MOSCOW, October 8 (RIA Novosti) - The former technical director of Russia's now defunct electricity monopoly, who was named among officials responsible for a disaster at a recent Siberian power plant accident, brushed aside on Thursday his role in the disaster.
Boris Vainzikher, who now sits on the RusHydro Board of Directors, asked the country's industrial safety watchdog Rostekhnadzor, which had earlier announced its findings on the disaster, to provide explanations.
In an interview with RIA Novosti on Thursday, Vainzikher said he had carefully studied Rostekhnadzor's findings on the technical causes of the disaster at the Sayano-Shushenskaya hydropower plant (HPP) in Siberia on August 17 that destroyed a turbine hall and killed 75 people.
"I was named in the report among seven persons responsible for creating the conditions for the disaster at the Sayano-Shushenskaya HPP, as the technical director of RAO UES who was in charge of enforcing standards pursuant to the energy holding's order No. 490 of 2006 aimed at enhancing the safety of the HPP's equipment and who failed to provide for the plant's operation at the proper level," he said.
Vainzikher said that RAO UES' order approved a standard methodology to assess the technical condition of equipment at the HPP. The order that had been worked out for several years by specialized agencies obliged Vainzikher to control the introduction of the standards at RAO UES.
Vainzikher said he had fulfilled the order as he introduced technical safety standards not only at RusHydro but also at other companies within the energy holding.
"Although the standard had been developed before my appointment as RAO UES technical director, I believe that the offered methodologies did not deteriorate requirements for assessing the HPP's technical condition... Moreover, this standard also enforced additional requirements and methodologies," he said.
"Therefore, Rostekhnadzor's findings that the RAO UES standards did not stipulate the necessary requirements for the HPP's safe operation and failed to ensure the proper safe operation of the plant's equipment are not confirmed by references to particular circumstances," he said.
