As a retired insurance sector professional — although my experience in the insurance aspects of nuclear power generation is limited — I would like to share some thoughts with reference to the article, “ >Resolving the nuclear liability deadlock ” (Jan.6). In 1988, when the Nuclear Power Corporation was formed, I was involved, on behalf of New India Assurance Company, in helping formulate an NPC Insurance scheme for the atomic power station near Mumbai. As it was in the standard form of insurance cover developed since 1957 in the global insurance market and where it comprised atomic insurance pools formed by insurance and reinsurance companies, the insurer retained the risk up to the net financial capacity possible and also shared the risks with atomic insurance pools from various countries and reinsurers in the global market. Because our power plant had been inspected by foreign surveyors and specialists, it was not possible for New India Assurance to reinsure the nuclear risks of plant damage and liability risks involved in the global market. The problem of placing liability insurance was important as even under the international pool system, the cover was limited. In my understanding, the situation continues. In view of the non-availability of reinsurance cover for the NPC policy, we made a suggestion to the NPC to form a national insurance fund that would take over 99 per cent of the risk under the policy issued by New India Assurance and with New India retaining 1 per cent risk. The suggestion was turned down. I then had an opportunity to discuss our problems with international pools. As we were familiar with participation in the global insurance market, we managed to adopt standard procedures in insuring nuclear power stations. Had such a fund been formed in 1988-89, it could have developed as a vehicle to sort out the problems of liability we face today.
Here is another example. The Indian space satellite programme has been insured with New India Assurance right from inception and reinsured in the global market. This has been useful in recovering losses in the initial space launches; the financial impact was reduced substantially.
Even though I have full confidence in the technical expertise of our nuclear scientists and the technology they use, it needs to be re-emphasised, especially in the backdrop of the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear disasters, that it is important that we sort out our problems in the nuclear power sector, especially if we are planning to expand nuclear power generation on an unprecedented scale.
R.D. Samarth,
Pune
