Thank you.
Madame DeBellefeuille, eliminating this clause would mean that the operators, the facilities, could choose to simply self-insure against any accident. In that case, if there were to be a significant amount of damage in an accident that could in fact cost up to $650 million and if the facility, rather than paying insurance premiums, had opted to simply self-insure, it could in fact financially destroy the facility if they became liable for $500 million to $600 million in compensation, and then we would have two problems: we'd not only have an accident, but we'd also have a nuclear facility that was bankrupt. In that case, an attempt to reactivate the facility would impose a huge cost on the consumers of that form of power.
That's certainly the major downside to eliminating that clause. The other thing, Madame DeBellefeuille, is that of course we would all like to see a huge lineup of companies wanting to insure the nuclear facility, but the fact is that apart from NIAC and the insurance companies that are already there, the other line is empty. There's no one else in that line wanting to get into the business of insuring nuclear facilities. Otherwise I'm sure NIAC and the insurers that are there would love to have them, in order to spread the risk out a little more than it is.
Eliminating so that others could come into the insuring business simply wouldn't bring a horde of people, believe me. It's not likely to bring any; if there were others out there, they would be there now. Nothing precludes them from making application to become part of the NIAC group or other insurance.
Is that correct?