Natural Resources committee  The extent of environmental damage that would be included would be those environmental damages for which a competent authority requires cleanup or requires reparations. So to the extent that it affected a water body, for example, if a competent authority would suggest that there had to be reparations associated with the water body, then that would be a compensable head of damage.

Natural Resources committee  That's right.

Natural Resources committee  I'll do my best. Basically, the operator is absolutely liable from a legal perspective. In the United States, there's such a thing as economic channelling, whereby all the insurance policies point toward the operator but everybody could be considered liable. All the insurance policies point toward the operator.

Natural Resources committee  That's right, but all the insurance policies then are directed toward the operator and compensation from the operator, so the operator in effect becomes totally liable.

Natural Resources committee  It's much lower.

Natural Resources committee  I think historically that's the way the American system was developed. I believe the German system was also based on economic channelling, but then it moved away and adopted legal channelling.

Natural Resources committee  It wasn't causality. It's negligence. They don't have to prove negligence.

Natural Resources committee  I'm saying they prove causation.

Natural Resources committee  But they don't need to prove... It's a lower burden of proof.

Natural Resources committee  There is no requirement to prove negligence, so it's very

Natural Resources committee  It's very tough on the operator, okay?

Natural Resources committee  From a liability perspective, it's very tough. The quid pro quo, I guess, is--

Natural Resources committee  --that it's very tough on the operator. They are liable if there's an incident. If the victim says there was an incident, and the victim was damaged, they are liable. The quid pro quo is that their liability is limited.

Natural Resources committee  Thank you. I think there are a couple of considerations. When the whole regime was first established in the 1950s or 1960s, the concern was that there was not a lot of knowledge of this new technology, and insurers were very uncertain about being able to provide insurance to the industry.

Natural Resources committee  That's right. In fact, all insurance... Your homeowner insurance actually states that you will not be able to get any home insurance to protect you against third party nuclear damage because it's all focused on the operator. It's the operator who has the coverage.