VZCZCXRO4046
RR RUEHTRO
DE RUEHBI #2064/01 3471425
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 131425Z DEC 06
FM AMCONSUL MUMBAI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4968
INFO RUEHBI/AMCONSUL MUMBAI 9826
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI 6130
RUEHCG/AMCONSUL CHENNAI 1280
RUEHCI/AMCONSUL CALCUTTA 1167
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 0679
RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO 0683
RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA 0675
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 0068
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 0052
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 0058
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 0083
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0178
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DC
RHMFIUU/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHMFIUU/HQ USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RHHMUNA/HQ USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
RUEHII/VIENNA IAEA POSTS COLLECTIVE
RHEHAAA/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 MUMBAI 002064 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
SIPDIS 
DEPT. OF ENERGY FOR U/S GARMAN, S. JOHNSON, T. CUTLER, A. SCHEINEMAN 
DEPT OF COMMERCE FOR U/S F. LAVIN, A/S VINEYARD,J.NEUHOF 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PARM TSPL KNNP ETTC ENRG TRGY PGOV ECON
BEXP, IN 
SUBJECT: NPCIL OUTLINES ITS VISION OF INDIA'S NUCLEAR FUTURE AT 
LARGEST EVER MEETING OF U.S. AND INDIAN NUCLEAR INDUSTRIES 
 
REF: A: Mumbai 1975; B: Mumbai 1803 
 
MUMBAI 00002064  001.2 OF 005 
 
 
¶1. (U) This is an action request.  See paragraph 14. 
 
 
 
Summary 
 
------- 
 
 
 
¶2. (SBU) India hopes to import 20 to 25 foreign nuclear reactors 
in the coming decades, the head of the country's nuclear power 
utility told over 25 U.S. companies from the nuclear sector on 
December 1 in Mumbai.  S.K. Jain, chairman of the state-run 
Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL), said India had 
increased to six the number of "nuclear parks," all of which he 
named, that it will build on India's coastline to house the 
foreign reactors.  Jain confirmed that the NPCIL already has GOI 
approval for two of the sites.  NPCIL officials emphasized 
privately that U.S. vendors were still in the running for one 
site where the French company Areva had done preliminary work 
for the the NPCIL.  NPCIL officials said India would welcome 
reactors from both General Electric and Westinghouse, and was 
prepared to be the first country to build the newest reactors 
offered by the two companies.  When importing foreign reactor 
technology, India would pursue "phased Indianization" to ensure 
technology and know-how transfer over time, Jain said.  He 
doubted whether India's nodal nuclear power authority would 
permit private nuclear power generators until the NPCIL reached 
a bottleneck in its expansion plans.  He also emphasized that 
the GOI understood U.S. firms' concerns on nuclear liability and 
was preparing appropriate legislation.  The companies 
accompanied Commerce U/S Frank Lavin to Mumbai as part of DOC's 
Business Development Mission.  The atmosphere at the path 
breaking day-long event hosted by NPCIL, the largest ever such 
gathering between U.S. and Indian firms involved in commercial 
nuclear power, was open and cordial, and laid the groundwork for 
future civil nuclear cooperation with potentially tremendous 
commercial benefits for the U.S.  At the same time, U.S. firms 
remained concerned that French and Russian companies might be 
the first to benefit from the successful passage of the civil 
nuclear initiative.  End summary. 
 
 
 
Cordial, Open Atmosphere Reigns at Commercial Nuclear Event 
 
--------------------------------------------- -------------- 
 
 
 
¶3. (U) Over 25 U.S. companies from the nuclear energy sector 
accompanied U/S Frank Lavin to the Business Development Mission 
on Nov. 29-Dec. 1 in Mumbai.  The group included top-level 
executives of General Electric, Westinghouse, nuclear fuel 
suppliers and companies involved in the design, construction and 
administration of nuclear power plants.  Several of the 
delegates visited the Tarapur nuclear power station near Mumbai, 
and on Dec. 1 the group had a full day of interaction with the 
Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) and with Indian 
companies that support the NPCIL's design, construction and 
operational activities.    The atmosphere was relaxed, open and 
cordial, and marked the first time that most of the U.S. 
companies had interacted with India's commercial nuclear 
community. A smaller group met with Department of Atomic Energy 
 
MUMBAI 00002064  002.2 OF 005 
 
 
(DAE) Chairman Anil Kakodkar on December 2 (septel). 
 
 
 
Six "Nuclear Parks" Planned For Foreign Reactor Technology 
 
--------------------------------------------- ------------- 
 
 
 
¶4. (SBU) NPCIL chairman S.K. Jain  gave the U.S. companies an 
update of India's plans to import nuclear reactors and 
technology once the civil nuclear initiative creates an enabling 
environment.  India now hoped to create 60 gigawatts (GW) of 
nuclear generation capacity by 2032, Jain said.   The country 
could not achieve that goal with its indigenously developed 
pressurized heavy water reactor (PHWR) technology and its 
planned fast breeder program, he said.  To make up the 
shortfall, the NPCIL needed to import 20 to 25 foreign light 
water reactors (LWR) with a capacity of 1 to 1.6 GW each. 
Confirming his earlier discussions with the USG on the NPCIL's 
expansion plans (ref A), Jain said his company planned to bundle 
foreign-built reactors in individual "nuclear parks," each 
housing six to eight reactors generate a total of 6 to 8 GW. 
For cost control and design efficiency reasons, the NPCIL would 
not mix different foreign technologies at each site, he added. 
 
 
 
¶5. (SBU) Jain said the NPCIL hoped to establish such parks at 6 
coastal sites.  He confirmed earlier reports (ref B) that the 
NPCIL had received GOI approval for nuclear parks at Jaitapur in 
southern Maharashtra and Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu, where two 
Russian LWRs are currently under construction.  An interagency 
site selection committee led by the NPCIL had identified a 
further four sites, Jain said.  They were Mithilirdi in Gujarat, 
Haripur in West Bengal, Patiswapur in Orissa and Kovvada in 
Andhra Pradesh. 
 
 
 
¶6. (SBU) In separate discussions on the margins of the formal 
presentation, Jain and other top NPCIL officials told Congenoffs 
that the company had not yet decided on specific foreign 
technologies for each site.   Several officials conceded, 
however, that the Kudankulam site is reserved for Russian 
technology, since two Russian reactors are already under 
construction and coming on line in 2007.  No decision on 
Jaitapur had been made, they emphasized, although they confirmed 
reports that the French company Areva had helped the NPCIL 
perform preliminary survey work at the site. 
 
 
 
Do U.S. Companies Still Have a Chance at Jaitapur? 
 
--------------------------------------------- ------ 
 
 
 
¶7. (SBU) The NPCIL would "soon" decide on the reactor technology 
for the Jaitapur site, Sudhinder Thakkur, the company's 
executive director for corporate planning, told Congenoff.  He 
emphasized that U.S. firms remained in the running and that the 
NPCIL was willing to discuss whatever was possible for GE, 
Westinghouse and others under U.S. law.  Once the NPCIL 
 
MUMBAI 00002064  003.2 OF 005 
 
 
committed to a specific reactor design and did the other 
necessary homework, it would approach India's Atomic Energy 
Regulatory Board (AERB) for concrete approval to build and 
operate a plant at Jaitapur.  Thakkur would not say when the 
NPCIL planed to commit to a specific reactor design, but only 
stated that AERB approval normally took up to 36 months. 
Separately, Timothy Richards, GE's director for international 
energy policy, told Congenoff that his company still felt it had 
a chance at the Jaitapur site. 
 
 
 
¶8. (SBU) The planning for Jaitapur was the most advanced of that 
at any of the proposed nuclear parks, several officials told us. 
 When selecting a site, the NPCIL must first identify a 
potential location and obtain approval "in principle" from the 
GOI, Thakkur explained to us.  It then formulates a design for 
the specific site and approaches the AERB and Ministry of 
Environment and Forests for approval.  The NPCIL had yet to 
receive GOI approval for the four additional sites, Thakkur 
said, but that process normally took 9-12 months.  The NPCIL's 
site selection committee was preparing reports on each site that 
will soon be sent to India's Atomic Energy Commission for 
approval.  Thereafter the Prime Minister's Office will make the 
final decisions in consultation with the respective state 
governments, he said.  He did not indicate when that might 
happen, but only said the company hopes to move quickly. 
 
 
 
Is There Room for Both GE and Westinghouse? 
 
------------------------------------------- 
 
 
 
¶9. (SBU) NPCIL management gave conflicting signals on whether it 
would buy reactors from both GE and Westinghouse, or concentrate 
on only one U.S. reactor.   During a roundtable discussion with 
GE and Westinghouse, S.K. Agrawal, NPCIL project director, said 
his company could envisage separate parks for both U.S. vendors. 
 However, officials told both Emboff and GE that NPCIL would 
focus on only one vendor each from the U.S., France and Russia. 
 Nonetheless, both Jain and Agrawal emphasized that U.S. reactor 
designs had a competitive advantage because the AERB used many 
regulatory norms of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 
and even compelled the Russians in Kudankulam to follow NRC 
standards and reformulate documentation and safety reports to 
comply with NRC formats.  The AERB and the NRC had a long 
history of co-operation (including the current placement of two 
AERB personnel in NRC), and NPCIL therefore anticipated quicker 
regulatory clearances with regard to U.S. reactors, Jain told 
us. 
 
 
 
A Strategy of "Phased Indianization" 
 
------------------------------------ 
 
 
 
¶10. (SBU) To speed up the process of buying foreign reactors, 
the NPCIL would desist from open tenders and conduct one-on-one 
negotiations with selected vendors, Agrawal said.  Localization 
and technology transfer were the chief priorities for the 
 
MUMBAI 00002064  004.2 OF 005 
 
 
selection of a technology provider. Price and resulting tariff 
rates ("the grid will pay anything we ask," one NPCIL official 
told us) were a second priority.  When working with foreign 
reactor vendors, Agrawal told GE's Tim Richards and 
Westinghouse's Ed Cummings, the NPCIL would pursue a strategy of 
"phased Indianization."  Initially, the NPCIL would purchase a 
complete reactor and as many foreign-built auxiliary components 
as necessary.  Over time, however, the company planed to 
indigenize both development and construction of components and 
tailor a given imported technology to the NPCIL's specific needs 
and preferences.  Agrawal said the company, and the AERB, 
preferred known and proven technologies.  Responding to a direct 
question by Westinghouse's Cummings, however, Agrawal said India 
was prepared to build separate plants using both GE's new 
Economic Simplified Boiling Water (ESBWR) and Westinghouse's 
AP-1000 reactor technologies, both of which have yet to be built 
anywhere in the world.  The NPCIL and India's strategic planners 
recognized that the country could not afford to rule out modern 
and path breaking new reactor designs.  He stressed that, in any 
case, the NPCIL would take charge of the planning and 
construction process.  Allowing a foreign company to control the 
entire process would not result in the desired technology and 
know-how transfer, Agrawal said. 
 
 
 
Private Participation in Nuclear Power Generation 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
 
 
 
¶11. (SBU) Several U.S. participants asked about the possibility 
of private players entering the nuclear power generation 
business.  Jain pointed out that, under current Indian law, 
private companies could have up to 49 percent ownership in a 
nuclear power utility.  The Department of Atomic Energy would 
need to approve any public private partnerships, which could 
only occur with NPCIL or Bhavini (the state company charged with 
building and operating India's fast breeder reactors). Privately 
Jain doubted whether the DAE would do so in the foreseeable 
term.  The DAE must also give consent to any other public sector 
utilities, such as the National Thermal Power Corporation, that 
want to enter the nuclear energy market.  Amendments to the 
Atomic Energy Act were currently being prepared that would allow 
100 percent private participation, but publicly Jain said he 
didn't expect this to pass until NPCIL reaches a bottleneck and 
cannot build any more reactors on its own. 
 
 
 
Nuclear Liability 
 
----------------- 
 
 
 
¶12. (SBU) The U.S. participants repeatedly emphasized that 
nuclear liability was the sine qua non for their ability and 
willingness to sell nuclear technology to India.  Jain and 
others said that the GOI clearly understood the issue and was in 
the process of preparing draft legislation that will limit 
vendor liability. 
 
 
 
 
MUMBAI 00002064  005.2 OF 005 
 
 
Comment 
 
------- 
 
 
 
¶13.  (SBU) The top leadership of the NPCIL and its major Indian 
suppliers spent the entire day with the U.S. companies, and were 
eager to emphasize their interest in U.S. civil nuclear 
technology.  The company's ambitious expansion plans and the 
country's hunger to acquire and "Indianize" the world's most 
advanced reactor technology will no doubt create tremendous 
commercial opportunities for many of the U.S. firms present at 
the meeting once the civil nuclear initiative creates an 
enabling environment.  Nobody doubts that the U.S. nuclear 
industry will get its park, or parks.  The big question is when. 
 Many of the U.S firms present, particularly Westinghouse and 
General Electric, fear that their French and Russian competitors 
could be the first to benefit commercially from the enabling 
environment that U.S. diplomacy has created.  During the 
interactions with the Indian industry, reps from both U.S. 
vendors reiterated how existing U.S. export controls prevent 
them from conducting the type of substantive discussion that 
Areva apparently had with the NPCIL.  The NPCIL's stance at the 
event made it clear that the company would welcome an Areva-like 
dialogue with Westinghouse and GE. 
 
 
 
Action Request:  The Way Forward 
 
--------------------------------- 
 
 
 
¶14. (SBU), Mission India encourages Washington to begin the 
interagency discussion that will lead to the liberalization of 
the export controls that currently prevent our nuclear industry 
from competing equally in the next phase of India's nuclear 
future.  With the legislation now completed, we recommend that 
Washington consider easing regulations as an intermediary step 
before the congressional approval of the Agreement for Peaceful 
Nuclear Cooperation (123 Agreement). We also urge Washington to 
take up a suggestion that DAE Chairman Kakodkar made to U/S 
Lavin (reported septel) to stage a conference dealing with 
export control policies and other issues related to the 
blossoming civil nuclear cooperation between the U.S. and India. 
 End comment. 
 
 
 
¶15. (U) Embassy New Delhi and FCS New Delhi cleared this cable. 
OWEN