I think you were asking what would happen if the coverage weren't available. Is that what you were asking—what would happen if they couldn't provide the coverage?
I think in that case, one has to consider whether such a liability should be allowed to exist, because really this is a question for society at large. In fact, that was one of the comments made in the early days by one of the insurance executives. It's questionable whether such a liability should be allowed to exist.
That's the reason for the comments about siting, remote siting, and underground siting. These are the things that are important to consider. If the industry can, in fact, design reactors that are free of these difficulties, then they should do so.
One of the ways of pressuring them to do so would be to not pass this kind of legislation, which allows them to continue to be, you might say, sloppy and not to have to design reactors that are truly safe.