Thawing India's 'nuclear winter': Holtec nod should spur govt to tweak laws

Eighteen years after India and the United States inked the signature Indo-US Civil Nuclear Agreement, the country finally saw a breakthrough. On March 26, the US Department of Energy granted Holtec International regulatory approval for the transfer of small modular reactor (SMR) technology to India. This approval permits Holtec, founded by Indian-American Kris P Singh, to share unclassified SMR technology — for nuclear reactors of between 30 Mw and 300 Mw — with three Indian entities, Holtec Asia (its regional subsidiary), Tata Consulting Engineers, and Larsen & Toubro. This approval signifies important progress on an agreement that was gratuitously stalled by a restrictive clause in the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act (CLNDA). It opens up new avenues for nuclear collaboration with the private sector. Given the target set by Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in her February Budget speech, of adding 100 Gw of nuclear energy by 2047 as part of a ₹20,000 crore Nuclear Energy Mission, this approval also offers the government a unique window of opportunity to accelerate India’s energy transition by tweaking its laws sooner rather than later.

 

The approval for Holtec’s collaboration, under the “10 CFR Part 810” export-control regulation of the US Atomic Energy Act, has been hedged by conditions that rule out collaboration with state-owned entities Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL), NTPC, and the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB). Among other things, the transferred information cannot be shared with any third party, including other Indian or foreign countries, without prior US consent. But India has not yet provided non-proliferation assurances for the three state-owned entities, all of which have considerable experience in SMR technology. The majority of the 22 operational indigenously built nuclear reactors have a capacity rating of 220 Mw. India also has experience in building an 85 Mw (e) reactor for its nuclear submarine. Offering this assurance would help build on readymade indigenous capabilities.

 

Beyond this, India also urgently needs to amend the Atomic Energy Act and the CLNDA, something that the finance minister referred to in her 2025-26 Budget speech. Amending the first law would end NPCIL’s official monopoly of nuclear power generation, opening the door for private participation. No less critical is an amendment to Clause 17 (b) of the CLNDA. The concept of the CLNDA was originally linked to a post-Chernobyl International Supplementary Civil Nuclear Liability Convention, which created a funding pool from member-country contributions to top up, in a timely manner, the relief distributed by states in the event of a nuclear accident. Accessing this fund required enabling legislation that would make the operator bear legal liability for the damage and also responsible for the distribution of relief.

 

The Indian legislation, however, added Clause 17(b), which imposed liabilities on suppliers as well as operators in the event of a nuclear accident. This was done on erroneous interpretations of the consequences of the Bhopal gas tragedy and of the clauses in the international convention concerning the financial liability of the operator of a nuclear-power plant. This provision has deterred foreign nuclear vendors such as GE-Hitachi, Westinghouse, and France’s Areva, from investing in India’s nuclear sector. With a commanding majority in Parliament, the government has the scope to facilitate these critical reforms. Doing so is vital not only for easing the flow of nuclear technology, but also for meeting climate-change imperatives.