Evidence of meeting #39 for Natural Resources in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was binder.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Noon
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Sorry, I'm not familiar with the incident you're talking about. But of the incidents I've been around, we did not have any where a release occurred that threatened either the employees or the environment.
All nuclear plants have a protocol for communicating emergency issues to the public. It's a very well-defined kind of process. I will gladly table it and share it with this committee.
Noon
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Merci, Monsieur Ouellet. Your time is up.
We'll go to Mr. Trost for up to five minutes.
Noon
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My first question is for Dr. Binder.
When you look at the various priorities you have here—nuclear power plants, waste management facilities, uranium fuel fabricators, processing, etc.—your organization ultimately has to do a bit of prioritizing. How does it go about prioritizing? What takes precedence? Do you divide your staff into teams that look after certain institutions? Is it a first-come, first-served basis? Because a nuclear power plant and a research facility are going to land somewhat differently on the scale of possible effects.
Noon
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Well, it's actually an excellent question, which troubled me when I arrived.
This particular sector has been somewhat in a sleep mode for the last 30 years in terms of doing new things. Right now all of a sudden there is hyperactivity--an interest in mining, in maybe new builds, in refurbishment--so we had to prioritize internally.
We also are growing. In fact, in the last few years we have been recruiting more staff, and we have created more jobs that look after mines, after new builds, and new designs, etc. We've done all of the above by re-prioritizing, and we're growing by recruiting new staff.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
I realize that what you look at is based out of legislation of the Canadian Nuclear Safety and Control Act. Do you sometimes find when you're looking at certain aspects of your mandate that there is a certain degree of duplication with other governments or other government departments?
Specifically on your noting of the mining issue--uranium mining affects my province, Saskatchewan, most definitely--are there areas where you overlap and perhaps do similar things to what provincial environment departments could do? In your opinion, if that overlap could be legislatively taken away, would that free up resources for other priorities?
12:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Again, it's an excellent question. I can tell you we try to avoid overlap whenever we can. In Saskatchewan--it's funny you should mention it--we have a protocol with the Government of Saskatchewan to in fact not overlap, to do joint environmental assessment, labour safety, using the mining protocol of the Government of Saskatchewan, wherever possible, absolutely.
So we cooperate. In fact, we create joint environmental assessment panels whenever we can.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
Effectively, if it were written into the legislation, you could delegate most or all of your authority or what you need to do over to the Government of Saskatchewan. You do believe that they would have the expertise to completely handle the mining issues. Is there something specific about uranium, with the radiation, that couldn't be handled by a normal provincial environment office, mining office?
12:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Our experience has been that the provinces want us to be partners with them because we are the nuclear...exactly the mission you mentioned. Nuclear is a federal responsibility and it requires some specialized expertise.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
I understand what you're saying, but at the same time, some potash mines have higher radiation. You can get higher radiation exposure from potash mines than you can from certain uranium mines. So there's a potential there for some flexibility.
12:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
In Saskatchewan, the richness of the uranium mine is such that--
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
I understand. It's sometimes so hot they can't go in, to send people.
12:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Right. So far I can tell you we have a very good working relationship with the Saskatchewan government, and in fact they're quite happy for us to continue to work with them on this thing.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
But it could free up staff for other priorities, if you could delegate more of that to them.
12:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
We delegate as much as we can.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
Okay.
My question is now to Dr. Lockyer.
You were discussing a bit about the various elements that could or could not be produced by accelerators, etc. I realize this is probably too new of a question. Has TRIUMF...? Are you aware of any other organization that has been developing plans to begin to move into the gap that the MAPLE would have filled? At what stage or what level are those plans, if they exist? Or have any plans been made to begin to move forward in that way?
12:05 p.m.
Director, TRIUMF
I can't be very precise on that, but the answer is yes. There are a number of efforts in the U.S. to do this. There are people who have approached me in Canada to do this, who would like to see these alternative methods pursued. It's a mixture of expertise that has to come together to decide whether it's worth while.
We've been discussing at TRIUMF whether we should have a workshop or something like this that brings together the expertise of the accelerator community, the chemistry, the radio-chemistry, to see just how viable these other methods are.
So the answer is yes, everybody is looking at it. There's quite a bit of interest.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
From your experience, would it be more of a scientific question they're having problems with, or is this more of a business model financial question?
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Bradley Trost Conservative Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK
You do interact with other people in your organization.
12:05 p.m.
Director, TRIUMF
Absolutely. In fact, it's the business people who have asked us whether there are alternatives. Both sides of the equation, if you like, are interested in this. It comes down to all those issues. The people I've spoken to feel that there are challenges to doing it other ways. A multi-year research project is more like a development project.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mr. Trost. Your time is up.
We have time for one more round, although Mr. Binder will be leaving partway through.
Starting with the official opposition, Mr. Boshcoff for up to five minutes.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Boshcoff Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Thank you very much.
You mentioned in your presentation, Dr. Lockyer, that in Canada there were 400 cyclotron or particle accelerators and 900 worldwide. Is that approximate?
12:10 p.m.
Director, TRIUMF
I said there were 400 cyclotrons worldwide that were not commercial. If you include commercial, there are about 900. That's an estimate, because you don't really know how many commercial ones there are.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Ken Boshcoff Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
How many of those two categories would we have in Canada?
12:10 p.m.
Director, TRIUMF
I think I said for medical purposes in Canada, those that are being used and those about to be used, it is 16.