Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2009

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Like Mr. Regan, I thought that we were allowed to ask questions on both of the minister's presentations, but since you don't want us to, we will stick with Bill C-20.

You evaluated all of this and came up with these figure of $650 million. I assume that you studied what is done elsewhere in the world. Are there legislative authorities in other countries that opted for an unlimited amount of liability?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Who would like to answer that?

Monsieur Dupont.

[Serge Dupont]

What I can answer is that in most countries, liability is limited. Some countries, such as Switzerland and Germany, have established unlimited liability. However, we would have to see how this unlimited liability would apply in the case of an accident, because that would basically mean that operators would see all of their capital depleted. The facilities would still be there and would then have to be operated or re-purposed in one way or another. Legally, it's different. In practice, though, the outcome may not be very different.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you.

Would it be a good idea for Canada, the United States and Mexico, our continent, to sign an agreement concerning nuclear liability, like the Europeans have done?

Could the three countries look at that possibility together?

[Serge Dupont]

Indeed, and certainly with regard to the United States, because of the proximity of the border, there could be cause for an agreement, and I think that issue has already been raised. A first step would be to have a law concerning liability, like the one before us today, which would allow us to raise our standards to bring them more in line with the American system and thereby facilitate the signing of such agreements.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

So you have thought about it. In your opinion, would it be a good idea to sign such an agreement?

[Serge Dupont]

We would certainly have to study it, but first, updated legislation would be required. That would be an important first step. You're absolutely right. It is something that merits in-depth analysis on our part.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Are the operators of research reactors and the producers of medical radio-isotopes also required to take out insurance during this process?

[David McCauley]

Yes, they do need to be included in the process. Any facility that has material that can have a nuclear reaction in it is covered, and the research reactors are included in that grouping, as are nuclear fuel waste facilities, fuel fabrication facilities, and uranium conversion facilities.

[Claude Guimond, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I have no more questions, Mr. Chair, if we are not allowed to discuss the minister's first presentation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Merci, Monsieur Guimond.

We go finally to Mr. Mike Allen from the government side, for up to five minutes.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for that formal introduction.

Thank you to our guests today. I have just a few questions on the bill and one in general. When we're looking at insurance, it seems to me the big thing about that is related to safety and risk. There's always this discussion, and I think we sometimes get clouded in our discussions about AECL and then try to blend that into Bill C-20, and neither of the two shall meet. From my standpoint, in each of our installations in Canada we typically have a utility that is operating that installation. Do we see any of that restructuring having an impact on this bill, and do we think anything will be any less safe in Canada as a result of the restructuring of AECL, or will CNSC be impacted by that?

[Serge Dupont]

The bill simply clarifies the liability of operators. It does not affect, fundamentally, the responsibilities of suppliers, and there is indeed no direct linkage between a restructuring of Atomic Energy of Canada and this bill.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

On the side of alternative forms of security, we talked about the $650 million. There's a discussion in the bill that there can be a presentation of alternative forms of security, which have to be approved or can be revoked by the minister. Is self-insurance an option on that? What is it that the operator has to do to approve this alternative form of security?

[David McCauley]

Yes, self-insurance was considered to be one of the options for alternative financial security. Another one was a provincial guarantee, for example. We would eventually be providing guidelines on the types of alternative financial security that operators might be providing to cover their risks. However, the view is not to be definitive on exactly the criteria for such things as self-insurance, but rather to seek proposals from the operators, and then those would be considered by the minister and a decision would be made.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

As part of the compensable damages that you have in here—if I read this right—if the facility cannot generate electricity while it is out due to damages, any income loss or any other loss is not covered by the insurance. Is that correct?

[David McCauley]

That's correct.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

My last question is just to follow up on one of the comments that Mr. Dupont made. It's with respect to the $330-some million on March 31 on AECL for Lepreau and its other refurbishment projects. They are carrying a liability there. How many other refurbishment projects does that include?

[Serge Dupont]

The other refurbishment projects are in Wolsong, South Korea; Gentilly, Quebec; and Bruce, Ontario.

[Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

There are four projects then. Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you very much, Mr. Allen.

Thank you very much, gentlemen, for staying with us until the end of the meeting: Mr. Tom Wallace, director general of the electricity resources branch; Mr. Serge Dupont, special advisor on nuclear energy policy to the Minister of Natural Resources; and David McCauley, director of uranium and radioactive waste division of the electricity resources branch.

Thank you very much, gentlemen. We much appreciated the answers and the information you've given us today.

The meeting is adjourned.