In the 21st Century the power has become an integral part of human life, country like India where the electricity is still a part of political campaign. Power plays very crucial role in the development of any country. Over the course of history, man has depended on various source of energy but it’s not sufficient to fulfill the demand of the people because in the last three – four decade the consumption of power and population both have increased. Today most of our power needs are fulfilled by fossil fuels derived from mines and ocean beds across the world. The problem with them being of non – renewable nature, it means if we continue to use our natural resources like this then the day is not far when whole world would be living in the dark. Nuclear power is one such alternative to conventional source of energy but generating power from the nuclear reactor poses some serious challenges in front of governments across the globe. The biggest of them being the deadly nature of the radiations that can emerge in case of accidents or other mishaps. The legal issue that surrounds this fact is of liability in case of such accidents. India was one of the first countries to adopt nuclear power technology with the commissioning of the Tarapur power station in 1969 but India had taken long time to come up with the policy that can address the problem. This paper will analyse international and national laws over the nuclear liability insurance.

Insuring Nuclear power plant
Whenever anyone discuss about the nuclear energy or nuclear power plant the first thought come in mind of the general public is that if in any case any mishap happens ( manmade or natural) and public would be affected by its radiations then who will compensate and take liability of that mishap. In case of nuclear power plants the country which has installed nuclear power plant has to take care of the neighboring countries in such situation the liability is more as compression to others. Many international conferences had held in the past to tackle with such problem and they have suggested solutions (Details in the latter part of the paper). At the national level, many countries have passed the legislation related to this concern like USA passed Price – Anderson Act, 1957 while international level it is comprised of one or more legally binding international instruments such as treaties, conventions and agreements.[1]

It is commonly asserted that nuclear power stations are not covered by insurance, and that insurance companies don't want to know about them either for first-party insurance of the plant itself or third-party liability for accidents. This is incorrect, and the misconception was addressed as follows in 2006 by a broker who had been responsible for a nuclear insurance pool: "it is wrong to believe that insurers will not touch nuclear power stations. In fact, wherever they are available to private sector insurers, Western-designed nuclear installations are sought-after business because of their high engineering and risk management standards. This has been the case for 50 years."[2]

General Structure of nuclear installation/reactor insurance
The structure of insurance of nuclear reactor or installations is completely different from general industrial risks. Insurance (direct damage and third party civil liability insurance) is placed with either one of the many national insurance pools which brings together insurance capacity for nuclear risks from the domestic insurers in the local country, or into one of the mutual insurance associations such as Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited (NEIL) or Overseas NEIL based in USA or European Mutual Insurance for Nuclear Installations (EMANI), focused on physical damage and European Liability Insurance Mutual ( ELINI), focused on liability, respectively based in Europe, they have members outside Europe as well. These are set up by the nuclear industry itself. Third Party liability involves international conventions, national legislation channelling liability to the operators, and pooling of insurance capacity in more than twenty countries.

From the inception of the nuclear reactors, there has been concern about the possible effects of a nuclear accident, and the main question which general public ask is that who would be liable for the third party act. This question becomes more serious after the Chernobyl disaster and Fukushima. The problem here is that the insurance company cannot take liability for the damage cause from the reactor or insured the nuclear reactor because the damage which would be caused could be extensive. So in such case the state has to work as an insurer so that the public would erase such concern from their mind.

Nuclear Liability Principles
International Conventions and national laws regarding nuclear third party liability have following principals.
Strict Liability of the nuclear operator: - The first principle aims at optimizing the protection for the public by making the operator of a nuclear installation subject to strict liability. He is liable for damage resulting from a nuclear incident at his installation, in principle irrespective of its cause.

Exclusive liability of the operator of a nuclear installation:- The second principle also enhances the protection for the public by channelling all liability for a nuclear incident to the installation operator. The victim of a nuclear incident can simply present his claim to the operator of the installation causing damage or his insurer. He does not need to bother about the question of whether someone else, for instance designers and contractors engaged in the production or installation of equipment at the installation, should be made liable for the incident instead. Channelling of liability to the operator has advantages from the insurance point of view, too. Without such channelling insurers would have to make available separate sums for nuclear liability incurred by parties other than the operator. It will be explained later why this would negatively influence the maximum availability of insurance capacity for covering nuclear liability risks.[3]
Compensation without discrimination based on nationality, domicile or residence: - The third principal based on the natural justice, which says that the insurer shall make compensation to each and every individual who affected by the accident.

Mandatory financial Coverage: - The operator must maintain insurance cover, and it ensures that funds will be made available by the operator or their insurers to pay for damages.

Limitation Liability Principal :- This principal has been underlying in both international Conventions and national law, principal aims at protecting the operator, at the same time adding an element of practical value. The operator’s liability is limited both in time and amount it depends upon the relevant national policy of nuclear liability insurance.

The main object behind these principal is that in case of an accident, meaningful levels of compensation are available to the affected parties with minimal level of litigation and difficulty.

International Convention and Treaties
International community had realised that there should be international framework for the nuclear liability because the countries were concerned of the risk of a nuclear accident causing Trans boundary damage. This led to the development of international convention to ensure that access to justice was readily available for victims outside of the country in which an accident occurs, so far as the countries are party to the relevant conventions.

Before 1997, the international liability regime was embodied primarily in two instruments:
The IAEA’s Vienna Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage of 1963
The OECD’s Paris Convention on Third Party Liability in the field of Nuclear of 1960 which entered into force in 168 and was bolstered by the Brussels Supplementary Convention in 1963.
These two conventions were linked by the Joint Protocol adopted in 1988 to bring together the geographical scope of the two conventions. Both the conventions are based on the concept of Civil law and adhere to the abovementioned principal.[4]

After the Chernobyl accident in 1986, the International Atomic Energy Agency (Herein after referred as in “IAEA”) had initiated the work to remove all the confusion which had been occurred due to the complexities involved in the Vienna Convention and Paris Convention. On Latter stage the IAEA’s worked on all aspects of nuclear liability with the view to improving the basic Conventions and establishing a comprehensive liability regime. In 1998 the Joint Protocol relating to the application of the Vienna Convention and the Paris Convention was adopted. The parties of the Joint Protocol are treated as if they are parties to the Vienna Convention and the Paris Convention.

Convention on Supplementary Compensation
The Convention on Supplementary Compensation (Hereinafter referred as “CSC”)was adopted in the year 1997 at a diplomatic conference at Vienna with a view to provide a worldwide liability regime and to supplement as the name suggests the fund for liability. Any state not a party to either the Paris Convention, 1960 or the Vienna Convention, 1963 can accede to this convention. Ratification or acceptance to this convention is on the condition that a state is party to either the Vienna or Paris convention(s) or the state’s national law must comply with the provisions of the convention.

The CSC adheres with both the provision of the Paris and the Vienna convention with an aim to increase the amount of compensation. It requires the state to make available 300 million Speacial Drawing Rights[5] (SDRs) or above by making available requisite public funds. The CSC provides for equitable distribution of the available fund. It prescribes a formula for the contribution of public funds by the contracting parties is the amount which shall be the product of the installed nuclear capacity of that Contracting Party multiplied by 300 SDRs per unit of installed capacity.

The amount determined by applying the ratio between the United Nations rate of assessment for that Contracting Party as assessed for the year preceding the year in which the nuclear incident occurs, and the total of such rates for all Contracting Parties to 10% of the sum of the amounts calculated for all Contracting Parties in conclusion the CSC is an amalgam of the Paris and the Vienna convention that extends the scope of damage it provides for a well-organized distribution of funds with prior notice to the contracting parties of a nuclear incident. The operator is required to furnish a list of nuclear reactors with the depository that holds the operator liable and provide a fund of insurance to supplement the compensation amount that is to be borne by the operator.All these conventions hold the operator severally and jointly liable.[6]

In the following table presents the obligation (in amount) of the nuclear operator under the international nuclear liability regime – liability amount imposed by the conventions.[7]

Framework in different Countries
US Framework
The USA has taken different approach in nuclear liability insurance; it is not a party to any international nuclear liability convention, except Convention on Supplementary Convention. But the USA is the first nation which comes up with the specific legislation (detail discussion in the latter part of the paper).

Nuclear Insurance: Price – Anderson Act
The Price-Anderson Act 1957, enacted to cover liability claims of members of the public for personal injury and property damage caused by a commercial nuclear power plant accident. The legislation helped encourage private investment in commercial nuclear power by placing a cap, or ceiling, on the total amount of liability each nuclear power plant licensee faced in the event of an accident. Over time, the "limit of liability" for a nuclear accident has increased the insurance pool to more than $13 billion.

Currently, owners of nuclear power plants pay an annual premium for $450 million in private insurance for offsite liability coverage for each reactor site (not per reactor). This primary or first tier, insurance is supplemented by a second tier. In the event a nuclear accident causes damages in excess of $450 million, each licensee would be assessed a prorated share of the excess, up to $121.255 million per reactor. With 102 reactors currently in the insurance pool this secondary tier of funds contains about $12.4 billion. Payouts in excess of 15 percent of these funds require a prioritization plan approved by a federal district court. If the court determines that public liability may exceed the maximum amount of financial protection available from the primary and secondary tiers, each licensee would be assessed a pro rata share of this excess not to exceed 5 percent of the maximum deferred premium ($121.255 million); approximately $6.063 million per reactor. If the second tier is depleted, Congress is committed to determine whether additional disaster relief is required.

5.1.2 Insurance Pool
The only insurance pool writing nuclear insurance, American Nuclear Insurers, is comprised of property-casualty insurance companies. The average annual premium for a single-unit reactor site in 2018 is approximately $1 million. The premium for a second or third reactor at the same site is discounted to reflect a sharing of limits. The average site premium for 2018 is approximately $1.3 million.

Claims resulting from nuclear accidents are covered under Price-Anderson; for that reason, all U.S. property and liability insurance policies exclude nuclear accidents. Claims can include any incident (including those caused by theft or sabotage) in transporting nuclear fuel to a reactor site; storing nuclear fuel or waste at a site; during operation of a reactor, including the discharge of radioactive effluent; and transporting irradiated nuclear fuel and nuclear waste from the reactor.

Insurance under Price-Anderson covers bodily injury, sickness, disease or resulting death, property damage and loss, including reasonable living expenses for individuals evacuated. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 extended the Price-Anderson Act to Dec. 31, 2025.[8]

Japan
Japan is also on the same path as USA. Japan has not been party to any international liability convention except the Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC). Japan has enacted two legislations in this area first one is the Law on Compensation for Nuclear Damage and second one is Law on contract for Liability Insurance for Nuclear Damage.

In Japan’s plant operator liability has always been exclusive and absolute, and power plant operators must provide a financial security amount of JPY 120 billion (US$ 1.12 billion) – half that to 2010. The government may relieve the operator of liability if it determines that damage results from “a grave natural disaster of an exceptional character”, and in any case where liability is unlimited. After review, the provision was maintained at the same level in 2012. However, a report from the Atomic Energy Commission’s Special Committee on the Nuclear Damage Compensation System in 2016 had indicated a need to increase the JPY 120 billion cover in the light of the Fukushima experience where JPY 6 trillion was needed. It remains unclear how the national government and power utilities should share responsibility for the unlimited liability.[9]

India
In 2010 Indian government passed the Civil Liability for nuclear damage Act, 2010, the main object of the act is to provide for civil liability for nuclear damage and prompt compensation to the victims of a nuclear incident through a no –fault liability regime channeling liability to the operator and the act also proposed the appointment of claims commissioner, establishment of nuclear damage claims commission and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.[10] The provisions of the CLND Act are broadly in conformity with the CSC but in the year 2010 India had not ratified the CSC. However, two of the sections of the act that is sections 6 and 17(b) have become the bone of contention by the suppliers. These sections five the operator the right to recourse making the suppliers liable for material that is defective or latent. These two provisions had become the great hurdle for the India because no country was ready to transfer of reactors to India. The international community perceives these sections as contradiction to the provisions of CSC.[11] On February 08, 2015 Ministry of External affair had issued the clarification on this issue. The clarification was this Article 10(a) of the CSC Annex does not restrict in any manner the contents of the contract between the operator and the supplier including the basis for recourse agreed by the operator and supplier. Therefore, in view of the above, in so far as the reference to the supplier in Section 17(b) is concerned, it would be in conformity with and not in contradiction of Article 10(a) of the CSC Annex. Its operationalization will be through contract conditions agreed to by the operator and the supplier.[12]

Further details on the 2010 Act and its implications are in the Nuclear liability section of the Nuclear Power in India paper. Plans for building reactors from Russian, French and US suppliers are at a standstill as of April 2018, and India’s private sector suppliers are also affected.

5.3.1 Nuclear Insurance Pool
India ratified the CSC in February 2016 after that Central Government has announced the Nuclear Insurance pool. M/s General Insurance Corporation of India (GIC-Re), along with several other Indian Insurance Companies, have launched the India Nuclear Insurance Pool (INIP) with a capacity of Rs.1500 crore on 12th June, 2015, to provide insurance to cover the liability as prescribed under Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage (CLND) Act 2010. The INIP will address liability related concerns of suppliers under the CLND Act 2010 and will pave the way for Indian as well as foreign suppliers to participate in the Indian Nuclear Power Projects.[13]

Conclusion
In conclusion, it could be summarized that India and other countries need nuclear reactor or energy because the countries are looking at nuclear energy to satisfy their demand but at the same time countries should also make proper mechanism so that citizen would not concern or live in the atmosphere of fear from nuclear energy.

The world cannot ignore the consequences of nuclear accident. We have witnessed the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, India is no stranger to industrial disaster on a large scale. The legacy of the Bhopal disaster in 1984, resulting in more than 15,000 deaths and complex legal battles for compensation[14].

Finally, India and other countries have made good structure to provide compensation to the victims in case any mishap/accident but there is still some scope to make it better so that common people would also feel that the government has insured them from any nuclear accident.

End-Notes
[1] New nuclear power plants – are they insurable risks, http://www.neimagazine.com/opinion/opinionnew-nuclear-power-plants-are-they-insurable-risks/
[2] http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/liability-for-nuclear-damage.aspx
[3] Sebastiaan M.S Reitsma, Dr. Jur, Nuclear Insurance pools : world – wide Practice and Prospective, https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/31/051/31051428.pdf.
[4] http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/liability-for-nuclear-damage.aspx.
[5] The Special Drawing Right is a unit of account defined by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) based upon the US dollar, the Euro, the Japanese Yen and the Pound Sterling. The IMF Treasury Department exchange rate between the SDR and the EUR on 31 March 2006 was SDR 1= EUR 1.19 and between the SDR and the USD on that same date was SDR 1=USD 1.44. All SDREUR/USD conversions in this paper are based on these exchange rates. 15 million SDRs is approximately EUR 17.8 million or USD 21.6 million.
[6] Summaiya Khan International Civil Nuclear Liability Regime and India : A Comparative Assessment, July 13, 2015 http://isssp.in/international-civil-nuclear-liability-regime-and-india-a-comparative-assessment
[7] Data according to Schwartz J., International Nuclear Third Party Liability Law: The Response to Chernobyl, International Nuclear Law in the Post- Chernobyl Period, A Joined report by OECD/NEA and IAEA,2006, pp.37-73, str. 42, available at https://www.oecd-nea.org/law/chernobyl/ on 17.04.2017 and Schwartz J., Nuclear Risks, Are they Insurable? Are they insured? Nuclear Risk and Public Decision – Making Scientific Conference, OECD, 2011.
[8] USNRC, Backgrounder on Nuclear Insurance and Disaster Relief, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/nuclear-insurance.html#top
[9] http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/liability-for-nuclear-damage.aspx
[10] Object of the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010 Act No 38 of 2010 available here https://indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2084/1/201038.pdf
[11] Summaiya Khan, International Civil Nuclear Liability Regime and India : A Comparative Assessment http://isssp.in/international-civil-nuclear-liability-regime-and-india-a-comparative-assessment/
[12]Ministry of External Affairs, Frequently asked questions and answers on Civil for Nuclear Damage Act 2010 and related issues, issued February 08, 2015 https://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/24766/Frequently_Asked_Questions_and_Answers_on_Civil_Liability_for_Nuclear_Damage_Act_2010_and_related_issues
[13] Press Information Bureau Government of India, Department of Atomic Energy “ Launching of Nuclear Insurance Pool” http://pib.nic.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=137276
[14] Ran Chakrabarti, Civil Nuclear Liability law in India http://www.mondaq.com/india/x/395640/Energy+Law/Civil+Nuclear+Liability+Law+in+India