California Subscriber

The endorsement is for those risks that are described in the first two paragraphs. The first paragraph talks about an insured that is an insured under a nuclear energy liability policy issued by a nuclear energy liability insurer.  The second paragraph talks about BI or PD resulting from radioactive, toxic or explosive properties with respect to which any person or organization is required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to maintain financial protection. Both paragraphs refer to nuclear energy risks and the endorsement is meant to apply to the nuclear energy field. So, if your insured just does cat scans or X-rays in a health-related field, this endorsement is not going to apply to your insured. Of course, the better course of action if there is any question, is to contact the insurer of your risk to make sure the endorsement is not applicable to the risk you describe before anything does happen.

As for the pollution exclusion, we have not heard of an insurer using the pollution exclusion for a nuclear incident or a cat scan or X-ray injury. This tactic could be tried, but the important point we see is the definition of pollutant. A pollutant is a solid, liquid, gaseous or thermal irritant or contaminant and cat scans or X-rays do not fit this description. And, if there is no pollutant as defined in the policy, the pollution exclusion is not applicable to the claim.