Radiological Events at Nuclear Power Plants (PDF) (opens in a new tab)

Pantex and radiological transportation preparedness

DSHS publishes state monitoring, environmental protection, emergency preparedness and response information for the Pantex facility, which sits in a heavily agricultural part of the Texas Panhandle.

• DSHS Pantex Nuclear Weapons Facility (opens in a new tab)
• DSHS Waste Isolation Pilot Plant preparedness information (opens in a new tab). The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant is located in New Mexico, not Texas. DSHS maintains Texas preparedness information because radioactive material is transported through Texas, so this is a transportation-preparedness resource rather than a Texas nuclear facility.

Additional educational resources

The University of Texas Environmental Health and Safety office publishes Radiation Emergency Information (opens in a new tab), which is primarily laboratory and campus radiation safety material. It is included as supplementary reading and is not a substitute for state or federal emergency guidance.

December 1, 2026, a review checkpoint

TANEO has indicated a report on its strategic plan is expected no later than December 1, 2026. Combined with HB 14's planning and reporting obligations, that makes late 2026 a meaningful review point for Texas nuclear policy.

We make no prediction about what those reports will say. We will review this page when they are published.

Sources & references

Primary / official. The Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office publishes its statutory mission, permitting-coordination role, TANDF program structure and strategic-plan timeline; its FAQ confirms HB 14's passage in the 89th Legislature, its authors, TANEO's creation within the Office of the Governor, the $350 million appropriation, and the 2023 PUCT working group that preceded it. HB 14 text and history are on Texas Legislature Online.

Agency roles: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission · TCEQ · DSHS Radiation Control · Railroad Commission of Texas · Public Utility Commission of Texas · U.S. Department of Energy.

Context. Project status and TANDF program details above draw on reporting including the American Nuclear Society's coverage of the funding round and Utility Dive, which describe the reimbursement programs, application timeline and the Seadrift and Amarillo-area projects. Project status should be confirmed against NRC dockets and developer filings.

A note on sources. The Texas Nuclear Alliance is a nuclear-industry advocacy organization and environmental organizations are advocacy organizations; both may be cited for their own stated positions, but neither is used here as neutral legal or scientific authority. Political campaign material is not used as a factual source for this page.

Statutes, agency roles, program terms, project status and litigation all change. Where this page and an official source differ, the official source controls. Reviewed August 18, 2026.

Related resources

Tribal Rights

Native American & Tribal Rights in Texas

Development

Texas Data Centers & Rural Land

Water

Water Rights, Groundwater & Private Wells