India’s ambition to scale its nuclear energy capacity from 8 GW to 100 GW by 2047, as part of its clean energy goals, has sparked debate over amending the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act (CLNDA), 2010, and the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), 1962. Announced in the 2025-26 Union Budget by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, these amendments aim to allow private companies to build and operate nuclear facilities, particularly Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), with a ₹20,000 crore allocation for R&D. The move, intended to attract foreign investment, has divided experts, a parley featuring Ashley Tellis and D. Raghunandan.
In This Article:
The Case for Amendment
Proponents argue that the CLNDA’s strict liability clause, which holds suppliers accountable for accidents alongside operators, deters foreign firms like General Electric and Westinghouse. Unlike international norms under the Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC), which channel liability solely to operators, India’s law imposes unlimited supplier liability, stalling projects like Jaitapur (France) and Kovvada (US). Tellis emphasizes that without amendments, foreign participation—crucial for technology transfer and capacity expansion—is unlikely. Reuters (April 19, 2025) reports a draft law capping supplier liability at contract value, aligning with global standards to boost investment. Indian conglomerates like Reliance and Adani are also keen, with potential $5.14 billion investments each.
Concerns Over Safety and Sovereignty
Critics, including Raghunandan, argue that amending the CLNDA risks diluting accountability, echoing the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy’s legacy, which shaped India’s strict liability framework. The Hindu (February 13, 2025) notes public and opposition fears that indemnifying suppliers could undermine safety, especially for untested SMRs. Anil Kakodkar, former Atomic Energy Commission chairman, warned against “knee-jerk amendments,” stressing uranium supply challenges and the need for an independent regulator, as the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) is too tied to the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE). Skeptics also question whether foreign firms will share advanced SMR technology, citing past failures in defense FDI despite relaxed rules.
Balancing Growth and Accountability
The proposed amendments, discussed by committees with DAE, AERB, NITI Aayog, and others, aim to enable public-private partnerships and ease FDI restrictions, currently barring private control of nuclear plants.. However, Shyam Saran, former Foreign Secretary, insists on consulting international partners to balance safety and investment. Critics argue that India’s indigenous 220 MW PHWR-based SMRs could suffice without compromising liability standards. The debate hinges on aligning with global norms while safeguarding public safety and strategic autonomy.
A Critical Juncture
Amending India’s nuclear laws could unlock stalled projects and bolster energy security, but risks diluting post-Bhopal accountability. With Modi’s US and France visits in February 2025 emphasizing nuclear cooperation, the amendments’ structure will be pivotal. As fans debate on X.
-By Manoj H
