`Moratorium is voluntary'

Dr. Anil Kakodkar, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission.-V.V. KRISHNAN

Interview with Dr. Anil Kakodkar, Chairman, AEC.

THE year 2006 was "exciting" for the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) on several counts. It kicked off the year with the inauguration of the golden jubilee celebrations of its nerve centre, the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Trombay on January 20. It was on this day 50 years ago that Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru formally inaugurated the Atomic Energy Establishment, Trombay (AEET), making the beginning of India's atomic energy programme. The AEET, founded in 1957 by Homi J. Bhabha, the paterfamilias of the programme, was renamed after him in January 1967, by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Today, BARC is the largest research and development organisation in the world. Dr. Anil Kakodkar, Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission and Secretary, DAE, calls it "a technology powerhouse".

Dr. Srikumar Banerjee, Director, BARC, describes it as "the fountainhead of all major activities" of the DAE.

On March 2, 2006, during U.S. President George W. Bush's visit, India and the U.S. agreed upon a Separation Plan document, which enables export of nuclear reactors to India from other countries. The plan was a sequel to the Joint Statement made by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President Bush on July 18, 2005, in Washington D.C. It entailed that India would place 14 of its 22 pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs), in operation or under construction, representing 65 per cent of its nuclear capacity, under the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) safeguards. The DAE was, however, firm that its breeder reactors, would be kept out of the purview of these safeguards.

On May 21, 2006, the third reactor at Tarapur, an indigenous PHWR with a capacity of 540 MWe, reached criticality. India will no longer build 220 MWe or 540 MWe PHWRs. All its future PHWRs that use natural uranium as fuel will be of 700 MWe capacity. A problem, however, remains: the shortage of natural uranium that fuels the indigenous PHWRs. The projects for mining uranium are delayed because of the local opposition especially in Meghalaya and Andhra Pradesh. This in turn has led to a delay in starting the construction of 700 MWe indigenous PHWRs. The capacity factor of the operating 220 MWe PHWRs has also dropped because of the shortage.

Kakodkar and representatives of six other countries signed an agreement in Brussels on May 24, 2006 to launch the construction of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), which is a fusion reactor.

The year was not without its share of big controversies. In April/May 2006, Russia supplied about 50 to 60 tonnes of enriched uranium for the two light water reactors at Tarapur, invoking the safety clause of the Nuclear Suppliers' Group guidelines. This angered the U.S.

On July 26, 2006, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the "United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006." The Bill provoked angry reaction in India from the media, academics and nuclear science community because it imposed many new, tough conditions that were not part of the joint statement by Manmohan Singh and Bush. As Dr. M.R. Srinivasan, former Chairman, Atomic Energy Commission, said, "During much of July and August 2006, politicians, Members of Parliament, media, public opinion and the scientific community were greatly agitated over the attempts of the U.S. Congress to rewrite what India perceived as a settled agreement." There was a similar angry reaction when the U.S. Senate passed in September 2006 the "United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act." The Hyde Act, passed by the U.S. Congress in December 2006, was equally unpalatable to the DAE officials.

Asked whether the Hyde Act impinged on India's strategic programme, Kakodkar, in an interview published in The Hindu of January 27, 2007, said, "... Whether you take it at the level of the sense of the Congress, the level of U.S. policy or the assessment and reporting requirement, there are a fairly large number of sections which essentially seek to, sort of contain or cap the Indian strategic programme. And in fact, in some places, it also articulates a policy or philosophy of rollback. This is a very serious issue and we need to seek clarifications. This is one of the most important things. There are of course many others."

Problems have surfaced again between India and the U.S. in the negotiations leading to the "123 agreement" with the U.S. insisting that India could not conduct any more nuclear tests and India sticking to its position that its unilateral voluntary moratorium "cannot be converted into a bilateral legality." The DAE is also firm that India should get lifetime of fuel supply for the reactors it places under the IAEA safeguards, not merely one extra "core" of fuel that the U.S. says these reactors are entitled to.

It was in this context that T.S. Subramanian met Dr. Kakodkar at BARC on March 2, 2007, for an interview:

What will be the future thrust of BARC activities?

BARC is a technology powerhouse. The future thrust will essentially be, of course, in the utilisation of thorium as fuel, which has been the thrust all along. Next comes the generation of nuclear energy at high temperature so that we can produce hydrogen in addition to electricity because hydrogen is likely to be another important carrier of energy in future. Then another thrust will be on ways of using technologies for storage, transportation and utilisation of hydrogen. We are also talking about the role of particle accelerators.

Do you mean accelerator-driven systems?

A lot of technologies have to be developed because particle accelerators can be used for energy production, for example, through accelerator-driven systems. This is as far as area of energy is concerned.

There are other areas. The spent fuel that comes out of the reactor contains a lot of radioactive products such as cesium. It is an important material for radiation processing. It is better than cobalt.

Can cesium be used for irradiation of spices, potatoes and onions to increase their shelf-life and prevent sprouting?

We can have a whole set of new technologies for radiation processing using cesium. Other thrust areas will be a host of technologies, including MEMs [micro-electro-mechanical systems], high-precision engineering and even futuristic micro-maching.

When will you start the construction of the Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) that will use thorium as fuel, which will signify the beginning of the third stage of India's nuclear power programme? When you were BARC Director, you had written an article in the BARC newsletter in 1999 that India should accelerate the utilisation of thorium, which we have in plenty.

Correct.

In 2003, you said the DAE will start the construction of the AHWR in 2004. It is 2007 now.

I know.

Construction of the AHWR has not begun. You said it would begin in 2004.

The peer review was completed sometime ago. It was being looked at by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board for pre-licensing review. I believe that has just been completed. They are now preparing the project document. So we want to start the construction this year. That will be our attempt.

Has Tarapur been selected as the site for the AHWR?

We have not decided on the site yet.

How was the criticality of the third nuclear reactor at Kaiga, Karnataka on February 26?

Kaiga-3 criticality went off very well.

It is said there has been a delay in starting the construction of the 700 MWe PHWRs because the natural uranium supply from the country will not match the demand. (The indigenous PHWRs use natural uranium as fuel and heavy water as both coolant and moderator).

Yes. We have to make some more progress on the mining and milling capacity of natural uranium in the country. We have this new mine coming up now.

Where is this new mine?

The uranium mine at Bandurung [near Jaduguda in Jharkhand State] is ready. The erection of a mill at Turamdih [also near Jaduguda for processing the natural uranium] is almost complete.

We have the environmental clearance for the Tumalapalle mine in Andhra Pradesh. We also have the environmental clearance for exploratory mining at Gogi in Karnataka.

Is the mine at Bandurung producing uranium ore?

They have reached the ore body. As soon as the mill at Turamdih starts working, they will start producing the ore at Bandurung. The mill is mechanically complete. They must be commissioning it now.

You have not been able to bring around the Meghalaya government to start the process of uranium mining in the State.

In Meghalaya, some progress is there. It will take time. In the meantime, we are working on the preliminary activities on [starting the construction of] 700 MWe reactors [at Rawatbhatta in Rajasthan and Kakrapar in Gujarat].

You said in September 2006 that India would not allow its unilateral, voluntary moratorium on nuclear tests into a bilateral legality with the United States. The U.S. officials have told their Indian counterparts during their negotiations on the "123 agreement" that it is not merely a nuclear test by India but any event in India that "jeopardises supreme U.S. national interests" will lead to the termination of the Indo-U.S. nuclear cooperation.

The question is our position remains the same. The Prime Minister has very clearly stated our concerns in Parliament. Now, we are, of course, approaching the whole matter in a positive spirit. So what we would like to see is explicit provisions that safeguard our interests in the light of the concerns that were expressed in Parliament by our Prime Minister. That will be the basis on which we will approach the negotiations.

If the U.S. insists that India should not conduct any more nuclear tests and that it will terminate the Indo-U.S. nuclear cooperation if we do the tests...

We don't want to convert this [unilateral, voluntary moratorium on nuclear tests] into a bilateral legality. We cannot do that. The moratorium on nuclear testing is unilateral, voluntary. So that is the position. Nothing more than that.

The U.S. says that it would supply only one extra "core" of fuel for the reactors instead of the lifetime fuel supplies which had been agreed upon earlier by India and the U.S.

The March 2006 Separation Plan document has a clear provision for building stockpiles of fuel to meet the lifetime requirements of reactors placed under the International Atomic Energy Agency's safeguards. That is what I am saying. We need everything to be built into the 123 agreement in a very explicit manner so that our interests are protected.

At what stage is our negotiations with the U.S. on the 123 agreement?

The 123 draft has just been given to them.