Muswellbrook would be taken off a list of preferred sites to host a nuclear power station if the risk of earthquakes made it unsafe, the Coalition has conceded.
It came as Coalition Leader Peter Dutton argued that nuclear power could be a companion to renewables rather than a competitor.
The former Liddell power station site has been earmarked as one of seven sites across Australia that the Coalition wants to investigate for their suitability to host a nuclear reactor.
But questions have been raised about whether the region should be on the list of potential nuclear sites after a series of earthquakes rocked the Upper Hunter and beyond last month, with the latest quake recorded just this week on Monday September 23.
Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy, Ted O'Brien said on Monday that nuclear facilities were engineered to ensure earthquakes and other major events don't pose any safety risk to people or the environment.
"International experience shows that nuclear plants, even in areas far more seismic than Australia, are designed and operated safely," he said.
"The notion that seismic activity automatically disqualifies a region from hosting a nuclear power plant is outdated.
"Each site will undergo a comprehensive site characterisation study, including detailed safety and technical assessments led by an independent Nuclear Energy Coordinating Authority. If a location is found to be technically unsuitable to host a nuclear power plant, it will be removed from consideration.
In a major speech on Monday to the Committee for Economic Development of Australia, Peter Dutton laid out his case for why nuclear power should be part of the country's energy mix.
He said Australia had been resistant to the idea of nuclear energy for too long and needed to embrace it.
"The coalition, like other countries, sees renewables and nuclear as companions, not competitors."
In addition to Muswellbrook, reactors would also be built at Lithgow, the Latrobe Valley in Victoria, Port Augusta in South Australia, Collie in Western Australia and Callide and Tarong in Queensland.
The first reactor would be built within 10 to 12 years, with the remainder to be operational from the 2040s, if the coalition wins government next year.
However, Mr Dutton did not disclose how much the proposal would cost taxpayers.
"Yes, our nuclear plan does have a significant upfront cost, but a whole new and vast transmission network and infrastructure won't be needed," he said.
"We will release our costings in due course, at a time of our choosing."
The Liddell site, which has strategic access to large volumes of water and a high voltage gird connection, is considered critical to the Coalition's plans.
Mr Dutton said in July that was hopeful energy giant AGL would reverse its anti-nuclear stance and will work with a future Coalition government to allow nuclear energy to be generated at the former Liddell coal-fired power station site.
But if the company refuses, Mr Dutton confirmed the government would move to seize the land in the national interest.
"I'm very confident we can (reach an agreement) because I think common sense prevails in the end," he said.
