CYIL 2015

JAKUB HANDRLICA CYIL 6 ȍ2015Ȏ reactors used for experimental, scientific or educational purposes (in research centres, universities etc.) are to be covered by the liability regime of the Convention. The Convention relates exclusively to land based nuclear installations and expressly excludes from its definition of “nuclear installation” any reactor “with which a means of sea or air transport is equipped for use as a source of power, whether for propulsion thereof or for any other purpose”. Consequently, nuclear reactors generating power for ships , submarines , airplanes , or space ships 23 do not fall under the scope of the Vienna Convention. However, in contrast to the definition 24 provided in the Paris Convention, the Vienna Convention did not exclude those nuclear reactors, generating power for terrestrial vehicles . 25 Therehavebeen several persuading arguments against inclusionof these technologies into the liability framework of the Vienna Convention. In particular, it was obvious that, while land based reactors might easily mitigate possible dangers by locating them far from populated areas, nuclear powered vessels were designed to sail into harbors. Consequently, while the installation state was expected to appropriately compensate a nuclear incident created by its land based reactor (situated in its territory), the state licensing the vessel would be not under such intermediate pressure where the incident occurs in a distant harbor, where the nuclear-powered ship bearing its flag is anchored. 26 Additionally, there were several issues considered specific to matters related to nuclear powered vessels: A very important issue was whether the rules would be common for nuclear powered merchant ships and warships with nuclear propulsion, while the latter represented the majority of nuclear powered vessels at the time. Furthermore, there was a question whether the legal framework would contain only rules applicable for operation of nuclear powered vessels on the High Seas, or also govern issues of their entry to the ports of other than licensing states. Therefore, 23 See REYE, S. Extension of the Technical Scope of the Paris and Vienna Conventions: Fusion Reactors and Reactors in Means of Transport, In OECD (ed.): Nuclear Accidents – Liabilities and Guarantees, Paris: OECD, 1993, pp. 248-252. 24 “Nuclear installation” means “reactors other than those comprised in any means of transport; factories for the manufacture or processing of nuclear substances; factories for the separation of isotopes of nuclear fuel; factories for the reprocessing of irradiated nuclear fuel; facilities for the storage of nuclear substances other than storage incidental to the carriage of such substances; and such other installations in which there are nuclear fuel or radioactive products or waste as the Steering Committee for Nuclear Energy of the Organisation (hereinafter referred to as the “Steering Committee”) shall from time to time determine; any Contracting Party may determine that two or more nuclear installations of one operator which are located on the same site shall, together with any other premises on that site where radioactive material is held, be treated as a single nuclear installation.” 25 The reason was the research project, ongoing to the date of the Convention’s adoption, dealing with the use of nuclear energy as a means of transport for terrestrial rescue vehicles. However, the outcomes of this project have never been applied in reality. See KISSICH, S. Internationales Atomhaftungsrecht. Baden Baden: Nomos Verlag, 2004, pp. 141-142. 26 See SEAVER, R. The Impact of Nuclear Propulsion of Ships on Admiralty and Shipping Law. Atomic Energy Law Journal, 1960, at p. 303.

154