 |
2 September 2010
India passes nuclear liability legislation
India's Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill 2010 was passed on 30 August. It sets operators' liability for nuclear damage to 15 trillion rupees (about US$320 million) but contains two clauses that are incompatible with international conventions on nuclear liability. While the bill channels liability for nuclear damage initially to the operator, after any compensation is paid it allows the operator recourse against a supplier for defective parts or services, thus absolving the national regulator from any responsibility. However, Russian, French and US expectations are that India's liability regime will be compatible with international conventions, and the US agreement says that India "shall take all steps necessary to adhere to the Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC)", which is not yet in force. However, the new legislation is incompatible with the CSC, due to the recourse against supplier provision (whether the supplier is domestic or foreign).
John Ritch, Director-General of WNA, warned "that the Nuclear Liability Bill, if not amended, may inflict tremendous harm on the prospects for the successful development of nuclear power in India" by making access to modern technology from overseas suppliers legally fraught. He continued: "Suppliers cannot purchase nuclear liability insurance for the fundamental reason that the world’s nuclear insurance pools have concentrated their resources on providing coverage only to operators, who have been made liable under the channeling principle of the international Conventions and the domestic laws of every other country with a nuclear power program. Against this reality, it is simply inconceivable that any supplier would be able to obtain coverage against such a vague claim concept as 'patent or latent defects or sub-standard services'. Of course, every plant operator needs insurance, with the amount determined by national arrangements as guided by international conventions. The amounts specified the Indian Parliament’s amended bill seem to be in line with those that apply elsewhere."
Russia's state corporation Rosatom and its subsidiary Atomstroyexport has built Kudankulam 1&2 reactors in India with explicit contractual provision for liability remaining with the operator once the plant is fully handed over. Whether such contractual provision in line with international conventions could in future override the new statutory liability remains to be seen. A supplier stand-off could lead to an amendment to the Bill, perhaps next year.
WNN 31/8/10. Nuclear power in India
Strong industry advocacy for US fuel recycling
Senior figures from both Areva and GE Hitachi have made a strong case for recycling used nuclear fuel in the USA. Appearing before the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, which was appointed to review US policy on used fuel, they outlined the significant benefits of embracing reprocessing and recycling technology under a new waste management strategy. The present US policy dates from 1977 and treats all used fuel as high-level waste, which requires storage and finally deep geological disposal. Reprocessing so that 96% of the used fuel is recycled extends the resource by about 25%, reduces the final high-level waste volume by 75%, and the toxicity of this waste by about 90%.
Areva pointed out that "Through its deployments internationally, the recycling process invented in the US has benefited from decades of lessons-learned and continuous improvements in technology. A new recycling facility in the US would not simply replicate facilities from France, the UK or Japan, but rather would employ state-of-the-art technologies and processes." GE Hitachi "strongly believes that recycling is the best policy and technology option for the US to pursue," and said that funds for developing it were already on hand in the $21 billion Nuclear Waste Fund.
WNN 1/9/10. US Nuclear fuel cycle US nuclear power policy
