1. The Nuclear Liability Bill A perspective by Maj. Gen. Nilendra Kumar Director, Amity Law School, Noida

2. The Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill, 2010

3. DEFICIENCIES Lack of public debate Lack of public debate Hasty drafting Hasty drafting Text warrants relook Text warrants relook

4. TRIGGER MECHANISM Issue of a notification by the AERB Clause 3(1)

5. No notification if threat and risk is insignificant. Clause 3(2) Clause 3(2)Questions 1. What is the scale for insignificant? 2. If no notification or no order, will it be a case of speaking order liable to be challenged on grounds of no application of mind?

6. Clause 2(l) Definition of an operator means a person. Will it extend to a corporate entity?

7. Clause 5 Provides a shelter to an operator from payment of compensation, if a nuclear damage is caused by a nuclear incident directly due to certain acts like terrorism. What if the operator contests his liability citing such pretext.

8. Clause 6(2) Power of the Central Government to increase the liability beyond Rs. 500 crore is based upon risk involved rather than damage caused.

9. Compensation may be demanded, amongst others, by the legal representative of the deceased (Clause 14). On the other hand, application for compensation has to be made by the person suffering damage. Clause 31(2)

10. Clause 6 The amount of liability of the operator shall not include any interest or cost of proceedings.

11. Scope for any appeal against an inadequate award rendered impracticable because the award is to be treated as final. Clauses 16(5) and 33(10)

12. RECOMMENDED 1. Review by the Standing Committee. 2. Seek public debate.