Nikhil Kulkarni

A few days back, I was going through the pages of The Hindu and came across the an interview with Anne Lauvergeon (aka Atomic Annie) , CEO of Areva, the French nuclear giant. I was aware that the French President was visiting India soon and the primary purpose was to sell the French nuclear capability to India. Fair enough, I thought. The government anyway seems to be in a sell mode and this was another step in that direction.

What really caught my attention though was Ms. Lauvergeon’s tone in the interview. No doubt the deal would have been confirmed and the signing between Dr. Singh and President Sarkozy a mere formality, but she was sounding very confident, almost bordering on arrogant. While she did not clearly spell out Areva’s position on the issue of supplier’s liability, her tone seemed to suggest that all that will be taken care of. You know, the kind we hear in India when want get something done, mostly not going by the book. I was beginning to get the feeling that an issue as important as the supplier’s liability was being obfuscated by claims of being a partner, under the guise of creating more jobs and the ability to keep the price within that of Indian regulations. Here are excerpts from the interview (emphasis mine) –

The Hindu: Have you fully identified the Indian players who are going to be involved in the construction? What percentage of the work force will be Indian?

Ms. Lauvergeon: NPCIL knows the different possible suppliers very well. They have already chosen some and they will be issuing bids for some others. For our part, we have identified a lot of different companies. We have created a joint venture with Bharat Forge for forgings and heavy components to manufacture them in India for the Indian market but also for export. What we would like to do ourselves is to create an Indian base for India and for the rest of the world. We have done the same thing for engineering, with Tata and others. The idea is to create a supply chain for India and for the rest of the world. A lot of jobs are involved. The construction of an EPR reactor calls for 5,000 people.

The Hindu: How much of a problem does the Nuclear Liability Act pose?

Ms. Lauvergeon: It is a highly political issue in India and we understand its sensitivity. That said, when we sell a nuclear island, it is clear that we guarantee the system for the next 10 years. The operator, by definition, is responsible. In 20 or 30 years from now you could imagine that the operator has changed some parts, used spares. So for the supplier to be held responsible for everything when everything in the plant is not supplied by him is a bit difficult.

Ed: So Areva is just the supplier and cannot be held responsible for any untoward incident. That’s not very comforting, is it? When the questions get a little tough, Ms. Lauvergeon takes the partner route. Read on –

The Hindu: But what kind of margin of manoeuvre do you have? Are you seeking exemptions from the law?

Ms. Lauvergeon: We are not only a supplier, we are also a partner. And when I speak of the delivery of the fuel cycle during 20 years, of a lifetime guarantee for uranium supply, etc., it also means that we are not going to be a supplier that disappears once the equipment is sold. We are partners over the long haul in this domain and we have to understand each other in the right way. Maybe I am too confident. But we feel this question is manageable. We must not exaggerate the liability issue.

The last sentence particularly is very disturbing. You can read the complete interview here. I tried to digest this and did the best I could, turn to the next day’s newspaper and check the Letters To The Editor section if any of the other readers have raised similar concerns. Surprisingly, it wasn’t a reader, but The Hindu itself had carried a follow-up story to the interview. There was another briefing by the Executive Vice President and he was equally evasive about his company’s position on the supplier’s liability.

While concerns still remain unaddressed, Dr.Singh and President Sarkozy today signed a $9.3 billion deal for India to purchase two nuclear reactors for a new plant in Jaitapur. Barely a couple of days back did we observe the 26th anniversary of the Bhopal Gas Tragedy (#youremember, anyone?) and while the victims are yet to get their compensation, we don’t seem to have learned our lessons well.

I’m certainly not saying that we should not adopt nuclear power to meet our energy requirements, I am only suggesting laying down clear regulations to avoid tragedies of the kind we have seen in Bhopal. Maybe all this is beyond the realm of us commoners and the policy-makers and the lobbyists must have surely thought through all these. Praying that all goes well and that our worst fears remain only that, fears.

I was in Bhopal last year and visited the Union Carbide factory area. While these pictures do not do any justice (ironic, no?) to the extent of damage witnessed in 1984, going by the accounts of the old rickshaw-wallah who took me around and the locals, one sincerely wishes for such a tragedy not to happen in any part of the word.

Mr. Anderson has a whole different meaning in Bhopal. Hope Atomic Anne is something we wouldn’t have to remember for the wrong reasons and that this French Kiss is a pleasant one!