IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 711 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives concerning the United 

States-India nuclear cooperation agreement. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 4, 2007 

Mr. BERMAN (for himself, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, and Mr. FORTENBERRY) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives concerning the United States-India nuclear cooperation 

agreement. 

Whereas President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh issued a Joint Statement on July 

18, 2005, declaring their intention to establish a ‘‘global 

partnership’’ between the two countries; 

Whereas in the Joint Statement the President announced his 

commitment to achieving the establishment of ‘‘full civil 

nuclear energy cooperation’’ between the United States 

and India; 

Whereas Congress passed the Henry J. Hyde United StatesIndia Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006 

(Public Law 109–401), also known as the Hyde Act, 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•HRES 711 IH 

that, among other provisions, would allow the President 

to waive restrictions in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 

that otherwise would prohibit nuclear cooperation with 

India; 

Whereas the Hyde Act and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 

include several provisions that impose conditions on 

United States civil nuclear cooperation with India, including— 

(1) a requirement that civil nuclear cooperation with 

India be terminated if India tests a nuclear explosive device or violates its safeguards agreements; 

(2) a prohibition on exports to India of sensitive nuclear technology, including enrichment, reprocessing, and 

heavy water production technology, with exceptions for 

certain programs to develop a proliferation-resistant fuel 

cycle or a potential multinational facility in India participating in a program approved by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to provide alternatives to national fuel cycle capabilities; 

(3) a requirement that India and the IAEA conclude 

a safeguards agreement that provides for safeguards on 

designated civil nuclear facilities ‘‘in perpetuity in accordance with IAEA standards, principles and practices’’; and 

(4) a sense of the Congress that ‘‘the United States 

should not seek to facilitate or encourage the continuation of nuclear exports to India by any other party if 

such exports are terminated under United States law’’; 

Whereas the Hyde Act requires that Congress affirmatively 

approve the United States-India nuclear cooperation 

agreement, also known as a 123 Agreement, for it to take 

effect; 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
3 

•HRES 711 IH 

Whereas on July 27, 2007, the Governments of the United 

States and India concluded negotiations on a nuclear cooperation agreement; 

Whereas under the terms of the Hyde Act, Congress will not 

consider the nuclear cooperation agreement until India 

and the IAEA conclude a safeguards agreement for the 

facilities India has listed as for civil use and the Nuclear 

Suppliers Group (NSG) approves an exemption for India 

from its guidelines establishing full-scope international 

safeguards as a condition of supply; 

Whereas it is in the interest of the United States to ensure 

that the NSG does not approve an exemption for India 

that allows other countries to engage in civil nuclear commerce with India that is prohibited under United States 

law, thus putting United States firms at a competitive 

disadvantage; 

Whereas an unqualified exemption for India would create a 

strong incentive for India to negotiate nuclear cooperation agreements with other countries with less stringent 

conditions than those contained in the agreement negotiated between India and the United States, thereby undermining United States nonproliferation policy and 

United States commercial interests; 

Whereas to prevent United States nonproliferation policy and 

United States commercial interests from being undermined by supplier countries continuing to trade with recipient countries that have violated their agreements with 

the United States, the Hyde Act states it shall be the 

policy of the United States to ‘‘[s]trengthen the NSG 

guidelines and decisions concerning consultation by members regarding violations of supplier and recipient understandings by instituting the practice of a timely and coVerDate Aug 31 2005 03:48 Oct 06, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR711.IH HR711

hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
4 

•HRES 711 IH 

ordinated response by NSG members to all such violations, including termination of nuclear transfers to an involved recipient, that discourages individual NSG members from continuing cooperation with such recipient 

until such time as a consensus regarding a coordinated 

response has been achieved’’; 

Whereas it remains to be determined if the nuclear cooperation agreement is fully consistent with the Hyde Act; 

Whereas the Government of India has stated interpretations 

of the meaning and application of the several provisions 

in the nuclear cooperation agreement that appear to conflict with the intent of the Congress as reflected in the 

Hyde Act; and 

Whereas the Administration should clarify all conflicts of interpretation regarding the nuclear cooperation agreement 

prior to seeking an exemption for India in the NSG 

guidelines: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the Administration— 

3 (1) should not propose any change to Nuclear 

4 Suppliers Group (NSG) guidelines relating to India 

5 until such time as the Administration has— 

6 (A) answered all outstanding questions 

7 raised by Congress regarding apparent incon8 sistencies between the nuclear cooperation 

9 agreement and the Henry J. Hyde United 

10 States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy CooperaVerDate Aug 31 2005 03:48 Oct 06, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR711.IH HR711

hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
5 

•HRES 711 IH 

1 tion Act of 2006 (Public Law 109–401), also 

2 known as the Hyde Act; and 

3 (B) resolved with the Government of India 

4 all differences of interpretation of the provisions 

5 in the nuclear cooperation agreement; and 

6 (2) should not support a proposed exemption 

7 for India in the NSG guidelines that is not con8 sistent with the Hyde Act and the Atomic Energy 

9 Act of 1954 and that does not incorporate the fol10 lowing provisions: 

11 (A) The immediate termination of all nu12 clear commerce by NSG member states if India 

13 detonates a nuclear explosive device or if the 

14 IAEA has determined that India has violated 

15 its international safeguards commitments. 

16 (B) A requirement that any safeguards 

17 agreement concluded between India and the 

18 IAEA provides for safeguards in perpetuity for 

19 all nuclear materials, equipment, and tech20 nology, and all facilities designated as ‘‘civil,’’ 

21 in accordance with IAEA standards, principles, 

22 and practices. 

23 (C) A prohibition on the transfer of enrich24 ment and reprocessing technology and heavy 

25 water production technology by any NSG memVerDate Aug 31 2005 03:48 Oct 06, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR711.IH HR711

hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
6 

•HRES 711 IH 

1 ber state to India and a requirement that all bi2 lateral nuclear cooperation agreements between 

3 NSG member states and India explicitly pro4 hibit the replication of any dual-use technology 

5 or use of such technology in any unsafeguarded 

6 Indian facilities. 

7 (D) A stipulation that NSG supplier states 

8 may not grant India consent to reprocess nu9 clear fuel supplied by an NSG member state ex10 cept in a facility that is under permanent and 

11 unconditional IAEA safeguards, and that any 

12 material produced in such a facility may not be 

13 transferred to any unsafeguarded facility. 

14 (E) A requirement that NSG member 

15 states should promptly consult regarding viola16 tions of commitments in any bilateral nuclear 

17 cooperation agreement between an NSG mem18 ber state and India in order to secure a timely 

19 and coordinated response by NSG members to 

20 all such violations, including termination of nu21 clear transfers to India, that discourages indi22 vidual NSG member states from continuing bi23 lateral cooperation until such time as a conVerDate Aug 31 2005 03:48 Oct 06, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR711.IH HR711

hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
7 

•HRES 711 IH 

1 sensus regarding a coordinated response has 

2 been achieved. 

Æ 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS