Can AERB power India’s nuclear ambition?

The Board must sharpen expertise and build a safety culture, tuning oversight to the realities of a new nuclear era

One major step in reaching India’s goal of net-zero emissions by 2070 is to build 100 gigawatts of nuclear power capacity by 2047. The recently passed SHANTI Act (2025), while opening the nuclear sector to private companies, has granted statutory powers to the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB). So far, the AERB has depended extensively on the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) for many of its functions, particularly for the supply of human resources. Now that the AERB has statutory independence, it must demonstrate functional independence.

The National Institute of Advanced Studies (NIAS) reports that achieving the stated goal of nuclear power output requires the judicious deployment of both conventional large nuclear power plants (700-1,200 MWe) in a few sites and small modular reactors (SMRs, 55-300 MWe) in 20 to 30 sites, spread across the country, mostly owned and operated by private companies. SMRs can be located at brownfield sites for repurposing retiring fossil fuel plants and as captive power plants in energy-intensive industries. The ability of private parties to secure large financial resources and their culture of time-bound implementation are often cited as the main arguments for their entry into the nuclear sector. Given that they are dipping their toes into a high-risk sector that demands a safety culture resistant to commercial incentives to cut corners, the question remains whether they will meet public expectations.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) defines safety culture as the core value and behaviour, resulting from a collective commitment by leaders and individuals to emphasise safety over competing goals to ensure protection of people and the environment. The DAE has, over the years, assiduously nurtured this culture among its units; clearly, it will take some time before the new market entrants imbibe it in their domain. Regulatory authorities in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan have resident inspectors in their nuclear power plants providing daily oversight and ensuring compliance with national safety regulations. The AERB currently does not appoint resident inspectors but conducts periodic inspections of the plants. In view of multiple plants likely to come up in different parts of the country, the AERB will have to appoint resident inspectors to ensure total compliance with the regulations.

Its first task will be to formulate the code requirements for SMRs. These reactors come with the claim that their passive safety features eliminate the need for emergency intervention in the public domain and that the current no-population zone of 1 km can be reduced to 500 metres. The new code will have to redefine these stipulations. There are myriad SMR designs in the international market, most of which have no operational grounding. The AERB may have to come out with safety codes and guidelines for generic SMRs without waiting for the application for a specific SMR proposal.

Currently, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), after receiving a site allotted to it by the DAE, seeks from the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) the environmental clearance and from the AERB the consent for the plant. The MoEFCC guidance manual for preparing the Environmental Impact Assessment report is based on practices envisioned for larger plants and needs a revision for SMRs, in particular, on the extent of the environmental monitoring zone.

Upgrading competence

The manual requires pre-operational radioactivity measurements of the environmental matrices—such as water, soil, milk, and agricultural products—up to a distance of 30 km around the site. One of the AERB’s siting requirements is to establish an environmental survey laboratory before construction begins. This laboratory can provide the required pre-operational radiological data of the environment. As radiological safety is the AERB’s mandate, it is recommended that the MoEFCC does not seek pre-operational radiological data at the time of application for approval.

Radiation protection regulations require periodic monitoring of radiation workers, including external and internal dose monitoring. The AERB has to formulate policies and procedures to grant accreditation to such state-of-the-art radiation dosimetry laboratories with highly skilled scientists. Apart from nuclear and radiation safety, industrial safety and hygiene will also come under the AERB’s purview as per the new Act. This implies
the AERB must enhance its industrial safety section to meet the additional mandate.

The SHANTI Act prescribes financial penalties for four categories – ranging from minor to severe – for breaches and violations of the Act. Categorising regulatory violations and assigning penalties are challenging tasks, considering the wide spectrum of licensees, which includes industrial radiographers, X-ray diagnostic facilities, radiation therapy centres, and nuclear power plant operators. This new provision will also result in several litigation cases, thus warranting the setup of a professional legal cell at the AERB.

Clearly, there is a dire need to augment the AERB’s technical competence and staff strength to eliminate regulatory delays. In a technology as unforgiving as nuclear power, the regulatory body should not suffer the familiar malady of staff shortage in government departments. It is worth noting that India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) faces significant staff shortages. The AERB should leverage the enabling provisions of the SHANTI Act and lose no time in making a shift in its organisational structure towards reaching the 100-GWe target within the next two decades.

(The writer is a former director [Radiological Safety], Atomic Energy Regulatory Board)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.