| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Implementing India's nuclear separation plan |
| 2006-03-07 |
| This is the text of the document titled "Implementation of the India-United States Joint Statement of July 18, 2005: India's Separation Plan" tabled in Parliament on March 7, 2006: "The resumption of full civilian nuclear energy cooperation between India and the United States arose in the context of India's requirement for adequate and affordable energy supplies to sustain its accelerating economic growth rate and as recognition of its growing technological prowess. It was preceded by discussions between the two Governments, particularly between President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, of the global energy scenario and the long-term implications of increasing pressure on hydrocarbon resources and rising oil prices. These developments led to the announcement in April 2005 of an Indo-US Energy Dialogue that encompassed the entire spectrum of energy options ranging from oil and gas to coal, alternative fuels and civilian nuclear energy. Through the initiation of a sustained dialogue to address energy security concerns, the two countries sought to promote stable, efficient, predictable and cost effective solutions for India's growing requirements. At the same time, they also agreed on the need to develop and deploy cleaner, more efficient, affordable and diversified energy technologies to deal with the environmental implications of energy consumption. India had developed proven and wide-ranging capabilities in the nuclear sector, including over the entire nuclear fuel cycle. It is internationally recognized that India has unique contributions to make to international efforts towards meeting these objectives. India has become a full partner in ITER, with the full support of the US and other partners. India also accepted the US invitation to join the initiative on Clean Development Partnership. U.S. undertaking "2. Noting the centrality of civilian nuclear energy to the twin challenges of energy security and safeguarding the environment, the two Governments agreed on 18 July 2005 to undertake reciprocal commitments and responsibilities that would create a framework for the resumption of full cooperation in this field. On its part, the United States undertook to: " # Seek agreement from the Congress to adjust US laws and policies to achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation. " # Work with friends and allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India, including but not limited to expeditious consideration of fuel supplies for safeguarded nuclear reactors at Tarapur. " # In the meantime, encourage its partners to consider fuel supply to Tarapur expeditiously. " # To consult with its partners to consider India's participation in ITER. " # To consult with other participants in the Generation-IV International Forum with a view towards India's inclusion. "3. India had conveyed its readiness to assume the same responsibilities and practices and acquire the same benefits and advantages as other leading countries with advanced nuclear technology, such as the United States. Accordingly, India for its part undertook the following commitments: " # Identifying and separating civilian and military nuclear facilities and programmes in a phased manner. " # Filing a declaration regarding its civilian facilities with the IAEA. " # Taking a decision to place voluntarily its civilian nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards, and " # Signing and adhering to an Additional Protocol with respect to civilian nuclear facilities. # "4. Other commitments undertaken by India have already been fulfilled in the last year. Among them are: " # India's responsible non-proliferation record, recognized by the US, continues and is reflected in its policies and actions. " # The harmonization of India's export controls with NSG [Nuclear Suppliers' Group] and MTCR [Missile Technology Control Regime] Guidelines even though India is not a member of either group. These guidelines and control lists have been notified and are being implemented. " # A significant upgrading of India's non-proliferation regulations and export controls has taken place as a result of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of May 2005. Inter-Ministerial consultations are ongoing to examine and amend other relevant Acts as well as framing appropriate rules and regulations. " # Refrain from transfer of enrichment and reprocessing technologies to states that do not have them and supporting international efforts to limit their spread. This has guided our policy on non-proliferation. " # Continued unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing, and " # Willingness to work with the United States for the conclusion of a multilateral Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty. "5. The Joint Statement of July 18, 2005, recognized that India is ready to assume the same responsibilities and practices as other leading countries with advanced nuclear technology, such as the United States. India has an impeccable record in non-proliferation. The Joint Statement acknowledges that India's nuclear programme has both a military and a civilian component. Both sides had agreed that the purpose was not to constrain India's strategic programme but to enable resumption of full civil nuclear energy cooperation in order to enhance global energy and environmental security. Such cooperation was predicated on the assumption that any international civil nuclear energy cooperation (including by the U.S.) offered to India in the civilian sector should, firstly, not be diverted away from civilian purposes, and secondly, should not be transferred from India to third countries without safeguards. These concepts will be reflected in the Safeguards Agreement to be negotiated by India with IAEA. "6. India's nuclear programme is unique as it is the only state with nuclear weapons not to have begun with a dedicated military programme. It must be appreciated that the strategic programme is an offshoot of research on nuclear power programme and consequently, it is embedded in a larger undifferentiated programme. Identification of purely civilian facilities and programmes that have no strategic implications poses a particular challenge. Therefore, facilities identified as civilian in the Separation Plan will be offered for safeguards in phases to be decided by India. The nature of the facility concerned, the activities undertaken in it, the national security significance of materials and the location of the facilities are factors taken into account in undertaking the separation process. This is solely an Indian determination. Three-stage programme "7.The nuclear establishment in India not only built nuclear reactors but promoted the growth of a national industrial infrastructure. Nuclear power generation was envisaged as a three-stage programme with PHWRs [pressurised heavy water reactors] chosen for deployment in the first stage. As indigenous reactors were set up, several innovative design improvements were carried out based on Indian R&D and a standardized design was evolved. The research and technology development spanned the entire spectrum of the nuclear fuel cycle including the front end and the back end. Success in the technologies for the back end of the fuel cycle allowed us to launch the second stage of the programme by constructing a Fast Breeder Test Reactor. This reactor has operated for 20 years based on a unique carbide fuel and has achieved all technology objectives. We have now proceeded further and are constructing a 500 MWe Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor. Simultaneously, we have launched design and development of reactors aimed at thorium utilization and incorporating inherent safety features. "8.Concepts such as grid connectivity are not relevant to the separation exercise. Issues related to fuel resource sustainability, technical design and economic viability, as well as smooth operation of reactors are relevant factors. This would necessitate grid connectivity irrespective of whether the reactor concerned is civilian or not civilian. "9.It must be recognized that the Indian nuclear programme still has a relatively narrow base and cannot be expected to adopt solutions that might be deemed viable by much larger programmes. A comparison of the number of reactors and the total installed capacity between India and the P-5 brings this out graphically [see table]. "10. Another factor to be taken into account is the small capacity of the reactors produced indigenously by India, some of which would remain outside safeguards. Therefore, in assessing the extent of safeguards coverage, it would be important to look at both the number of reactors and the percentage of installed capacity covered. An average Indian reactor is of 220 MW and its output is significantly smaller than the standards reactor in a P-5 economy [see table]. "11. The complexity of the separation process is further enhanced by the limited resources that India has devoted to its nuclear programme as compared to P-5 nations. Moreover, as India expands international cooperation, the percentage of its thermal power reactor installed capacity under safeguards would rise significantly as fresh capacity is added through such cooperation. "12. India's approach to the separation of its civilian nuclear facilities is guided by the following principles: " # Credible, feasible and implementable in a transparent manner; " # Consistent with the understandings of the 18 July Statement; " # Consistent with India's national security and R&D requirements as well as not prejudicial to the three-stage nuclear programme in India; " # Must be cost effective in its implementation; and " # Must be acceptable to Parliament and public opinion. "13. Based on these principles, India will: " # Include in the civilian list only those facilities offered for safeguards that, after separation, will no longer be engaged in activities of strategic significance. " # The overarching criterion would be a judgment whether subjecting a facility to IAEA safeguards would impact adversely on India's national security. " # However, a facility will be excluded from the civilian list if it is located in a larger hub of strategic significance, notwithstanding the fact that it may not be normally engaged in activities of strategic significance. " # A civilian facility would, therefore, be one that India has determined not to be relevant to its strategic programme. "14. Taking the above into account, India, on the basis of reciprocal actions by the US, will adopt the following approach: "(i) Thermal Power Reactors: India will identify and offer for safeguards 14 thermal power reactors between 2006 and 2014. This will include the 4 presently safeguarded reactors (TAPS 1&2, RAPS 1&2) and in addition KK 1&2 that are under construction. 8 other PHWRs, each of a capacity of 220 MW, will also be offered. Phasing of specific thermal power reactors, being offered for safeguards would be indicated separately by India. Such an offer would, in effect, cover 14 out of the 22 thermal power reactors in operation or currently under construction to be placed under safeguards, and would raise the total installed Thermal Power capacity by MWs under safeguards from the present 19% to 65% by 2014. "(ii) Fast Breeder Reactors: India is not in a position to accept safeguards on the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) and the Fast Breeder Test Reactor (FBTR), both located at Kalpakkam. The Fast Breeder Programme is at the R&D stage and its technology will take time to mature and reach an advanced stage of development. "(iii) Future Reactors: India has decided to place under safeguards all future civilian thermal power reactors and civilian breeder reactors, and the Government of India retains the sole right to determine such reactors as civilian. "(iv) Research Reactors: India will permanently shut down the CIRUS reactor, in 2010. It will also be prepared to shift the fuel core of the APSARA reactor that was purchased from France outside BARC [Bhabha Atomic Research Centre] and make the fuel core available to be placed under safeguards in 2010. "(v) Upstream facilities: The following upstream facilities would be identified and separated as civilian: " # List of those specific facilities in the Nuclear Fuel Complex, which will be offered for safeguards by 2008 will be indicated separately. " # The Heavy Water Production plants at Thal, Tuticorin and Hazira are proposed to be designated for civilian use between 2006-2009. We do not consider these plants as relevant for safeguards purposes. "(vi) Downstream facilities: The following downstream facilities would be identified and separated as civilian: " # India is willing to accept safeguards in the `campaign' mode after 2010 in respect of the Tarapur Power Reactor Fuel Reprocessing Plant. " # The Tarapur and Rajasthan `Away From Reactors' spent fuel storage pools would be made available for safeguards with appropriate phasing between 2006-2009. "(vii) Research Facilities: India will declare the following facilities as civilian: "(a) Tata Institute of Fundamental Research "(b) Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre "(c) Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics "(d) Institute for Plasma Research "(e) Institute of Mathematics Sciences "(f) Institute of Physics "(g) Tata Memorial Centre "(h) Board of Radiation and Isotope Technology "(i) Harish Chandra Research Institute "These facilities are safeguards-irrelevant. It is our expectation that they will play a prominent role in international cooperation. 15. Safeguards: "(a) The United States has conveyed its commitment to the reliable supply of fuel to India. Consistent with the July 18, 2005, Joint Statement, the United States has also reaffirmed its assurance to create the necessary conditions for India to have assured and full access to fuel for its reactors. As part of its implementation of the July 18, 2005, Joint Statement the United States is committed to seeking agreement from the U.S. Congress to amend its domestic laws and to work with friends and allies to adjust the practices of the Nuclear Suppliers Group to create the necessary conditions for India to obtain full access to the international fuel market, including reliable, uninterrupted and continual access to fuel supplies from firms in several nations. "(b) To further guard against any disruption of fuel supplies, the United States is prepared to take the following additional steps: "(i) The United States is willing to incorporate assurances regarding fuel supply in the bilateral U.S.-India agreement on peaceful uses of nuclear energy under Section 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act, which would be submitted to the U.S. Congress. "(ii) The United States will join India in seeking to negotiate with the IAEA an India-specific fuel supply agreement. "(iii) The United States will support an Indian effort to develop a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel to guard against any disruption of supply over the lifetime of India's reactors. "(iv) If despite these arrangements, a disruption of fuel supplies to India occurs, the United States and India would jointly convene a group of friendly supplier countries to include countries such as Russia, France and the United Kingdom to pursue such measures as would restore fuel supply to India. "(c) In light of the above understandings with the United States, an India-specific safeguards agreement will be negotiated between India and the IAEA providing for safeguards to guard against withdrawal of safeguarded nuclear material from civilian use at any time as well as providing for corrective measures that India may take to ensure uninterrupted operation of its civilian nuclear reactors in the event of disruption of foreign fuel supplies. Taking this into account, India will place its civilian nuclear facilities under India-specific safeguards in perpetuity and negotiate an appropriate safeguards agreement to this end with the IAEA. "16. This plan is in conformity with the commitments made to Parliament by the Government." |
| Posted by:john |
| #7 Some background info on the Indian nuclear program As the US Congress debates the Indo-US agreement on nuclear cooperation, a key aspect from the American viewpoint is that India has certain inherent strengths in the area of nuclear technology, which would enable India to forge ahead, albeit slowly, even without US cooperation. Central to this argument is the availability of huge reserves of thorium in India. Thorium reserves have been estimated to be between 3,60,000 and 5,18,000 tonnes. The US estimates the “economically extractable” reserves to be 2,90,000 tonnes, one of the largest in the world. Our uranium reserves, by contrast, are estimated to be at a maximum of around 70,000 tonnes. India currently has 15 commercial power reactors in operation, most of which are pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWR) which use natural uranium. Two Tarapur reactors are boiling water reactors (BWR) which need enriched uranium, which has to be imported. Together they generate about 3300 MWe (Mega Watt Electrical) of power, about 4 per cent of that generated from all sources. Another six PHWRs are in construction, and along with the two “VVER” Russian built 1000 MWe reactors which use enriched uranium, they would add about 3960 MWe by 2008. The goal is to reach at least 20,000 MWe by 2020. India's uranium reserves are low. Obtaining enriched uranium for the two Tarapur reactors and VVER type reactors requires the consent of the Nuclear Suppliers Groups countries, including Russia. This is where the agreement with the US is expected to be beneficial to India. Also central to India's success in achieving these goals, is the harnessing of thorium, for which India has developed a three-stage nuclear programme. India has already developed and tested the technologies needed to extract energy from Thorium, but large scale execution has not yet been possible, mainly because of limited availability of Plutonium. Stage one is the use of PHWRs. Natural uranium is the primary fuel. Heavy water (deuterium oxide, D2O) is used as moderator and coolant. The composition of natural uranium is 0.7 percent U-235, which is fissile, and the rest is U-238. This low fissile component explains why certain other types of reactors require the uranium to be “enriched” i.e. the fissile component increased. In the second stage, the spent fuel from stage one is reprocessed in a reprocessing facility, where Plutonium-239 is separated. Plutonium, of course, is a weapons material, which goes towards creating India’s nuclear deterrent. Pu-239 then becomes the main fissile element, the fuel core, in what are known as fast breeder reactors (FBR). A test FBR is in operation in Kalpakkam, and the construction for a 500 MWe prototype FBR was launched recently by Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh. These are known as breeder reactors because the U-238 “blanket” surrounding the fuel core will undergo nuclear transmutation to produce more PU-239, which in turn will be used to create energy. The stage also envisages the use of Thorium (Th-232) as another blanket. Th-232 also undergoes neutron capture reactions, creating another uranium isotope, U-233. It is this isotope which will be used in the third stage of the programme. Thorium by itself is not a fissile material, and cannot be used directly to produce nuclear energy. The Kamini 40 MWe reactor at Kalpakkam which became critical in Sept 1996, using U-233 fuel, has demonstrated some of these technologies. India is currently developing a prototype advanced heavy water reactor (AHWR) of 300 MWe capacity. The AHWRs, which use plutonium based fuel, are to be used to shorten the period of reaching full scale utilisation of our thorium reserves. The AHWR is thus the first element of the third stage. AHWR design is complete but further R and D work is required, especially on safety. It is expected to be unveiled soon and construction launched. In the third phase, in addition to the U-233 created from the second phase, breeder reactors fuelled by U-233, with Th-232 blankets, will be used to generate more U-233. The Bhabha Atomic Research Centre has estimated that India's thorium reserves can amount to a staggering 3,58,000 GWe-yr (Giga Watt Electrical - Year) of energy, enough for the next century and beyond BARC scientists are also looking at other designs, like an advanced thorium breeder reactor (ATBR) which requires plutonium only as a seed to start off the reaction, and then use only thorium and U-233. Here the plutonium is completely consumed and this reactor is thus considered “proliferation resistant”. A Compact High Temperature Reactor also under development at BARC . This reactor is designed to work in closed spaces and remote locations. Success in harnessing thorium’s potential is thus critical for the India’s future energy security. India has put in place mechanisms for ensuring safety and security of nuclear facilities. The regulatory and safety systems ensure that equipment at India's nuclear facilities are designed to operate safely and even in the unlikely event of any failure or accident, mechanisms like plant and site emergency response plans are in place to ensure that the public is not affected in any manner. In addition, detailed plans, which involve the local public authorities, are also in place to respond if the consequences were to spill into the public domain. The emergency response system is also in a position to handle any other radiation emergency in the public domain that may occur at locations, which do not even have any nuclear facility. Regulatory and safety functions of Atomic Energy in India are carried out by an independent body, the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB). The AERB was constituted on November 15, 1983 by the President of India under the Atomic Energy Act, 1962 to carry out certain regulatory and safety functions under the Act. The regulatory authority of AERB is derived from the rules and notifications promulgated under the Atomic Energy Act, 1962 and the Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986. The mission of the Board is to ensure that the use of ionizing radiation and nuclear energy in India does not cause undue risk to health and the environment. |
| Posted by: john 2006-03-07 20:02 |
| #6 India operates more Candu derived units than any country outside Canada itself. These are heavy water reactors that use natural uranium fuel. No enrichment is needed. When used in low burnup mode, significant amounts of weapons grade plutonium are available in the spent fuel rods. Power output is quite low in this mode though. The recycling of the heavy water causes a build up of Tritium. Both Canada and India have developed (independently) the technology for detritiating heavy water. This gives a low cost source of large amounts of Tritium (used to boost the yield of a nuclear weapon primary). Canada recently shut down two CANDU units prematurely becuse it was too expensive to fix their corroded coolant pipes. In contrast, India has managed to fix (and essentially refurbish) the coolant pipes of its CANDU units quite cheaply, extending their life by decades. |
| Posted by: john 2006-03-07 18:23 |
| #5 btw, "home grown" means CANDU derivative. The heavy water reactors are based on Canadian designs. The fast breeders and the other research reactors - such as Kamini the only U233 reactor in the world, and the (still to be built) thorium reactor are of purely Indian design. |
| Posted by: john 2006-03-07 17:53 |
| #4 Reuters - India will open 14 of its 22 nuclear plants for international inspections by 2014 as part of a landmark civilian nuclear cooperation deal with the United States, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said on Tuesday. Here are some key facts about India's plan to separate its civilian and military nuclear facilities: - 14 thermal reactors that generate about 65 percent of atomic power will be placed on the civilian list between 2006 and 2014 and opened to inspections. India has 15 nuclear power plants in operation, with an installed generating capacity of 3,310 megawatts (MW). Seven more plants with a capacity of 3,420 MW are under construction and scheduled for completion by 2009. - Four nuclear power plants in operation (capacity 620 MW) and two under construction (capacity 2000 MW) are currently under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. - The experimental fast-breeder reactor (FBR) programme, the subject of hard bargaining during the negotiations, will fall outside the ambit of safeguards. This leaves out the fast breeder test reactor, which was completed in 1985, and the 500 MW Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor, scheduled for completion by 2010. The FBRs, which use spent fuel from existing heavy water reactors to process plutonium, are intended as the mainstay of the country's nuclear power programme. - India has decided to place under safeguards all future civilian thermal power reactors and civilian breeder reactors with the caveat that it will determine which ones fall in the civilian list. India has plans to increase the installed capacity of its nuclear power reactors to 20,000 MW by 2020. - Reprocessing, enrichment and other facilities associated with the fuel cycle for the strategic programme have been kept out of the separation plan. - The Canadian-built CIRUS research reactor, which has been used to produce weapons-grade plutonium, will be shut down by 2010. India has said it is ready to shift another research reactor, "Apsara," out of a high-security atomic research centre in Mumbai and place it under safeguards. - The safeguards will apply in "perpetuity" but only as long as foreign fuel supplies remain uninterrupted. This will require safeguards and fuel supply agreements with the IAEA applicable only to India. Sources: Reuters, Indian Atomic Energy Commission (www.aec.gov.in), IAEA (www.iaea.org) |
| Posted by: john 2006-03-07 17:49 |
| #3 The fast breeders are 500 MW. The Indian Naval reactor is rumored to be 190 MW |
| Posted by: john 2006-03-07 17:46 |
| #2 Home grown. The ones under construction now are 540 MW. They have designed 700 MW ones though and future reactors will be this size. |
| Posted by: john 2006-03-07 17:45 |
| #1 . An average Indian reactor is of 220 MW Wow! Home grown or French Navy? |
| Posted by: 6 2006-03-07 17:22 |