The regulator enters your facility. Learn about nuclear oversight mechanisms, sanctions, and rules of liability for damage.

Many entrepreneurs entering the nuclear sector are surprised by the scope of the regulator’s powers over suppliers and subcontractors. Polish law is unambiguous and uncompromising on this matter.

Nuclear oversight authorities have the right to inspect you directly

Nuclear law explicitly vests the regulator with the right to inspect not only the licensee but the entire supply chain. Nuclear oversight authorities may inspect contractors and suppliers of systems, structural components, and equipment for a nuclear facility, as well as contractors who perform construction, outfitting, commissioning, operation and decommissioning works related to a nuclear facility, with respect to systems, components, and works critical for nuclear safety, radiation protection, and the safe operation of equipment.

It is not only the oversight authorities that may conduct such inspections. Several other administrative bodies may carry out the aforementioned inspections within the scope of their respective powers (e.g. the Office of Technical Inspection, the Head of the Internal Security Agency, the Chief Labor Inspector, etc.).

The inspection involves examining selected systems, structural elements, and equipment at a nuclear facility – both the complete ones and those currently under construction – as well as monitoring works at the nuclear facility as they are being carried out.

Thus, the nuclear oversight authority has the right to enter a component manufacturer’s facility and inspect the product while it is still being manufactured. This also applies to facilities located abroad, to the extent permitted by law. Such approach (known in the industry as “source inspection”) is standard in nuclear projects, but its legal basis in Polish law may come as a surprise to suppliers with no prior experience in the nuclear sector.

Inspection access clause – a mandatory element of every contract

Contracts with contractors and suppliers must provide for the ability of nuclear oversight authorities to conduct inspections. The provision requires that the licensee incorporates appropriate clauses into every supply chain contract concerning components or works critical for safety. The absence of such a clause would directly violate the nuclear law. The clause is a prerequisite for every procurement contract and EPC (Engineering, Procurement, and Construction) agreement.

“Stop work” and prohibition on the use of a component – risk of halting the entire construction project

If an inspection finds that a specific system or component of the structure or equipment of a nuclear facility may adversely affect nuclear safety and radiation protection, the President of the Agency prohibits the organizational unit from using that system or component in the nuclear facility.

Similarly, if an inspection finds that specific works at a nuclear facility are carried out in a manner that could adversely affect nuclear safety and radiation protection, the President of the Agency orders the suspension of such works. The prohibition and order are directed at the licensee and not directly at the supplier. It is the licensee who bears the legal and economic risk of the administrative decision, even if it resulted from the supplier’s action or negligence.

The costs of opinions issued during an inspection are borne by the organizational unit carrying out activities related to the construction or operation of a nuclear facility. Unless the licensee transfers the costs to the suppliers through appropriate contractual clauses (e.g. indemnification, back-to-back liability), suppliers do not bear these costs directly to the regulator.

Civil liability for nuclear damage – channelling model

Nuclear law adopts the classic channelling model of civil liability, as established by the Vienna Convention (1963) and the Paris Convention (1960). This means that the operator (the entity operating a nuclear facility) bears exclusive liability for nuclear damage caused by a nuclear accident at or in connection with a nuclear facility unless the damage resulted directly from acts of war or armed conflict.

The concept of “nuclear damage” within the framework of civil liability is extremely broad. It covers personal injury, property damage, as well as damage to the environment as a common good, that is, the costs of measures taken to restore the natural environment to its pre-damage state.

Compensation for nuclear damage is governed by the regulations of the Civil Code, subject to the exceptions provided for in the Act. A key exception is the channelling model itself. As a rule, the injured party may not direct claims directly to a subcontractor or supplier. The nuclear law denies that opportunity, while protecting the interests of the injured parties by concentrating liability in a single, insured entity. The operator is required to enter into a civil liability insurance contract for nuclear damage caused. A million-dollar question is which Polish insurance company will be willing or required (e.g. due to a statutory mandate) to enter into such an insurance contract. Under the nuclear law, an insurance company may not contractually limit the payment of compensation.

Limit of liability and right of recourse

The limit of the operator’s liability for nuclear damage is a PLN equivalent of SDR (Special Drawing Rights – the International Monetary Fund’s unit of account) 300 million. As of March 2026, SDR 1 equals approximately PLN 5.027. The sum is huge.

Importantly, from the suppliers’ perspective, the licensee retains the right of recourse.

It is worth noting that the previous version of the nuclear law of 1986 explicitly stated that the operator of a nuclear facility is entitled to a right of recourse against the party that caused nuclear damage if such damage resulted from that party’s wilful misconduct. The former recourse mechanism thus limited the liability of suppliers/subcontractors in typical (non-intentional) cases, but a supplier/subcontractor acting with intent did not benefit from this protection.

Administrative and criminal sanctions

Administrative liability for violations of nuclear safety regulations stems from both the nuclear law and the Special Nuclear Act. The amount of a fine (e.g. 5-fold, 50-fold, 200-fold the average salary) is imposed on the head of an organizational unit (e.g. a management board, a receiver, an administrator) and depends on the nature of the organizational unit and its activities.

A monetary penalty may also be imposed on the company itself that conducts activities connected with a possible threat, such as the construction, commissioning, operation, or decommissioning of a nuclear power plant – in an amount of up to 500-fold the average salary.

The Special Act provides for a separate regime of sanctions for violations of obligations at the construction site. Any person who, being obligated to do so, fails to fulfil the obligation imposed on them to collect and store data regarding contractors and employees at the construction site is subject to a fine. The same penalty applies to a person who, contrary to the obligation imposed on them, has allowed unauthorized persons to enter the construction site of a nuclear power facility.

***

This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Any business and legal decisions regarding participation in nuclear projects should be preceded by obtaining a specialist legal opinion that accounts for the individual situation of the entity.

Our law office is ready to provide you with legal assistance regarding participation in the nuclear power plant project in Poland, both at the stage of analysis of possibilities to enter the supply chain as well as at the stage of negotiations and drafting agreements with a general investor or further subcontractors.