By IANS,
New Delhi : India’s atomic regulator Tuesday told the Supreme Court that the enhanced safety measures (ESM) recommended by a task force in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident were not a precondition for the operationalisation of the Kudankulan Nuclear Power Plant.
Attorney General G.E. Vahanvati, referring to a series of meetings that the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) held before giving the go-ahead for the loading of fuel rods in reactor I and II, told the bench of Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan and Justice Dipak Misra that no sane man can say that ESM were necessary before loading of fuel in reactors I and II.
Assailing those red-flagging the safety measures, he told the court that “an alarmist argument have been raised before the Madras High Court showing that these steps (ESM) were precedent to making plant operational and it was being rushed through bypassing them”.
Seeking to assure the court that safety of the KNPP was beyond any doubt, Vahanvati said that the apprehensions raised by the petitioner were based on “completely baseless apprehensions”.
At this, the court said that what he was saying was that they “are complying with these conditions (ESM) but in a phased manner”.
Vahanvati said that Fukushima nuclear power plant suffered the accident because, as admitted by the Japanese, it was closer to the epicentre of the tsunami coupled with earthquake of 9 Richter scale. He told the court that KNPP was located some distance away from the sea level.
In an effort to knock down the petitioner G. Sunderrajan’s case on facts, Vahanvati told the court that task force that was constituted to review the safety of KNPP in the wake of Fukushima accident was set up by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited and not by the central government as contended by the petitioner.
He told the court that ESM even anticipated the low probability situations involving accidents that were beyond design stage and the improvements suggested in the plant by Indian scientists have been acknowledged by the Russians. He said that the dome of the power plant had two containers (double domed).
Vahanvati told the court that ESM that were being put in place on the recommendations of the task force were “something which was completely unheard of prior to 2011, Fukushima accident.”
As Vahanvati referred to the date of schedule to put ESM in place, opposing lawyer Prashant Bhushan said that they were tentative dates.
Prashant Bhushan told the court that the security measures that NPCIL was supposed to put in place related to review of safety after 200 hour long hot tests of the KNPP.
The court will continue with the hearing Wednesday.