What's new

India's Nuclear Agreement

While 120 Democrats voted for the Bill, 107 Democrats voted against. Of the Republicans, 178 voted for and 10 voted against.

The deal still faces major obstacles in the Senate. :frown:
The deal was already approved by the Senate two days ago, what obstacles are we talking about? :confused:
 
.
The deal was already approved by the Senate two days ago, what obstacles are we talking about? :confused:
Deal was not approved but cleared by the foreign relation committee of the senate for the VOTE. and I dont think there is any obstacle remain for the deal It should be clear before the end of the september.
 
.
In July 2005, President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced the outlines of a groundbreaking agreement that would bring India out of its nuclear isolation, enhance its participation in the global nonproliferation effort, and cement the emerging partnership between the world's two largest democracies. After a three-year ride punctuated by great controversy in both Delhi and Washington, the IAEA and the NSG have now signed off on implementing this agreement, and the Bush administration has submitted to Congress the materials required for the final approval of the U.S.-India bilateral cooperation agreement.

There are three main arguments for the agreement: the geostrategic significance of our emerging relationship with India; India's massive future energy needs; and India's excellent record in safeguarding nuclear technology, which offers the hope of bringing India fully into global nonproliferation efforts.

Strategic significance of India: With its growing economy and powerful military position, India has become a global partner for the United States and is shaping the future of Asia. Indian and U.S. interests converge on issues vital to us. India has taken a strong stand against international terrorism. It is one of the largest economic contributors to reconstruction in Afghanistan. It is the primary resident naval force in the Indian Ocean, and works with us to maintain the security of the sea lanes through which most of the world's oil trade travels. With increasingly vibrant relations with Japan and Southeast Asia, and a pattern of engagement and rivalry with China, India will be one of the major forces shaping the future of Asia, a region that is pivotal for U.S. security.

These common interests provide a solid foundation for a long-term partnership based on both democratic values and geopolitical interests. But despite the tremendous gains in U.S.-India relations in the past two decades, our inability to work even with the safeguarded civilian parts of India's nuclear program have impeded the kind of cooperation we would like. This agreement has transformed the landscape, opening the possibility of a real collaboration in shaping a global and regional balance of power that protects both U.S. and Indian interests.

Energy and the environment: India's energy demand is expected to grow 4.6 percent per year for the next two decades. The whole world has an interest in helping India deal with this relentless expansion. Nuclear energy currently supplies only about 3 percent of India's overall power supply. But with an economy growing at 7 percent to 9 percent per year, every potential source of power is crucial. India has ambitious plans to expand civil nuclear power. Every nuclear power plant it introduces will take some pressure off the financial and environmental costs of conventional generation. We need this agreement, for our sake and for the sake of the planet.

India's nonproliferation record: This agreement represents a major change in decades of nonproliferation policy. India's steadfast refusal to transfer nuclear technology to others is what makes this possible.

The most dangerous proliferation challenges we now face come from the countries that are seeking to overturn the global order, such as North Korea and Iran, both of whom were NPT signatories. As we confront these challenges, we need India's active help. But we cannot expect to get it if the nuclear system still keeps India in isolation. Eligibility for civilian nuclear cooperation, in other words, is an essential first step toward bringing India fully into the global effort to prevent onward transmission of nuclear weapons and related know-how. As part of the deliberations in the NSG, India signaled its intention to make good on this hope. Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee made a formal statement on Sept. 5 reiterating India's commitment to a voluntary, unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing. He pledged to strengthen the international nonproliferation regime, and undertook to work toward a multilateral Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. Implementing this agreement will give new energy to these critical efforts.

In reality, the critical decisions have already been taken. When it passed the Hyde Act in December 2006, Congress put its stamp on this change in course. By aligning its export controls with the NSG's norms, India began joining the world's nonproliferation system. The bilateral cooperation agreement negotiated last year with the United States and the safeguards agreement just concluded with the IAEA set forth the ground rules. Finally, in the waiver it issued in early September, the NSG made space for India in its vital work. The NSG decision also freed India to carry out civilian nuclear commerce with NSG members. It is only U.S. suppliers who need the legislation now before the Congress in order to participate.

There is plenty of work ahead — especially in making the potential nonproliferation benefits real. But we are likely to look back on this as the time when we put in place the new U.S. strategic posture in Asia.

• Teresita C. Schaffer, director of the South Asia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is a retired U.S. diplomat with long experience in South Asia.

Washington Times - SCHAFFER: Dealing with India's nuclear weapons ambitions
 
.
PM arrives in France, civil nuclear co-operation on agenda
Zee News - PM Manmohan Singh arrives in France
Marseilles, Sept 28: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh arrived in France on Sunday afternoon, after concluding his visit to the United States. Upon landing in the resort town of Marseilles, Dr Singh said that he will discuss civil nuclear co-operation during his meeting with French President Nicolas Sarkozy. He also expressed confidence that an agreement in this regard may be signed during the visit.

The Prime Minister will also take part in the ninth India-EU summit in the French Riviera tomorrow.

Meanwhile, expressing happiness at the approval of the Indo-US nuclear deal by the US House of Representatives on Saturday, Dr Singh said that one more hurdle has been crossed in implementing the 123 Agreement.

He, however, cautioned that one should not get ahead of the Congressional process and wait for the final outcome as the deal has yet to get the approval of the Senate.

Reports said that India still has concerns regarding some of the language in Senate and House Bills on the nuclear deal. However, Washington has assured New Delhi that all such concerns will be addressed by President George W Bush when he makes a statement once the deal is approved by the Senate.

Commenting on the recent string of blasts in Delhi, including the one that took place in Mehrauli yesterday killing three persons and injuring 25, the Prime Minister said that the incidents prove that there was a need to strengthen intelligence gathering and prosecution process.

“We can’t afford to give up the war against terror. We have to fight it resolutely,” Dr Singh announced.

National Security Advisor MK Narayanan is reported to have spent a day with US Homeland Security to look for ideas on tackling terrorism.

Indian decided to observe the way US was fighting terror as there has been no major strike in America since the 9/11 attack.
 
.
France will launch n-coop with India: SarkozyFrance will launch n-coop with India: Sarkozy - Express India
September 28: Even as the Indo-US nuclear deal is making its passage in the US Congress, French President Nicolas Sarkozy made clear his country's intention to forge ahead with the civil nuclear cooperation with India which will be sealed in an agreement he is signing with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Paris on Tuesday.
France, the world's leading country in nuclear power which produces 80 per cent of electricity from atomic energy, is ready to offer its latest EPR technology to India under the agreement.

In an e-mail interview to PTI ahead of his talks with Singh, Sarkozy said the prospects of cooperation between France and India in the civil nuclear field are ‘very promising’ considering his country's expertise, long tradition of cooperation with New Delhi and an atmosphere of trust.

"This visit holds a special meaning for me... We will launch our civil nuclear cooperation which will become a cornerstone of our partnership," the French President said while talking about the agenda of his bilateral meeting with the Prime Minister in Paris on Tuesday.

India and France initialed the Framework Agreement for Civil Nuclear Cooperation in January but could not sign it pending a waiver from the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group.

With the NSG giving its nod, the two leaders will sign the agreement during Singh's visit to Paris.

Prior to their bilateral talks, the two leaders will meet tomorrow in Marseille for India-EU Summit as France is the current chair of the 27-nation European body
 
.
Nuclear Power in India : WNA

Nuclear Power in India

(September 2008)

India has a flourishing and largely indigenous nuclear power program and expects to have 20,000 MWe nuclear capacity on line by 2020. It aims to supply 25% of electricity from nuclear power by 2050.

Because India is outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, due to its weapons program, it has been for 34 years largely excluded from trade in nuclear plant or materials, which has hampered its development of civil nuclear energy.

Due to these trade bans and lack of indigenous uranium, India has uniquely been developing a nuclear fuel cycle to exploit its reserves of thorium.


Electricity demand in India has been increasing rapidly, and the 534 billion kilowatt hours produced in 2002 was almost double the 1990 output, though still represented only 505 kWh per capita for the year. In 2005, 699 billion kWh gross was produced, but with huge transmission losses this resulted in less than 500 billion kWh consumption. The per capita figure is expected to almost triple by 2020, with 6.3% annual growth. Coal provides 69% of the electricity at present, but reserves are limited.

Nuclear power supplied 15.8 billion kWh (2.5%) of India's electricity in 2007 from 3.7 GWe (of 110 GWe total) capacity and this will increase steadily as imported uranium becomes available and new plants come on line. India's fuel situation, with shortage of fossil fuels, is driving the nuclear investment for electricity, and 25% nuclear contribution is foreseen by 2050, from one hundred times the 2002 capacity. Almost as much investment in the grid system as in power plants is necessary.

In 2006 almost US$ 9 billion was committed for power projects, including 9354 MWe of new generating capacity, taking forward projects to 43.6 GWe and US$ 51 billion.

A KPMG report in 2007 said that India needed to spend US$ 120-150 billion on power infrastructure over the next five years, including transmission and distribution. It said that distribution losses are currently some 30-40%, worth more than $6 billion per year.

The target since about 2004 has been for nuclear power is to provide 20,000 MWe by 2020, but in 2007 the prime Minister referred to this as "modest" and capable of being "doubled with the opening up of international cooperation." However, it is evident that on the basis of indigenous fuel supply only, the 20,000 MWe target is not attainable, or at least not sustainable without uranium imports.

Nuclear power industry development

Nuclear power for civil use is well established in India. Its civil nuclear strategy has been directed towards complete independence in the nuclear fuel cycle, necessary because it is excluded from the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) due to it acquiring nuclear weapons capability after 1970. (Those five countries doing so before 1970 were accorded the status of Nuclear Weapons States under the NPT.)

As a result, India's nuclear power program has proceeded largely without fuel or technological assistance from other countries (but see later section). Its power reactors to the mid 1990s had some of the world's lowest capacity factors, reflecting the technical difficulties of the country's isolation, but rose impressively from 60% in 1995 to 85% in 2001-02.

India's nuclear energy self-sufficiency extended from uranium exploration and mining through fuel fabrication, heavy water production, reactor design and construction, to reprocessing and waste management. It has a small fast breeder reactor and is building a much larger one. It is also developing technology to utilise its abundant resources of thorium as a nuclear fuel.

The Atomic Energy Establishment was set up at Trombay, near Mumbai, in 1957 and renamed as Bhaba Atomic Research Centre (BARC) ten years later. Plans for building the first Pressurised Heavy Water Reactor (PHWR) were finalised in 1964, and this prototype - Rawatbhata-1, which had Canada's Douglas Point reactor as a reference unit, was built as a collaborative venture between Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd and NPCIL. It started up in 1972 and was duplicated Subsequent indigenous PHWR development has been based on these units.

The Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) is responsible for design, construction, commissioning and operation of thermal nuclear power plants.

It has 15 small and two mid-sized nuclear power reactors in commercial operation, six under construction - including two large ones and a fast breeder reactor, and more planned.

India's operating nuclear power reactors:

Reactor Type MWe net, each Commercial operation Safeguards status
Tarapur 1 & 2 BWR 150 1969 item-specific

Kaiga 1 & 2 PHWR 202 1999-2000

Kaiga 3 PHWR 202 2007

Kakrapar 1 & 2 PHWR 202 1993-95 by 2012 under new agreement

Kalpakkam 1 & 2PHWR 202 1984-86
(MAPS)

Narora 1 & 2 PHWR 202 1991-92 by 2014 under new agreement

Rawatbhata 1 PHWR 90 1973 item-specific

Rawatbhata 2 PHWR 187 1981 item-specific

Rawatbhata PHWR 202 1999-2000 by 2010 under new agreement
3 & 4

Tarapur 3 & 4 PHWR 490 2006, 05
Total (17) 3779 MWe

Kalpakkam also known as Madras/MAPS
Rawatbhata also known as Rajasthan/RAPS
Kakrapar = KAPS, Narora = NAPS
dates are for start of commercial operation.


The two Tarapur 150 MWe Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs) built by GE on a turnkey contract before the advent of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty were originally 200 MWe. They were derated due to recurrent problems but have run well since. They have been using imported enriched uranium and are under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. However, late in 2004 Russia deferred to the Nuclear Suppliers' Group and declined to supply further uranium for them. They underwent six months refurbishment over 2005-06, and in March 2006 Russia agreed to resume fuel supply.

The two small Canadian (Candu) PHWRs at Rawatbhata started up in 1972 & 1980, and are also under safeguards. Rawatbhata-1 was down-rated early in its life and has operated very little since 2002 due to ongoing problems and has been shut down since 2004 as the government considers its future.

The 220 MWe PHWRs (202 MWe net) were indigenously designed and constructed by NPCIL, based on a Canadian design.

The Kalpakkam (MAPS) reactors were refurbished in 2002-03 and 2004-05 and their capacity restored to 220 MWe gross (from 170). Much of the core of each reactor was replaced, and the lifespans extended to 2033/36.

More recent reactor developments

The new series of 540 MWe (gross, 490 MWe net) nuclear reactors are developed indigenously from the 220 MWe (gross) model PHWR. The Tarapur 3&4 units were built by NPCIL.

The first - Tarapur 4 - started up in March 2005, was connected to the grid in June and started commercial operation in September. Tarapur-4's criticality came five years after pouring first concrete and seven months ahead of schedule. Its twin - unit 3 - was about a year behind it and criticality was achieved in May 2006, with grid connection in June and commercial operation in August, five months ahead of schedule.

Russia is supplying the country's first large nuclear power plant, comprising two VVER-1000 (V-392) reactors, under a Russian-financed US$ 3 billion contract. The AES-92 units at Kudankulam are being built by NPCIL and will be commissioned and operated by NPCIL under IAEA safeguards. Unlike other Atomstroyexport projects such as in Iran there have been only about 80 Russian supervisory staff on the job. Russia will supply all the enriched fuel, though India will reprocess it and keep the plutonium. The first unit is due start supplying power in March 2008 and go into commercial operation late in 2008, after some delay. The second unit is about nine months behind it.

Under plans for the India-specific safeguards to be administered by the IAEA in relation to the civil-military separation plan, eight further reactors will be safeguarded (beyond Tarapur 1&2, Rawatbhata 1&2, and Kudankulam 1&2): Rawatbhata 3&4 by 2010, Rawatbhata 5&6 by 2008, Kakrapar 1&2 by 2012 and Narora 1&2 by 2014.

India's nuclear power reactors under construction:

Reactor Type MWe net, each Project control Commercial operation Safeguards status
Kaiga 4 PHWR 202 MWe NPCIL end of 2008

Rawatbhata PHWR 202 MWe NPCIL end of 2008, 3/09 by 2008 under new agreement
5 & 6

Kudankulam PWR (VVER) 950 MWe NPCIL 9/2009, 12/09 item-specific
1 & 2

Kalpakkam FBR 470 MWe Bhavini 2010 unlikely
PFBR 2976 MWe
Total (6)

Rawatbhata also known as Rajasthan/RAPS
dates are for start of commercial operation.


Kaiga 3 started up in February, was connected to the grid in April and went into commercial operation in May 2007. Unit 4 was scheduled about six months behind it, but it and RAPP-5 were to load fuel in late 2007 and are up to a year behind original schedule due to shortage of uranium. Start up of RAPP-5 is now anticipated in September 2008, though construction is complete.

In mid 2008 Indian nuclear power plants were running at about half of capacity due to a chronic shortage of fuel. The situation was expected to persist for several years if the civil nuclear agreement faltered, though some easing in 2008 is likely due to the new Turamdih mill in Jharkhand state coming on line (the mine there is already operating). Political opposition has delayed new mines in Jharkhand, Meghalaya and Andhra Pradesh.

A 500 MW prototype fast breeder reactor (FBR) is under construction at Kalpakkam by BHAVINI, a government enterprise set up to focus on FBRs. (See also Thorium cycle section below.)

In contrast to the situation in the 1990s, most reactors under construction are on schedule, and the first two - Tarapur 3 & 4 - were increased in capacity. These and future planned ones were 450 (now 490) MWe versions of the 202 MWe domestic products. Beyond them, future units will be nominal 700 MWe.

The Russian PWR types are apart from India's three-stage plan for nuclear power and are simply to increase generating capacity more rapidly. There are plans for eight 1000 MWe units at the Kudankulam site, and in January 2007 a memorandum of understanding was signed for Russia to build four more there, as well as others elsewhere in India, subject to Nuclear Suppliers' Group agreement in September 2008.

Between 2010 and 2020, further construction is expected to take total gross capacity to 21,180 MWe. The nuclear capacity target is part of national energy policy. This planned increment includes those set out in the Table below including the initial 300 MWe Advanced Heavy Water Water Reactor (AHWR).

In 2005 four sites were approved for eight new reactors. Two of the sites - Kakrapar and Rawatbhata, are to have 700 MWe indigenous PHWR units, Kudankulam is to have imported 1000 MWe light water reactors alongside the two being built there by Russia, and the fourth site is greenfield for 1000 MWe LWR units - Jaithalpur in the Konkan region. However, acquisition of any further light water reactors depends upon international political approvals. NPCIL has had exploratory meetings and technical discussions with three major reactor suppliers - Areva of France, GE-Hitachi and Westinghouse Electric Corporation of the USA for supply of reactors for these projects and Kaiga.

In April 2007 the government gave approval for construction of the first four of these eight units.

Power reactors planned or firmly proposed

Reactor Type MWe net, each Project control Start operation
Kakrapar 3 & 4 PHWR 640 NPCIL 2012
Rawatbhata 7 & 8 PHWR 640 NPCIL 2012
Kudankulam 3 & 4 PWR - VVER 1000/1200 NPCIL
Jaithalpur 1 & 2 PWR 1000/1500 NPCIL
Kaiga 5 & 6 PWR 1000/1500 NPCIL
? PWR x 2 1000 NTPC 2014
? PHWR x 4 640 NPCIL
? FBR x 4 470 Bhavini 2020
? AHWR 300 ? 2020

For reactor table: first ten units 'planned', next 11 'proposed'.

NPCIL is reported to be evaluating a site for up to 6000 MWe of PWR nuclear capacity at Pati Sonapur in Orissa state. Major industrial developments are planned in that area and Orissa was the first Indian state to privatise electricity generation and transmission. State demand is expected to reach 20 billion kWh/yr by 2010.

NPCIL is also reported to be planning construction of a 1600 MWe plant in the northern state of Haryana, one of the country's most industrialized, by 2012. The state has a demand of 8900 MWe, but currently generates less than 2000 MWe and imports 4000 MWe. The $2.5 billion plant would be sited at the village of Kumaharia, near Fatehabad and paid for by the state government.

Apparently in anticipation of easing nuclear trade restriction, the National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) brought forward consideration of a 2000 MWe nuclear power plant to be in operation by 2014. It would be the utility's first nuclear plant and also the first conventional nuclear plant not built by NPCIL. Both organizations are government-owned and NTPC is planning to increase its total installed capacity from 26 to 51 GWe by 2012 (72% of it coal).

In July 2008 the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) said that the large energy gap projected for 2050 could be bridged if 40-GWe capacity PWRs plus uranium to fuel them were imported during 2012-20. This strategy would consolidate the January 2007 declaration referred to above but looks well beyond Russia, and it would apparently sideline the 3-stage indigenous thorium-based policy. Used fuel from these PWRs would be reprocessed and the plutonium used to launch a series of FBRs, which would largely eliminate the energy deficit in 2050. This plan now looks plausible.

The government has announced that it intends to amend the law to allow private companies to be involved in nuclear power generation and possibly other aspects of the fuel cycle. In anticipation of this, Reliance Power Ltd, GVK Power & Infrastructure Ltd and GMR Energy Ltd are reported to be in discussion with overseas nuclear vendors including Areva, GE-Hitachi, Westinghouse and Atomstroyexport.

India's largest engineering group, Larsen & Toubro (L&T) announced in July 2008 that it was preparing to venture into international markets for supply of heavy engineering components for nuclear reactors. It plans to form a 20 billion rupee (US$ 463 million) venture with NPCIL for domestic and export nuclear forgings. In the context of India's trade isolation over three decades L&T has produced heavy components for 17 of India's pressurized heavy water reactors (PHWRs) and has also secured contracts for 80% of the components for the fast breeder reactor at Kalpakkam. It is qualified by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers to fabricate nuclear-grade pressure vessels and core support structures, achieving this internationally recognised quality standard in 2007. It is one of about ten major nuclear-qualified heavy engineering enterprises worldwide.

Uranium resources

India's uranium resources are modest, with 54,000 tonnes U as reasonably assured resources and 23,500 tonnes as estimated additional resources in situ.

Mining and processing of uranium is carried out by Uranium Corporation of India Ltd, a subsidiary of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), at Jaduguda and Bhatin (since 1967), Narwapahar (since 1995) and Turamdih (since 2002) - all in Jharkhand near Calcutta. All are underground, the last two being modern. A common mill is located near Jaduguda, and processes 2090 tonnes per day of ore.

In 2005 and 2006 plans were announced to invest almost US$ 700 million to open further mines in Jharkand at Banduhurang, Bagjata and Mohuldih; in Meghalaya at Domiasiat-Mawthabah (with a mill) and in Andhra Pradesh at Lambapur-Peddagattu (with mill 50km away at Seripally), both in Nalgonda district.

In Jharkand, Banduhurang is India's first open cut mine and was commissioned in 2007. Bagjata is underground and due in production from 2008, though there had been earlier small operations 1986-91. The Mohuldih underground mine is expected to operate from 2010. A new mill at Turamdih in Jharkhand, with 3000 t/day capacity, was commissioned in 2008.

In Andhra Pradesh the Lambapur-Peddagattu project in Nalgonda district has environmental clearance for one open cut and three small underground mines but faces local opposition. In August 2007 the government approved a new US$ 270 million underground mine and mill at Tummalapalle near Pulivendula in Kadapa (Cuddapa) district, for commissioning in 2010.

In Meghalaya, close to the Bangladesh border, the Domiasiat-Mawthabah mine project (also called Nongbah-Jynrin) is in a high rainfall area and also faces longstanding local opposition, but environmental approval for this and the Nongstin mine in Meghalaya has been reported.

In August 2007 the government approved a new US$ 270 million mine and mill at Tummalapalle in Kadapa district of Andhra Pradesh, for commissioning in 2010.

India's uranium mines and mills - existing and announced

State, district Mine Mill Operating from tU per year
Jharkhand Jaduguda Jaduguda 1967 (mine) 1968 (mill) 175 total from mill
Bhatin Jaduguda 1967
Narwapahar Jaduguda 1995
Bagjata Jaduguda 2008
Turamdih Turamdih 2003 (mine) 2008 (mill) 190 total from mill
Banduhurang Turamdih 2007
Mohuldih Turamdih 2011

Meghalaya Kylleng- Mawthabah 2012 340
Pyndengsohiong
(Domiasiat)Mawthabah


Andhra Pradesh, Lambapur-Peddagattu Seripally 2012 130
Nalgonda

Andhra Pradesh, Tummalapalle Tummalapalle 2010 220
Kadapa

However, India has reserves of 290,000 tonnes of thorium - about one quarter of the world total, and these are intended to fuel its nuclear power program longer-term (see below).

Uranium fuel cycle

DAE's Nuclear Fuel Complex at Hyderabad undertakes refining and a conversion of uranium, which is received as magnesium diuranate (yellowcake) and refined. The main 400 t/yr plant fabricates PHWR fuel (which is unenriched). A small (25 t/yr) fabrication plant makes fuel for the Tarapur BWRs from imported enriched (2.66% U-235) uranium. Depleted uranium oxide fuel pellets (from reprocessed uranium) and thorium oxide pellets are also made for PHWR fuel bundles. Mixed carbide fuel for FBTR was first fabricated at BARC in 1979.

Heavy water is supplied by DAE's Heavy Water Board, and the seven plants are working at capacity due to the current building program.

A very small enrichment plant - insufficient even for the Tarapur reactors - is operated by DAE in Mysore.

Used fuel from the civil PHWRs is reprocessed by BARC at Trombay, Tarapur and Kalpakkam to extract reactor-grade plutonium for use in the fast breeder reactors. Small plants at each site were supplemented by a new Kalpakkam plant of some 100 t/yr commissioned in 1998, and this is being extended to reprocess FBTR carbide fuel. Apart from this all reprocessing uses the Purex process. Further capacity is being built at Tarapur and Kalpakkam, to come on line by about 2010.

In 2003 a facility was commissioned at Kalpakkam to reprocess mixed carbide fuel using an advanced Purex process. Future FBRs will also have these facilities co-located.

The PFBR and the next four FBRs to be commissioned by 2020 will use oxide fuel. After that it is expected that metal fuel with higher breeding capability will be introduced and burn-up is intended to increase from 100 to 200 GWd/t.

To close the FBR fuel cycle a fast reactor fuel cycle facility is planned, with construction to begin in 2008 and operation to coincide with the need to reprocess the first PFBR fuel.

Under plans for the India-specific safeguards to be administered by the IAEA in relation to the civil-military separation plan several fuel fabrication facilities will come under safeguards.

Thorium cycle development

The long-term goal of India's nuclear program is to develop an advanced heavy-water thorium cycle.This first employs the PHWRs fuelled by natural uranium, and light water reactors, to produce plutonium.

Stage 2 uses fast neutron reactors burning the plutonium to breed U-233 from thorium. The blanket around the core will have uranium as well as thorium, so that further plutonium (ideally high-fissile Pu) is produced as well as the U-233.

Then in stage 3, Advanced Heavy Water Reactors (AHWRs) burn the U-233 and this plutonium with thorium, getting about two thirds of their power from the thorium.

In 2002 the regulatory authority issued approval to start construction of a 500 MW prototype fast breeder reactor at Kalpakkam and this is now under construction by BHAVINI. The unit is expected to be operating in 2010, fuelled with uranium-plutonium oxide (the reactor-grade Pu being from its existing PHWRs). It will have a blanket with thorium and uranium to breed fissile U-233 and plutonium respectively. This will take India's ambitious thorium program to stage 2, and set the scene for eventual full utilisation of the country's abundant thorium to fuel reactors. Four more such fast reactors have been announced for construction by 2020.

Initial FBRs will be have mixed oxide fuel but these will be followed by metallic-fuelled ones to enable shorter doubling time.

Radioactive Waste Management

Radioactive wastes from the nuclear reactors and reprocessing plants are treated and stored at each site. Waste immobilisation plants are in operation at Tarapur and Trombay and another is being constructed at Kalpakkam. Research on final disposal of high-level and long-lived wastes in a geological repository is in progress at BARC.

Regulation and safety

The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was established in 1948 under the Atomic Energy Act as a policy body. Then in 1954 the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) was set up to encompass research, technology development and commercial reactor operation. The current Atomic Energy Act is 1962, and it permits only government-owned enterprises to be involved in nuclear power.

The DAE includes NPCIL, Uranium Corporation of India (mining and processing), Electronics Corporation of India Ltd (reactor control and instrumentation) and BHAVIN* (for setting up fast reactors). The government also controls the Heavy Water Board for production of heavy water and the Nuclear Fuel Complex for fuel and component manufacture.

* Bhartiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Ltd

The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) was formed in 1983 and comes under the AEC but is independent of DAE. It is responsible for the regulation and licensing of all nuclear facilities, and their safety and carries authority conferred by the Atomic Energy Act for radiation safety and by the Factories Act for industrial safety in nuclear plants.

NPCIL is an active participant in the programmes of the World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO).

Research & Development

An early AEC decision was to set up the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) at Trombay near Mumbai. A series of 'research' reactors and critical facilities was built here: APSARA (1 MW, operating from 1956) was the first research reactor in Asia, Cirus (40 MW, 1960) and Dhruva (100 MW, 1985) followed it along with fuel cycle facilities. The Cirus and Dhruva units are assumed to be for military purposes, as is the plutonium plant commissioned in 1965.

BARC is also responsible for the transition to thorium-based systems and in particular is developing the 300 MWe AHWR as a technology demonstration project. This will be a vertical pressure tube design with heavy water moderator, boiling light water cooling with passive safety design and thorium-plutonium based fuel. A large critical facility to validate the reactor physics of the AHWR core was being commissioned at BARC in September 2007.

A series of three Purnima research reactors have explored the thorium cycle, the first (1971) running on plutonium fuel fabricated at BARC, the second and third (1984 & 1990) on U-233 fuel made from thorium - U-233 having been first separated in 1970.

In 1998 a 500 keV accelerator was commissioned at BARC for research on accelerator-driven subcritical systems as an option for stage three of the thorium cycle.

There are plans for a new 30 MWt multi-purpose research reactor for radioisotope production, testing nuclear fuel and reactor materials, and basic research. It is to be capable of conversion to an accelerator-driven system later.

Two civil research reactors at the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research at Kalpakkam are preparing for stage two of the thorium cycle. The 40 MWt fast breeder test reactor (FBTR) has been operating since 1985, and has achieved 120,000 MWday/tonne burnup with its carbide fuel (70% PuC + 30% UC). In 2005 the FBTR fuel cycle was closed, with the reprocessing of 100 GWd/t fuel - claimed as a world first. This has been made into new mixed carbide fuel for FBTR. FBTR is based on the French Rapsodie FBR design. Also the tiny Kamini (Kalpakkam mini) reactor is exploring the use of thorium as nuclear fuel, by breeding fissile U-233. BHAVINI is located here and draws upon the centre's expertise and that of NPCIL in establishing the fast reactor program.

As part of developing higher-burnup fuel for PHWRs mixed oxide (MOX) fuel is being used experimentally in FBTR, which is now operating with a hybrid core of mixed carbide and mixed oxide fuel (the high-Pu MOX forming 20% of the core).

A Compact High-Temperature Reactor (CHTR) is being designed to have long (15 year) core life and employ liquid metal (Pb-Bi) coolant. There are also designs for HTRs up to 600 MWt for hydrogen production and a 5 MWt multi-purpose nuclear power pack.

The Board of Radiation & Isotope Technology was separated from BARC in 1989 and is responsible for radioisotope production. The research reactors APSARA, CIRUS and Dhruva are used, along with RAPS for cobalt-60.


Non-proliferation, US-India agreement and Nuclear Suppliers' Group

India's nuclear industry has been largely without IAEA safeguards, though four nuclear power plants (see above) are under facility-specific arrangements related to India's INFCIRC/66 safeguards agreement with IAEA.

India's situation as a nuclear-armed country excluded it from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)* so this and the related lack of full-scope IAEA safeguards means that India has been isolated from world trade by the Nuclear Suppliers' Group. A clean waiver to the trade embargo was agreed in September 2008 in recognition of the country's impeccable non-proliferation credentials. India has always been scrupulous in ensuring that its weapons material and technology are guarded against commercial or illicit export to other countries.
* India could only join the NPT if it disarmed and joined as a Non Nuclear Weapons State, which is politically impossible. See Appendix.

Following the 2005 agreement between US and Indian heads of state on nuclear energy cooperation, the UK indicated its strong support for greater cooperation and France then Canada then moved in the same direction. The US Department of Commerce, the UK and Canada relaxed controls on export of technology to India, though staying within the Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines. The French government said it would seek a nuclear cooperation agreement, and Canada agreed to "pursue further opportunities for the development of the peaceful uses of atomic energy" with India.

In December 2006 the US Congress passed legislation to enable nuclear trade with India. Then in July 2007 a nuclear cooperation agreement with India was finalized, opening the way for India's participation in international commerce in nuclear fuel and equipment and requiring India to put most of the country's nuclear power reactors under IAEA safeguards and close down the Cirus research reactor by 2010. It would allow India to reprocess US-origin and other foreign-sourced nuclear fuel at a new national plant under IAEA safeguards. This would be used fuel arising from those 14 reactors designated as unambiguously civilian and under full IAEA safeguards.

The IAEA greeted the deal as being "a creative break with the past" - where India was excluded from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. After much delay in India's parliament, it then set up a new and comprehensive safeguards agreement with the IAEA, plus an Additional Protocol. The IAEA board approved this in July 2008, after the agreement had threatened to bring down the Indian government. The agreement is similar to those between IAEA and non nuclear weapons states, notably Infcirc-66, the IAEA's information circular that lays out procedures for applying facility-specific safeguards, hence much more restrictive than many in India's parliament wanted.

The next step in bringing India into the fold was the consensus resolution of the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) in September 2008 to exempt India from its rule of prohibiting trade with non members of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. A bilateral trade agreement can then go to US Congress for final approval. Similar agreements are likely with Russia and France. The ultimate objective is to put India on the same footing as China in respect to responsibilities and trade opportunities, though it has had to accept much tighter international controls than other nuclear-armed countries.

The introduction to India's safeguards agreement says that India's access to assured supplies of fresh fuel is an "essential basis" for New Delhi's acceptance of IAEA safeguards on some of its reactors and that India has a right to take "corrective measures to ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian nuclear reactors in the event of disruption of foreign fuel supplies." But the introduction also says that India will "provide assurance against withdrawal of safeguarded nuclear material from civilian use at any time." In the course of NSG deliberations India also gave assurances regarding weapons testing.

Appendix:

BACKGROUND TO NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION ISSUES

India (along with Pakistan and Israel) was originally a 'threshold' country in terms of the international non-proliferation regime, possessing, or quickly capable of assembling one or more nuclear weapons: Their nuclear weapons capability at the technological level was recognised (all have research reactors at least) along with their military ambitions. Then in 1998 India and Pakistan's military capability became more overt. All three remained remained outside the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which 186 nations have now signed. This led to their being largely excluded from trade in nuclear plant or materials, except for safety-related devices for a few safeguarded facilities.

India is opposed to the NPT as it now stands, since it is excluded as a Nuclear Weapons State, and has consistently criticised this aspect of the Treaty since its inception in 1970.

Regional rivalry

Relations between India and Pakistan are tense and hostile, and the risks of nuclear conflict between them have long been considered quite high.

In 1974 India exploded a "peaceful" nuclear device at Pokhran and then in May 1998 India and Pakistan each exploded several nuclear devices underground. This heightened concerns regarding an arms race between them.

Kashmir is a prime cause of bilateral tension, its sovereignty has been in dispute since 1948. There is persistent low level military conflict due to Pakistan backing a Muslim rebellion there.

Both countries engaged in a conventional arms race in the 1980s, including sophisticated technology and equipment capable of delivering nuclear weapons. In the 1990s the arms race quickened. In 1994 India reversed a four-year trend of reduced allocations for defence, and despite its much smaller economy, Pakistan pushed its own expenditures yet higher. Both then lost their patrons: India, the former USSR; and Pakistan, the USA.

In 1997 India deployed a medium-range missile and is now developing a long-range missile capable of reaching targets in China's industrial heartland.

In 1995 the USA quietly intervened to head off a proposed nuclear test. The 1998 tests were unambiguously military, including one claimed to be of a sophisticated thermonuclear device. Their declared purpose was "to help in the design of nuclear weapons of different yields and different delivery systems".

It is the growth and modernisation of China's nuclear arsenal and its assistance with Pakistan's nuclear power program and, reportedly, with missile technology, which now exacerbates Indian concerns. In particular, China's People's Liberation Army operates somewhat autonomously within Pakistan as an exporter of military material.

Indian security policies are driven by:

its desire to be recognised as the dominant power in the region;
its increasing concern with China's expanding nuclear weapons and missile delivery programs; and
its enduring concern about Pakistan, with its nuclear weapons capability and now the clear capability to deliver such weapons deep into India.
It perceives nuclear weapons as a cost-effective political counter to China's nuclear and conventional weaponry, and the effects of its nuclear weapons policy in provoking Pakistan is, by some accounts, considered incidental.


India has had an unhappy relationship with China. Soundly defeated by China in the 1962 war, relations were frozen until 1998. Since then a degree of high-level contact has been established and a few elementary confidence-building measures put in place. China still occupies some Indian territory. Its nuclear and missile support for Pakistan is however a major bone of contention.

India's weapons material initially came from the Canadian-designed 40 MWt CIRUS "research" reactor which started up in 1960 (well before the NPT), and the 100 MWt Dhruva indigenous unit in operation since 1985, using local uranium. CIRUS was supplied with heavy water from the USA and it was probably only after the 1962 war that it was employed largely to make weapons-grade plutonium.* Development of nuclear weapons apparently began in earnest in 1967. It is estimated that India may have built up enough weapons-grade plutonium for one hundred nuclear warheads.
* Article III of the 1956 India-Canada Agreement: The Government of India will ensure that the reactor and any products resulting from its use will be employed for peaceful purposes only. Clause 9 of the India-US Heavy Water Agreement: The heavy water sold here under shall be for use only in India by the Government in connection with research into and the use atomic energy for peaceful purposes.
In response to India's 1974 nuclear test explosion using plutonium from CIRUS, demonstrating that nuclear technology transferred to non-nuclear-weapons states for peaceful purposes could be misused, the Nuclear Suppliers Group was formed and began regulating nuclear trade, particularly with India. This is one reason why the closure of CIRUS is a condition of the NSG waiver in 2008.

Nuclear arms control in the region

The public stance of India and Pakistan on non-proliferation differs markedly.

Pakistan has initiated a series of regional security proposals. It has repeatedly proposed a nuclear-free zone in South Asia and has proclaimed its willingness to engage in nuclear disarmament and to sign the NPT if India would do so. This would involve disarming and joining as non-weapon states. It has endorsed a US proposal for a regional five power conference to consider non-proliferation in South Asia.

India has taken the view that solutions to regional security issues should be found at the international rather than the regional level, since its chief concern is with China. It therefore rejects Pakistan's proposals.

Instead, the 'Gandhi Plan', put forward in 1988, proposed the revision of the NPT, which it regards as inherently discriminatory in favour of the Nuclear-Weapons States, and a timetable for complete nuclear weapons disarmament. It endorsed early proposals for a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and for an international convention to ban the production of highly enriched uranium and plutonium for weapons purposes, known as the 'cut-off' convention.

The USA has, for some years pursued a variety of initiatives to persuade India and Pakistan to abandon their nuclear weapons programs and to accept comprehensive international safeguards on all their nuclear activities. To this end the Clinton administration proposed a conference of nine states, comprising the five established nuclear-weapon states, along with Japan, Germany, India and Pakistan.

This and previous similar proposals have been rejected by India, which countered with demands that other potential weapons states, such as Iran and North Korea, should be invited, and that regional limitations would only be acceptable if they were accepted equally by China. The USA would not accept the participation of Iran and North Korea and such initiatives lapsed.

Another, more recent approach, centres on the concept of containment, designed to 'cap' the production of fissile material for weapons purposes, which would hopefully be followed by 'roll back'. To this end India and the USA jointly sponsored a UN General Assembly resolution in 1993 calling for negotiations for a 'cut-off' convention, the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT). Should India and Pakistan join such a convention, they would have to agree to halt the production of fissile materials for weapons and to accept international verification on their relevant nuclear facilities (enrichment and reprocessing). In short, their weapons programs would be thus 'capped'. It appeared that India was prepared to join negotiations regarding such a FMCT under the 1995 UN Conference on Disarmament (UNCD).

However, despite the widespread international support for a FMCT, formal negotiations on cut-off have yet to begin. The UNCD can only approve decisions by consensus and since the summer of 1995, the insistence of a few states to link FMCT negotiations to other nuclear disarmament issues has brought progress on the cut-off treaty there to a standstill. In connection with its 2006 agreement with the USA, India has reiterated its support for a FMCT.

Bilateral confidence-building measures between India and Pakistan to reduce the prospects of confrontation have been limited. In 1990 each side ratified a treaty not to attack the other's nuclear installations, and at the end of 1991 they provided one another with a list showing the location of all their nuclear plants, even though the respective lists were regarded as not being wholly accurate. Early in 1994 India proposed a bilateral agreement for a 'no first use' of nuclear weapons and an extension of the 'no attack' treaty to cover civilian and industrial targets as well as nuclear installations.

Having promoted the CTBT since 1954, India dropped its support in 1995 and in 1996 attempted to block the Treaty. Following the 1998 tests the question has been reopened and both Pakistan and India have indicated their intention to sign the CTBT. Indian ratification may be conditional upon the five weapons states agreeing to specific reductions in nuclear arsenals.



paper also contains links for pakistan's program : Nuclear Power in Pakistan
Sources:
This paper was based on one by Michael Wilson, 1995, The Nuclear Future: Asia and Australia and the 1995 Conference on Non-Proliferation, published by Griffith University. Used with the author's permission.
PPNN Newsbriefs 1995-98, Issue Review #5, 1995.
Australian Safeguards Office
Dr A.Kakodkar, paper at WNA Symposium 2002.
A B Vajpayee in India Express 31/10/02.
A.Gopalakrishnan, 2002, Evolution of the Indian Nuclear Power Program, Ann Review Energy Environment 27:369-395.
A. Kakodkar & R.Grover, 2004, Nuclear Energy in India, The Nuclear Engineer 45,2.
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd
IAEA 2003, Country Niuclear Power Profiles.
Nu-Power 18,2-3, 2004
A. Kakodkar 2007, statement to IAEA General Conference, Sept 2007.
 
.
Nuclear Power in India : WNA

Nuclear Power in India

(September 2008)

India has a flourishing and largely indigenous nuclear power program and expects to have 20,000 MWe nuclear capacity on line by 2020. It aims to supply 25% of electricity from nuclear power by 2050.

Because India is outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, due to its weapons program, it has been for 34 years largely excluded from trade in nuclear plant or materials, which has hampered its development of civil nuclear energy.

Due to these trade bans and lack of indigenous uranium, India has uniquely been developing a nuclear fuel cycle to exploit its reserves of thorium.


Electricity demand in India has been increasing rapidly, and the 534 billion kilowatt hours produced in 2002 was almost double the 1990 output, though still represented only 505 kWh per capita for the year. In 2005, 699 billion kWh gross was produced, but with huge transmission losses this resulted in less than 500 billion kWh consumption. The per capita figure is expected to almost triple by 2020, with 6.3% annual growth. Coal provides 69% of the electricity at present, but reserves are limited.

Nuclear power supplied 15.8 billion kWh (2.5%) of India's electricity in 2007 from 3.7 GWe (of 110 GWe total) capacity and this will increase steadily as imported uranium becomes available and new plants come on line. India's fuel situation, with shortage of fossil fuels, is driving the nuclear investment for electricity, and 25% nuclear contribution is foreseen by 2050, from one hundred times the 2002 capacity. Almost as much investment in the grid system as in power plants is necessary.

In 2006 almost US$ 9 billion was committed for power projects, including 9354 MWe of new generating capacity, taking forward projects to 43.6 GWe and US$ 51 billion.

A KPMG report in 2007 said that India needed to spend US$ 120-150 billion on power infrastructure over the next five years, including transmission and distribution. It said that distribution losses are currently some 30-40%, worth more than $6 billion per year.

The target since about 2004 has been for nuclear power is to provide 20,000 MWe by 2020, but in 2007 the prime Minister referred to this as "modest" and capable of being "doubled with the opening up of international cooperation." However, it is evident that on the basis of indigenous fuel supply only, the 20,000 MWe target is not attainable, or at least not sustainable without uranium imports.

Nuclear power industry development

Nuclear power for civil use is well established in India. Its civil nuclear strategy has been directed towards complete independence in the nuclear fuel cycle, necessary because it is excluded from the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) due to it acquiring nuclear weapons capability after 1970. (Those five countries doing so before 1970 were accorded the status of Nuclear Weapons States under the NPT.)

As a result, India's nuclear power program has proceeded largely without fuel or technological assistance from other countries (but see later section). Its power reactors to the mid 1990s had some of the world's lowest capacity factors, reflecting the technical difficulties of the country's isolation, but rose impressively from 60% in 1995 to 85% in 2001-02.

India's nuclear energy self-sufficiency extended from uranium exploration and mining through fuel fabrication, heavy water production, reactor design and construction, to reprocessing and waste management. It has a small fast breeder reactor and is building a much larger one. It is also developing technology to utilise its abundant resources of thorium as a nuclear fuel.

The Atomic Energy Establishment was set up at Trombay, near Mumbai, in 1957 and renamed as Bhaba Atomic Research Centre (BARC) ten years later. Plans for building the first Pressurised Heavy Water Reactor (PHWR) were finalised in 1964, and this prototype - Rawatbhata-1, which had Canada's Douglas Point reactor as a reference unit, was built as a collaborative venture between Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd and NPCIL. It started up in 1972 and was duplicated Subsequent indigenous PHWR development has been based on these units.

The Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) is responsible for design, construction, commissioning and operation of thermal nuclear power plants.

It has 15 small and two mid-sized nuclear power reactors in commercial operation, six under construction - including two large ones and a fast breeder reactor, and more planned.

India's operating nuclear power reactors:

Reactor Type MWe net, each Commercial operation Safeguards status
Tarapur 1 & 2 BWR 150 1969 item-specific

Kaiga 1 & 2 PHWR 202 1999-2000

Kaiga 3 PHWR 202 2007

Kakrapar 1 & 2 PHWR 202 1993-95 by 2012 under new agreement

Kalpakkam 1 & 2PHWR 202 1984-86
(MAPS)

Narora 1 & 2 PHWR 202 1991-92 by 2014 under new agreement

Rawatbhata 1 PHWR 90 1973 item-specific

Rawatbhata 2 PHWR 187 1981 item-specific

Rawatbhata PHWR 202 1999-2000 by 2010 under new agreement
3 & 4

Tarapur 3 & 4 PHWR 490 2006, 05
Total (17) 3779 MWe

Kalpakkam also known as Madras/MAPS
Rawatbhata also known as Rajasthan/RAPS
Kakrapar = KAPS, Narora = NAPS
dates are for start of commercial operation.


The two Tarapur 150 MWe Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs) built by GE on a turnkey contract before the advent of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty were originally 200 MWe. They were derated due to recurrent problems but have run well since. They have been using imported enriched uranium and are under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. However, late in 2004 Russia deferred to the Nuclear Suppliers' Group and declined to supply further uranium for them. They underwent six months refurbishment over 2005-06, and in March 2006 Russia agreed to resume fuel supply.

The two small Canadian (Candu) PHWRs at Rawatbhata started up in 1972 & 1980, and are also under safeguards. Rawatbhata-1 was down-rated early in its life and has operated very little since 2002 due to ongoing problems and has been shut down since 2004 as the government considers its future.

The 220 MWe PHWRs (202 MWe net) were indigenously designed and constructed by NPCIL, based on a Canadian design.

The Kalpakkam (MAPS) reactors were refurbished in 2002-03 and 2004-05 and their capacity restored to 220 MWe gross (from 170). Much of the core of each reactor was replaced, and the lifespans extended to 2033/36.

More recent reactor developments

The new series of 540 MWe (gross, 490 MWe net) nuclear reactors are developed indigenously from the 220 MWe (gross) model PHWR. The Tarapur 3&4 units were built by NPCIL.

The first - Tarapur 4 - started up in March 2005, was connected to the grid in June and started commercial operation in September. Tarapur-4's criticality came five years after pouring first concrete and seven months ahead of schedule. Its twin - unit 3 - was about a year behind it and criticality was achieved in May 2006, with grid connection in June and commercial operation in August, five months ahead of schedule.

Russia is supplying the country's first large nuclear power plant, comprising two VVER-1000 (V-392) reactors, under a Russian-financed US$ 3 billion contract. The AES-92 units at Kudankulam are being built by NPCIL and will be commissioned and operated by NPCIL under IAEA safeguards. Unlike other Atomstroyexport projects such as in Iran there have been only about 80 Russian supervisory staff on the job. Russia will supply all the enriched fuel, though India will reprocess it and keep the plutonium. The first unit is due start supplying power in March 2008 and go into commercial operation late in 2008, after some delay. The second unit is about nine months behind it.

Under plans for the India-specific safeguards to be administered by the IAEA in relation to the civil-military separation plan, eight further reactors will be safeguarded (beyond Tarapur 1&2, Rawatbhata 1&2, and Kudankulam 1&2): Rawatbhata 3&4 by 2010, Rawatbhata 5&6 by 2008, Kakrapar 1&2 by 2012 and Narora 1&2 by 2014.

India's nuclear power reactors under construction:

Reactor Type MWe net, each Project control Commercial operation Safeguards status
Kaiga 4 PHWR 202 MWe NPCIL end of 2008

Rawatbhata PHWR 202 MWe NPCIL end of 2008, 3/09 by 2008 under new agreement
5 & 6

Kudankulam PWR (VVER) 950 MWe NPCIL 9/2009, 12/09 item-specific
1 & 2

Kalpakkam FBR 470 MWe Bhavini 2010 unlikely
PFBR 2976 MWe
Total (6)

Rawatbhata also known as Rajasthan/RAPS
dates are for start of commercial operation.


Kaiga 3 started up in February, was connected to the grid in April and went into commercial operation in May 2007. Unit 4 was scheduled about six months behind it, but it and RAPP-5 were to load fuel in late 2007 and are up to a year behind original schedule due to shortage of uranium. Start up of RAPP-5 is now anticipated in September 2008, though construction is complete.

In mid 2008 Indian nuclear power plants were running at about half of capacity due to a chronic shortage of fuel. The situation was expected to persist for several years if the civil nuclear agreement faltered, though some easing in 2008 is likely due to the new Turamdih mill in Jharkhand state coming on line (the mine there is already operating). Political opposition has delayed new mines in Jharkhand, Meghalaya and Andhra Pradesh.

A 500 MW prototype fast breeder reactor (FBR) is under construction at Kalpakkam by BHAVINI, a government enterprise set up to focus on FBRs. (See also Thorium cycle section below.)

In contrast to the situation in the 1990s, most reactors under construction are on schedule, and the first two - Tarapur 3 & 4 - were increased in capacity. These and future planned ones were 450 (now 490) MWe versions of the 202 MWe domestic products. Beyond them, future units will be nominal 700 MWe.

The Russian PWR types are apart from India's three-stage plan for nuclear power and are simply to increase generating capacity more rapidly. There are plans for eight 1000 MWe units at the Kudankulam site, and in January 2007 a memorandum of understanding was signed for Russia to build four more there, as well as others elsewhere in India, subject to Nuclear Suppliers' Group agreement in September 2008.

Between 2010 and 2020, further construction is expected to take total gross capacity to 21,180 MWe. The nuclear capacity target is part of national energy policy. This planned increment includes those set out in the Table below including the initial 300 MWe Advanced Heavy Water Water Reactor (AHWR).

In 2005 four sites were approved for eight new reactors. Two of the sites - Kakrapar and Rawatbhata, are to have 700 MWe indigenous PHWR units, Kudankulam is to have imported 1000 MWe light water reactors alongside the two being built there by Russia, and the fourth site is greenfield for 1000 MWe LWR units - Jaithalpur in the Konkan region. However, acquisition of any further light water reactors depends upon international political approvals. NPCIL has had exploratory meetings and technical discussions with three major reactor suppliers - Areva of France, GE-Hitachi and Westinghouse Electric Corporation of the USA for supply of reactors for these projects and Kaiga.

In April 2007 the government gave approval for construction of the first four of these eight units.

Power reactors planned or firmly proposed

Reactor Type MWe net, each Project control Start operation
Kakrapar 3 & 4 PHWR 640 NPCIL 2012
Rawatbhata 7 & 8 PHWR 640 NPCIL 2012
Kudankulam 3 & 4 PWR - VVER 1000/1200 NPCIL
Jaithalpur 1 & 2 PWR 1000/1500 NPCIL
Kaiga 5 & 6 PWR 1000/1500 NPCIL
? PWR x 2 1000 NTPC 2014
? PHWR x 4 640 NPCIL
? FBR x 4 470 Bhavini 2020
? AHWR 300 ? 2020

For reactor table: first ten units 'planned', next 11 'proposed'.

NPCIL is reported to be evaluating a site for up to 6000 MWe of PWR nuclear capacity at Pati Sonapur in Orissa state. Major industrial developments are planned in that area and Orissa was the first Indian state to privatise electricity generation and transmission. State demand is expected to reach 20 billion kWh/yr by 2010.

NPCIL is also reported to be planning construction of a 1600 MWe plant in the northern state of Haryana, one of the country's most industrialized, by 2012. The state has a demand of 8900 MWe, but currently generates less than 2000 MWe and imports 4000 MWe. The $2.5 billion plant would be sited at the village of Kumaharia, near Fatehabad and paid for by the state government.

Apparently in anticipation of easing nuclear trade restriction, the National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) brought forward consideration of a 2000 MWe nuclear power plant to be in operation by 2014. It would be the utility's first nuclear plant and also the first conventional nuclear plant not built by NPCIL. Both organizations are government-owned and NTPC is planning to increase its total installed capacity from 26 to 51 GWe by 2012 (72% of it coal).

In July 2008 the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) said that the large energy gap projected for 2050 could be bridged if 40-GWe capacity PWRs plus uranium to fuel them were imported during 2012-20. This strategy would consolidate the January 2007 declaration referred to above but looks well beyond Russia, and it would apparently sideline the 3-stage indigenous thorium-based policy. Used fuel from these PWRs would be reprocessed and the plutonium used to launch a series of FBRs, which would largely eliminate the energy deficit in 2050. This plan now looks plausible.

The government has announced that it intends to amend the law to allow private companies to be involved in nuclear power generation and possibly other aspects of the fuel cycle. In anticipation of this, Reliance Power Ltd, GVK Power & Infrastructure Ltd and GMR Energy Ltd are reported to be in discussion with overseas nuclear vendors including Areva, GE-Hitachi, Westinghouse and Atomstroyexport.

India's largest engineering group, Larsen & Toubro (L&T) announced in July 2008 that it was preparing to venture into international markets for supply of heavy engineering components for nuclear reactors. It plans to form a 20 billion rupee (US$ 463 million) venture with NPCIL for domestic and export nuclear forgings. In the context of India's trade isolation over three decades L&T has produced heavy components for 17 of India's pressurized heavy water reactors (PHWRs) and has also secured contracts for 80% of the components for the fast breeder reactor at Kalpakkam. It is qualified by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers to fabricate nuclear-grade pressure vessels and core support structures, achieving this internationally recognised quality standard in 2007. It is one of about ten major nuclear-qualified heavy engineering enterprises worldwide.

Uranium resources

India's uranium resources are modest, with 54,000 tonnes U as reasonably assured resources and 23,500 tonnes as estimated additional resources in situ.

Mining and processing of uranium is carried out by Uranium Corporation of India Ltd, a subsidiary of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), at Jaduguda and Bhatin (since 1967), Narwapahar (since 1995) and Turamdih (since 2002) - all in Jharkhand near Calcutta. All are underground, the last two being modern. A common mill is located near Jaduguda, and processes 2090 tonnes per day of ore.

In 2005 and 2006 plans were announced to invest almost US$ 700 million to open further mines in Jharkand at Banduhurang, Bagjata and Mohuldih; in Meghalaya at Domiasiat-Mawthabah (with a mill) and in Andhra Pradesh at Lambapur-Peddagattu (with mill 50km away at Seripally), both in Nalgonda district.

In Jharkand, Banduhurang is India's first open cut mine and was commissioned in 2007. Bagjata is underground and due in production from 2008, though there had been earlier small operations 1986-91. The Mohuldih underground mine is expected to operate from 2010. A new mill at Turamdih in Jharkhand, with 3000 t/day capacity, was commissioned in 2008.

In Andhra Pradesh the Lambapur-Peddagattu project in Nalgonda district has environmental clearance for one open cut and three small underground mines but faces local opposition. In August 2007 the government approved a new US$ 270 million underground mine and mill at Tummalapalle near Pulivendula in Kadapa (Cuddapa) district, for commissioning in 2010.

In Meghalaya, close to the Bangladesh border, the Domiasiat-Mawthabah mine project (also called Nongbah-Jynrin) is in a high rainfall area and also faces longstanding local opposition, but environmental approval for this and the Nongstin mine in Meghalaya has been reported.

In August 2007 the government approved a new US$ 270 million mine and mill at Tummalapalle in Kadapa district of Andhra Pradesh, for commissioning in 2010.

India's uranium mines and mills - existing and announced

State, district Mine Mill Operating from tU per year
Jharkhand Jaduguda Jaduguda 1967 (mine) 1968 (mill) 175 total from mill
Bhatin Jaduguda 1967
Narwapahar Jaduguda 1995
Bagjata Jaduguda 2008
Turamdih Turamdih 2003 (mine) 2008 (mill) 190 total from mill
Banduhurang Turamdih 2007
Mohuldih Turamdih 2011

Meghalaya Kylleng- Mawthabah 2012 340
Pyndengsohiong
(Domiasiat)Mawthabah


Andhra Pradesh, Lambapur-Peddagattu Seripally 2012 130
Nalgonda

Andhra Pradesh, Tummalapalle Tummalapalle 2010 220
Kadapa

However, India has reserves of 290,000 tonnes of thorium - about one quarter of the world total, and these are intended to fuel its nuclear power program longer-term (see below).

Uranium fuel cycle

DAE's Nuclear Fuel Complex at Hyderabad undertakes refining and a conversion of uranium, which is received as magnesium diuranate (yellowcake) and refined. The main 400 t/yr plant fabricates PHWR fuel (which is unenriched). A small (25 t/yr) fabrication plant makes fuel for the Tarapur BWRs from imported enriched (2.66% U-235) uranium. Depleted uranium oxide fuel pellets (from reprocessed uranium) and thorium oxide pellets are also made for PHWR fuel bundles. Mixed carbide fuel for FBTR was first fabricated at BARC in 1979.

Heavy water is supplied by DAE's Heavy Water Board, and the seven plants are working at capacity due to the current building program.

A very small enrichment plant - insufficient even for the Tarapur reactors - is operated by DAE in Mysore.

Used fuel from the civil PHWRs is reprocessed by BARC at Trombay, Tarapur and Kalpakkam to extract reactor-grade plutonium for use in the fast breeder reactors. Small plants at each site were supplemented by a new Kalpakkam plant of some 100 t/yr commissioned in 1998, and this is being extended to reprocess FBTR carbide fuel. Apart from this all reprocessing uses the Purex process. Further capacity is being built at Tarapur and Kalpakkam, to come on line by about 2010.

In 2003 a facility was commissioned at Kalpakkam to reprocess mixed carbide fuel using an advanced Purex process. Future FBRs will also have these facilities co-located.

The PFBR and the next four FBRs to be commissioned by 2020 will use oxide fuel. After that it is expected that metal fuel with higher breeding capability will be introduced and burn-up is intended to increase from 100 to 200 GWd/t.

To close the FBR fuel cycle a fast reactor fuel cycle facility is planned, with construction to begin in 2008 and operation to coincide with the need to reprocess the first PFBR fuel.

Under plans for the India-specific safeguards to be administered by the IAEA in relation to the civil-military separation plan several fuel fabrication facilities will come under safeguards.

Thorium cycle development

The long-term goal of India's nuclear program is to develop an advanced heavy-water thorium cycle.This first employs the PHWRs fuelled by natural uranium, and light water reactors, to produce plutonium.

Stage 2 uses fast neutron reactors burning the plutonium to breed U-233 from thorium. The blanket around the core will have uranium as well as thorium, so that further plutonium (ideally high-fissile Pu) is produced as well as the U-233.

Then in stage 3, Advanced Heavy Water Reactors (AHWRs) burn the U-233 and this plutonium with thorium, getting about two thirds of their power from the thorium.

In 2002 the regulatory authority issued approval to start construction of a 500 MW prototype fast breeder reactor at Kalpakkam and this is now under construction by BHAVINI. The unit is expected to be operating in 2010, fuelled with uranium-plutonium oxide (the reactor-grade Pu being from its existing PHWRs). It will have a blanket with thorium and uranium to breed fissile U-233 and plutonium respectively. This will take India's ambitious thorium program to stage 2, and set the scene for eventual full utilisation of the country's abundant thorium to fuel reactors. Four more such fast reactors have been announced for construction by 2020.

Initial FBRs will be have mixed oxide fuel but these will be followed by metallic-fuelled ones to enable shorter doubling time.

Radioactive Waste Management

Radioactive wastes from the nuclear reactors and reprocessing plants are treated and stored at each site. Waste immobilisation plants are in operation at Tarapur and Trombay and another is being constructed at Kalpakkam. Research on final disposal of high-level and long-lived wastes in a geological repository is in progress at BARC.

Regulation and safety

The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was established in 1948 under the Atomic Energy Act as a policy body. Then in 1954 the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) was set up to encompass research, technology development and commercial reactor operation. The current Atomic Energy Act is 1962, and it permits only government-owned enterprises to be involved in nuclear power.

The DAE includes NPCIL, Uranium Corporation of India (mining and processing), Electronics Corporation of India Ltd (reactor control and instrumentation) and BHAVIN* (for setting up fast reactors). The government also controls the Heavy Water Board for production of heavy water and the Nuclear Fuel Complex for fuel and component manufacture.

* Bhartiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Ltd

The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) was formed in 1983 and comes under the AEC but is independent of DAE. It is responsible for the regulation and licensing of all nuclear facilities, and their safety and carries authority conferred by the Atomic Energy Act for radiation safety and by the Factories Act for industrial safety in nuclear plants.

NPCIL is an active participant in the programmes of the World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO).

Research & Development

An early AEC decision was to set up the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) at Trombay near Mumbai. A series of 'research' reactors and critical facilities was built here: APSARA (1 MW, operating from 1956) was the first research reactor in Asia, Cirus (40 MW, 1960) and Dhruva (100 MW, 1985) followed it along with fuel cycle facilities. The Cirus and Dhruva units are assumed to be for military purposes, as is the plutonium plant commissioned in 1965.

BARC is also responsible for the transition to thorium-based systems and in particular is developing the 300 MWe AHWR as a technology demonstration project. This will be a vertical pressure tube design with heavy water moderator, boiling light water cooling with passive safety design and thorium-plutonium based fuel. A large critical facility to validate the reactor physics of the AHWR core was being commissioned at BARC in September 2007.

A series of three Purnima research reactors have explored the thorium cycle, the first (1971) running on plutonium fuel fabricated at BARC, the second and third (1984 & 1990) on U-233 fuel made from thorium - U-233 having been first separated in 1970.

In 1998 a 500 keV accelerator was commissioned at BARC for research on accelerator-driven subcritical systems as an option for stage three of the thorium cycle.

There are plans for a new 30 MWt multi-purpose research reactor for radioisotope production, testing nuclear fuel and reactor materials, and basic research. It is to be capable of conversion to an accelerator-driven system later.

Two civil research reactors at the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research at Kalpakkam are preparing for stage two of the thorium cycle. The 40 MWt fast breeder test reactor (FBTR) has been operating since 1985, and has achieved 120,000 MWday/tonne burnup with its carbide fuel (70% PuC + 30% UC). In 2005 the FBTR fuel cycle was closed, with the reprocessing of 100 GWd/t fuel - claimed as a world first. This has been made into new mixed carbide fuel for FBTR. FBTR is based on the French Rapsodie FBR design. Also the tiny Kamini (Kalpakkam mini) reactor is exploring the use of thorium as nuclear fuel, by breeding fissile U-233. BHAVINI is located here and draws upon the centre's expertise and that of NPCIL in establishing the fast reactor program.

As part of developing higher-burnup fuel for PHWRs mixed oxide (MOX) fuel is being used experimentally in FBTR, which is now operating with a hybrid core of mixed carbide and mixed oxide fuel (the high-Pu MOX forming 20% of the core).

A Compact High-Temperature Reactor (CHTR) is being designed to have long (15 year) core life and employ liquid metal (Pb-Bi) coolant. There are also designs for HTRs up to 600 MWt for hydrogen production and a 5 MWt multi-purpose nuclear power pack.

The Board of Radiation & Isotope Technology was separated from BARC in 1989 and is responsible for radioisotope production. The research reactors APSARA, CIRUS and Dhruva are used, along with RAPS for cobalt-60.


Non-proliferation, US-India agreement and Nuclear Suppliers' Group

India's nuclear industry has been largely without IAEA safeguards, though four nuclear power plants (see above) are under facility-specific arrangements related to India's INFCIRC/66 safeguards agreement with IAEA.

India's situation as a nuclear-armed country excluded it from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)* so this and the related lack of full-scope IAEA safeguards means that India has been isolated from world trade by the Nuclear Suppliers' Group. A clean waiver to the trade embargo was agreed in September 2008 in recognition of the country's impeccable non-proliferation credentials. India has always been scrupulous in ensuring that its weapons material and technology are guarded against commercial or illicit export to other countries.
* India could only join the NPT if it disarmed and joined as a Non Nuclear Weapons State, which is politically impossible. See Appendix.

Following the 2005 agreement between US and Indian heads of state on nuclear energy cooperation, the UK indicated its strong support for greater cooperation and France then Canada then moved in the same direction. The US Department of Commerce, the UK and Canada relaxed controls on export of technology to India, though staying within the Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines. The French government said it would seek a nuclear cooperation agreement, and Canada agreed to "pursue further opportunities for the development of the peaceful uses of atomic energy" with India.

In December 2006 the US Congress passed legislation to enable nuclear trade with India. Then in July 2007 a nuclear cooperation agreement with India was finalized, opening the way for India's participation in international commerce in nuclear fuel and equipment and requiring India to put most of the country's nuclear power reactors under IAEA safeguards and close down the Cirus research reactor by 2010. It would allow India to reprocess US-origin and other foreign-sourced nuclear fuel at a new national plant under IAEA safeguards. This would be used fuel arising from those 14 reactors designated as unambiguously civilian and under full IAEA safeguards.

The IAEA greeted the deal as being "a creative break with the past" - where India was excluded from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. After much delay in India's parliament, it then set up a new and comprehensive safeguards agreement with the IAEA, plus an Additional Protocol. The IAEA board approved this in July 2008, after the agreement had threatened to bring down the Indian government. The agreement is similar to those between IAEA and non nuclear weapons states, notably Infcirc-66, the IAEA's information circular that lays out procedures for applying facility-specific safeguards, hence much more restrictive than many in India's parliament wanted.

The next step in bringing India into the fold was the consensus resolution of the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) in September 2008 to exempt India from its rule of prohibiting trade with non members of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. A bilateral trade agreement can then go to US Congress for final approval. Similar agreements are likely with Russia and France. The ultimate objective is to put India on the same footing as China in respect to responsibilities and trade opportunities, though it has had to accept much tighter international controls than other nuclear-armed countries.

The introduction to India's safeguards agreement says that India's access to assured supplies of fresh fuel is an "essential basis" for New Delhi's acceptance of IAEA safeguards on some of its reactors and that India has a right to take "corrective measures to ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian nuclear reactors in the event of disruption of foreign fuel supplies." But the introduction also says that India will "provide assurance against withdrawal of safeguarded nuclear material from civilian use at any time." In the course of NSG deliberations India also gave assurances regarding weapons testing.

Appendix:

BACKGROUND TO NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION ISSUES

India (along with Pakistan and Israel) was originally a 'threshold' country in terms of the international non-proliferation regime, possessing, or quickly capable of assembling one or more nuclear weapons: Their nuclear weapons capability at the technological level was recognised (all have research reactors at least) along with their military ambitions. Then in 1998 India and Pakistan's military capability became more overt. All three remained remained outside the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which 186 nations have now signed. This led to their being largely excluded from trade in nuclear plant or materials, except for safety-related devices for a few safeguarded facilities.

India is opposed to the NPT as it now stands, since it is excluded as a Nuclear Weapons State, and has consistently criticised this aspect of the Treaty since its inception in 1970.

Regional rivalry

Relations between India and Pakistan are tense and hostile, and the risks of nuclear conflict between them have long been considered quite high.

In 1974 India exploded a "peaceful" nuclear device at Pokhran and then in May 1998 India and Pakistan each exploded several nuclear devices underground. This heightened concerns regarding an arms race between them.

Kashmir is a prime cause of bilateral tension, its sovereignty has been in dispute since 1948. There is persistent low level military conflict due to Pakistan backing a Muslim rebellion there.

Both countries engaged in a conventional arms race in the 1980s, including sophisticated technology and equipment capable of delivering nuclear weapons. In the 1990s the arms race quickened. In 1994 India reversed a four-year trend of reduced allocations for defence, and despite its much smaller economy, Pakistan pushed its own expenditures yet higher. Both then lost their patrons: India, the former USSR; and Pakistan, the USA.

In 1997 India deployed a medium-range missile and is now developing a long-range missile capable of reaching targets in China's industrial heartland.

In 1995 the USA quietly intervened to head off a proposed nuclear test. The 1998 tests were unambiguously military, including one claimed to be of a sophisticated thermonuclear device. Their declared purpose was "to help in the design of nuclear weapons of different yields and different delivery systems".

It is the growth and modernisation of China's nuclear arsenal and its assistance with Pakistan's nuclear power program and, reportedly, with missile technology, which now exacerbates Indian concerns. In particular, China's People's Liberation Army operates somewhat autonomously within Pakistan as an exporter of military material.

Indian security policies are driven by:

its desire to be recognised as the dominant power in the region;
its increasing concern with China's expanding nuclear weapons and missile delivery programs; and
its enduring concern about Pakistan, with its nuclear weapons capability and now the clear capability to deliver such weapons deep into India.
It perceives nuclear weapons as a cost-effective political counter to China's nuclear and conventional weaponry, and the effects of its nuclear weapons policy in provoking Pakistan is, by some accounts, considered incidental.


India has had an unhappy relationship with China. Soundly defeated by China in the 1962 war, relations were frozen until 1998. Since then a degree of high-level contact has been established and a few elementary confidence-building measures put in place. China still occupies some Indian territory. Its nuclear and missile support for Pakistan is however a major bone of contention.

India's weapons material initially came from the Canadian-designed 40 MWt CIRUS "research" reactor which started up in 1960 (well before the NPT), and the 100 MWt Dhruva indigenous unit in operation since 1985, using local uranium. CIRUS was supplied with heavy water from the USA and it was probably only after the 1962 war that it was employed largely to make weapons-grade plutonium.* Development of nuclear weapons apparently began in earnest in 1967. It is estimated that India may have built up enough weapons-grade plutonium for one hundred nuclear warheads.
* Article III of the 1956 India-Canada Agreement: The Government of India will ensure that the reactor and any products resulting from its use will be employed for peaceful purposes only. Clause 9 of the India-US Heavy Water Agreement: The heavy water sold here under shall be for use only in India by the Government in connection with research into and the use atomic energy for peaceful purposes.
In response to India's 1974 nuclear test explosion using plutonium from CIRUS, demonstrating that nuclear technology transferred to non-nuclear-weapons states for peaceful purposes could be misused, the Nuclear Suppliers Group was formed and began regulating nuclear trade, particularly with India. This is one reason why the closure of CIRUS is a condition of the NSG waiver in 2008.

Nuclear arms control in the region

The public stance of India and Pakistan on non-proliferation differs markedly.

Pakistan has initiated a series of regional security proposals. It has repeatedly proposed a nuclear-free zone in South Asia and has proclaimed its willingness to engage in nuclear disarmament and to sign the NPT if India would do so. This would involve disarming and joining as non-weapon states. It has endorsed a US proposal for a regional five power conference to consider non-proliferation in South Asia.

India has taken the view that solutions to regional security issues should be found at the international rather than the regional level, since its chief concern is with China. It therefore rejects Pakistan's proposals.

Instead, the 'Gandhi Plan', put forward in 1988, proposed the revision of the NPT, which it regards as inherently discriminatory in favour of the Nuclear-Weapons States, and a timetable for complete nuclear weapons disarmament. It endorsed early proposals for a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and for an international convention to ban the production of highly enriched uranium and plutonium for weapons purposes, known as the 'cut-off' convention.

The USA has, for some years pursued a variety of initiatives to persuade India and Pakistan to abandon their nuclear weapons programs and to accept comprehensive international safeguards on all their nuclear activities. To this end the Clinton administration proposed a conference of nine states, comprising the five established nuclear-weapon states, along with Japan, Germany, India and Pakistan.

This and previous similar proposals have been rejected by India, which countered with demands that other potential weapons states, such as Iran and North Korea, should be invited, and that regional limitations would only be acceptable if they were accepted equally by China. The USA would not accept the participation of Iran and North Korea and such initiatives lapsed.

Another, more recent approach, centres on the concept of containment, designed to 'cap' the production of fissile material for weapons purposes, which would hopefully be followed by 'roll back'. To this end India and the USA jointly sponsored a UN General Assembly resolution in 1993 calling for negotiations for a 'cut-off' convention, the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT). Should India and Pakistan join such a convention, they would have to agree to halt the production of fissile materials for weapons and to accept international verification on their relevant nuclear facilities (enrichment and reprocessing). In short, their weapons programs would be thus 'capped'. It appeared that India was prepared to join negotiations regarding such a FMCT under the 1995 UN Conference on Disarmament (UNCD).

However, despite the widespread international support for a FMCT, formal negotiations on cut-off have yet to begin. The UNCD can only approve decisions by consensus and since the summer of 1995, the insistence of a few states to link FMCT negotiations to other nuclear disarmament issues has brought progress on the cut-off treaty there to a standstill. In connection with its 2006 agreement with the USA, India has reiterated its support for a FMCT.

Bilateral confidence-building measures between India and Pakistan to reduce the prospects of confrontation have been limited. In 1990 each side ratified a treaty not to attack the other's nuclear installations, and at the end of 1991 they provided one another with a list showing the location of all their nuclear plants, even though the respective lists were regarded as not being wholly accurate. Early in 1994 India proposed a bilateral agreement for a 'no first use' of nuclear weapons and an extension of the 'no attack' treaty to cover civilian and industrial targets as well as nuclear installations.

Having promoted the CTBT since 1954, India dropped its support in 1995 and in 1996 attempted to block the Treaty. Following the 1998 tests the question has been reopened and both Pakistan and India have indicated their intention to sign the CTBT. Indian ratification may be conditional upon the five weapons states agreeing to specific reductions in nuclear arsenals.



paper also contains links for pakistan's program : Nuclear Power in Pakistan
Sources:
This paper was based on one by Michael Wilson, 1995, The Nuclear Future: Asia and Australia and the 1995 Conference on Non-Proliferation, published by Griffith University. Used with the author's permission.
PPNN Newsbriefs 1995-98, Issue Review #5, 1995.
Australian Safeguards Office
Dr A.Kakodkar, paper at WNA Symposium 2002.
A B Vajpayee in India Express 31/10/02.
A.Gopalakrishnan, 2002, Evolution of the Indian Nuclear Power Program, Ann Review Energy Environment 27:369-395.
A. Kakodkar & R.Grover, 2004, Nuclear Energy in India, The Nuclear Engineer 45,2.
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd
IAEA 2003, Country Niuclear Power Profiles.
Nu-Power 18,2-3, 2004
A. Kakodkar 2007, statement to IAEA General Conference, Sept 2007.
 
.
Senate likely to clear N-deal tomorrow-USA-World-The Times of India



Senate likely to clear N-deal tomorrow
30 Sep 2008, 1047 hrs IST,PTI


WASHINGTON: The Bush administration is confident that the approval legislation on the US-India civilian nuclear deal will be cleared by the Senate "most likely" on Wednesday.
The message is said to have been conveyed to a small group of top Indian American community leaders yesterday by senior White House officials, a source privy to the goings said.

"We are confident that just like last time, the Bill will be passed by substantial majority. With that a new era will begin for India’s nuclear programme," the officials were quoted by the source as saying.

Unlike the House of Representatives which needed a two-thirds majority, the Senate requires only a simple majority to approve the legislation.

The Senate was expected to convene a session today in spite of a Jewish holiday to take up the Bill along with other legislations.

But before the House rejected the USD700 billion financial bailout package to rescue bankrupt financial institutions, Senate Majority leader Reid said on Monday that the "India nuclear agreement" will be coming up for a vote only on Wednesday when the Senate reconvenes after the holiday.

"In the meantime we're working to see if we can complete an agreement to move and complete the Indian nuclear treaty also on the same day, that would be Wednesday," he said.

"And that would allow all afternoon today, all day on Tuesday, and Wednesday to work on those two items," the Nevada Democrat said, referring to the emergency economic bailout package as also the approval legislation to the nuclear deal with India.
 
.
The Associated Press: Senior senator wants quick vote on US-India pact

Senior senator wants quick vote on US-India pact
By FOSTER KLUG – 2 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate majority leader is putting pressure on other senators to vote quickly on a U.S.-India nuclear cooperation accord, even as opponents of the pact urge careful consideration of an endeavor that would reverse three decades of U.S. nuclear policy.
Despite passage in the House, at least one senator, acting anonymously, has used the Senate's rules to block the accord from coming to a vote in the Senate. Lawmakers are trying to deal with a financial crisis before they leave for the year to campaign for the November elections, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is suggesting that he might call senators back to work in about two weeks for a vote on the accord if objections are not cleared up soon.

Reid spokesman Jim Manley said Monday that Reid, D-Nev., was "doing what he can to try to get it done."

Opponents, meanwhile, are urging the Senate not to rush a deal that would allow U.S. civilian nuclear trade with India in exchange for safeguards and U.N. inspections at India's civilian nuclear plants. Military plants would be off-limits.

Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, said "legislators should understand what they're voting for before they vote on it. This has not been fully vetted."

The deal is a priority for President Bush and is supported by senior lawmakers of both political parties. It received a boost this month when the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group of countries that supply nuclear material and technology agreed to lift a ban on civilian nuclear trade with India.

Critics say opening India to new nuclear material could spark an atomic arms race in Asia by allowing India to use the extra nuclear fuel that the deal would provide to free up domestic uranium for its weapons program.

India built its bombs outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which provides civil nuclear trade in exchange for a pledge from nations not to pursue nuclear weapons. The country has faced a nuclear trade ban since its first atomic test in 1974.

Lawmakers must overcome a U.S. law that says they may not ratify the accord for 30 working days after receiving it from Bush on Sept. 10. Lawmakers also were required to hold hearings to study the deal. The Senate's single hearing included only Bush administration officials and no outside witnesses or critics of the agreement.

Speaking after the House approved the accord, Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said it was "outrageous that such a critical vote, one that will forever change the global nonproliferation regime, was taken without the benefit of full congressional review and oversight, as required by the law."

Sharon Squassoni, a nonproliferation analyst with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said the deal has been "a case study in how things should not be done."

"This kind of congressional approval is a farce, and the reason why it's happening is the tremendous political pressure being exerted by the Bush administration on behalf of the Indian government" and Indian-American political action committees, Squassoni said.
 
.
good news guys:

India, France finalise nuclear cooperation pact-India-The Times of India



India, France finalise nuclear cooperation pact
30 Sep 2008, 1330 hrs IST,PTI

PARIS: India and France on Tuesday finalised a landmark agreement on civil nuclear cooperation that covered supply of reactors and atomic fuel in the first concrete step to bring New Delhi back into the nuclear mainstream ending 34 years of nuclear isolation.

The agreement to be initialled later in the day after summit talks between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and French President Nicolas Sarkozy will form the basis of wide ranging bilateral cooperation from basic and applied research to full civil nuclear cooperation including reactors and fuel supplies, nuclear safety, radiation and environment protection and nuclear fuel cycle management.

The atomic pact comes three weeks after India got the crucial NSG waiver that cleared the decks for New Delhi's global nuclear trade.

The atomic pact is one of the three agreements to be signed during Singh's two-day visit to Paris. The other two relates to social security matters which will benefit Indian and French nationals staying in each others countries on short duration up to five years.
 
.
Mangalorean.Com- Serving Mangaloreans Around The World!

BANGALORE: SEPTEMBER 29: Even as the communists opposed the Indo-US nuclear deal in total, the scientists feel that the deal will rejuvenate India's nuclear power generation.

"The deal is good for India that we are planning the use of atomic energy as well as atomic programme in other fields, scientist K. Kasturirangan, said.

The agreement passed the House of Representatives by a margin of 298-117. The Democrats who control the Senate hope to vote in favour of the deal.

Former head of the Atomic Energy Commission M R Srinivasan has said that the scenario of the deal being scrapped in the wake of India testing a nuclear device is a hypothetical situation given that the two major parties in India, the Congress and the BJP have committed the country to a voluntary moratorium.

"So, both the major political parties of India have accepted to honour the voluntary moratorium. Now, there is no legal ban on test, but at the same time it is a fact that as a practical preposition. I consider a very low probability situation. Therefore, this ought not to burden our thinking too much," he said.


Indian Communists, who withdrew support to the Congress-led coalition over the deal, said Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh had betrayed the country. The Government had survived following the support by Samjwadi Party of Mulayam Sing Yadav. The SP voted in favour of the deal in the Lok Sabha.

Sitaram Yechuri, a senior leader of Communist Party of India (Marxist) opined that the deal has been possible because India has surrendered its sovereignty to the US. As of now not a single one out of nine assurances that the Prime Minister has given in the Parliament remains, the assurances are valid. On all counts there has been a negation. India has willingly surrendered itself to this American pressure."

The BJP, communists and Janata Dal (S) held protests all over the country opposing the nuclear deal. They alleged that the UPA Government led by Manmohan Singh has least bothered to deal with issued concerned to common man such as price rice, inflation, unemployment, poverty, terrorism etc.
 
.
India, France sign civil nuke cooperation pact

http://www.timesnow.tv/Newsdtls.aspx?NewsID=17153
Scripting a new era in bilateral ties, India and France on Tuesday (Sep 30) signed a landmark agreement on civil nuclear cooperation that covers supply of reactors and atomic fuel in the first concrete step to bring New Delhi back into the nuclear mainstream after 34 years of isolation.

"We expect to finalise agreements with other European partners too" on civil nuclear cooperation, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said after holding talks with President Nicolas Sarkozy at the Elysee Palace in Paris.

France is the first country to open nuclear commerce with India after the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) granted a waiver to New Delhi on September six. The Indo-US nuclear deal is awaiting Congressional nod and an agreement on it between the two countries is expected to be inked soon.

"Today we have added a new dimension to our strategic partnership by signing an inter-governmental agreement on civil nuclear cooperation," Singh said after the Indo-France Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement was signed in the presence of the two leaders by Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Anil Kakodkar and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner.

The agreement will form the basis of wide ranging bilateral cooperation from basic and applied research to full civil nuclear cooperation including reactors, fuel supplies, nuclear safety, radiation and environment protection and nuclear fuel cycle management. The atomic pact is one of the three agreements signed during Singh's two-day visit to Paris.

The other two relates to social security matters which will benefit Indian and French nationals staying in each others countries on short duration up to five years and a Long Term Agreement on utilisation of the Indian Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle (PSLV) launch services.

"France is the first country with whom we have entered into such an agreement after the lifting of international restrictions on civil nuclear cooperation with India by the NSG. I conveyed to President Sarkozy our gratitude for France's consistent support to our civil nuclear initiative," Singh said.

The two countries decided to give a new impetus to their cooperation for the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes as an expression of their strategic partnership. A statement on the agreement said both sides recognise nuclear energy as a reliable source of sustainable and non-polluting energy, it could make a significant contribution to meeting the global challenge of achieving energy security.

It also noted that both the countries share common concerns and objectives in the field of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery including in view of possible linkages to terrorism. As responsible states with advanced nuclear technologies, including in the fuel cycle, the two countries are interested to promote nuclear energy with the highest standards of safety and security, the statement said.

Wrapping up his 10-day visit to the US and France, Singh addressed India-EU Business Summit, during which he said New Delhi expects to finalise agreements on civil nuclear cooperation with other European countries. Under the social security agreement inked today, workers on short term contract up to five years, do not have to make any social security contribution provided they continue to make social security payment in India and France respectively.

For Indians working in France, these benefits shall be available even when the Indian company sends its employees to the French Republic from a third country.

(With inputs from PTI)
 
.
hey that's great news, but any details are out about the the details about the nuclear pact?
 
.
hey that's great news, but any details are out about the the details about the nuclear pact?

Not much but accourdinng to news channel..advance EP reactor, Life time fuel supply insurance, reprocessing technology and life time service......
 
.
Not much but accourdinng to news channel..advance EP reactor, Life time fuel supply insurance, reprocessing technology and life time service......

EPR reactors are good, and reprocessing right? Does it means we can use the spent fuel, extract the plutonium and use it in our FBR reactors?
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom