CYIL vol. 13 (2022)

CYIL 13 ȍ2022Ȏ CHARTING A COURSE TOWARDS A UNIVERSAL REGIME OF LIABILITY FOR NUCLEAR… a nuclear installation excludes ships. Therefore, the Vienna Convention did not include nuclear ships in its scope either. Third, did the CSC include nuclear ships in the scope of applicability. Here, again we find a similar definition of nuclear installation as the Paris and Vienna Conventions that excludes a reactor as source of power on sea or air transport in the Annex, Article 1 of the CSC. 84 This definition of a nuclear installation and that liability arises from incidents created or involving an operator’s nuclear installation reasonably excludes nuclear ships from the scope. 85 However, the CSC does expand nuclear damages to include reinstatement of impaired environment and economic interest or enjoyment of the environment and extends the territory to include the maritime areas beyond the territorial sea of a contracting party and the exclusive economic zone. 86 This is an important expansion of the coverage area, one that, notably, the United States is a party to. Nonetheless, it does not provide evidence that nuclear ships are included in the scope of the CSC. The last international convention that we will examine was never entered into force but was adopted to address liability specifically for operators of nuclear ships is the Brussels Convention. 87 Article I(1) of the Brussels Convention defined a nuclear ship as any ship equipped with a nuclear power plant and Article I(9) provided that power plant is used as a source of power whether propulsion or any other purpose. 88 This scope is specific to govern nuclear ships and distinguishes traditional ships transporting nuclear material such as those covered in the Paris Convention, Vienna Convention, and the CSC. 89 However, the Brussels Convention was consistent with the other conventions on placing strict liability for damages on the authorized operator of the vessel, as authorized by the licensing state. 90 In conclusion, nuclear ships were the primary purpose of the Brussels Convention but, it neither entered into force nor had agreement from the major nuclear powers. Lastly, in terms for framework scope analysis, we turn to United States nuclear liability law, specifically, Price-Anderson. The 1947 Atomic Energy Act and subsequent amendment in 1954 initially established the legal framework commercial nuclear application in general. Price-Anderson was enacted three years later to specifically address nuclear liability of operators. Price-Anderson was codified in Title 42 of the United State Code. 91 The scope in section 2014(t), defines a person indemnified to include any incident in connection with the NS SAVANNAH. 92 The NRC was assigned the authority to grant licenses to operators as part of a program to develop and utilize atomic energy for the maximum contribution to the general welfare. 93 As a condition of the license, the licensee is required to carry a financial protection to cover public liability claims in exchange for indemnification. 94 The NRC 84 CSC, supra note 36. 85 Id. 86 Id. 87 HANDRLICA, J. Transportable nuclear power plants: An enigma of international nuclear liability law, 12 Journal of World Energy Law and Business 465–479 (2019). 88 Id. at 319. 89 Id. 90 Id. at 321.

91 42 U.S.C.A § 2210 (West). 92 42 U.S.C.A § 2012(i) (West). 93 42 U.S.C.A § 2011 (West). 94 42 U.S.C.A § 2210 (West).

275