Natural Resources Committee on Aug. 21st, 2009

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

Okay, I have just one really quick question, then.

Following up on that, Dr. Atcher, by putting the targets in these reactors--you have the reactors--are there any licensing issues that would mean it might not necessarily be a short-term solution because you are introducing something else into the reactor core that's different?

[Dr. Robert Atcher]

In some cases we would have to get permission from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to engage in that activity, but we have been briefing the commissioners of the NRC on the crisis that we have at the moment and on some of the potential solutions, so they've been engaged in the conversation as we've been exploring some of these alternatives. There are, however, as you point out, regulatory issues in terms of irradiating those targets and then moving those targets to Canada for processing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Allen, and thank you, Dr. Ivanco, Dr. Atcher, and Dr. McEwan, for your very helpful information.

We will now suspend just for a couple of minutes--maybe three or four minutes--as we change witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We will reconvene the meeting with our second panel for this afternoon.

We have here in this next hour Hugh MacDiarmid, president and CEO of AECL, and Bill Pilkington, senior vice-president and chief nuclear officer of AECL.

Thank you very much, gentlemen, for being here today. We have to stop meeting like this or people are going to start talking. You've certainly been here a lot in the past year and a half, and I do appreciate your giving us this very important information.

If either of you has an opening statement, please go ahead. You have up to 10 minutes.

[Hugh MacDiarmid, President and Chief Executive Officer, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to introduce Mr. Bill Pilkington, the Chief Nuclear Officer for AECL.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Excuse me for a minute, Mr. MacDiarmid.

Could we have the activity in the corner here disappear? If you'd like to, you can resume out in the foyer or somewhere like that, but let's give our full attention to the witnesses and to the committee proceedings.

I'm sorry for interrupting, Mr. MacDiarmid. Go ahead, please.

[Hugh MacDiarmid]

That's quite all right, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Allow me to introduce to you Mr. Bill Pilkington, Chief Nuclear Officer with AECL.

Let me begin by expressing my own concern about and acknowledgement of the impact of the ongoing strain on the supply of medical isotopes across Canada and around the world. We are obviously following the news of the shortage very closely and we have daily reminders of the urgency and importance of our mission. We deeply regret the all-too-real consequences of the shutdown of our Chalk River facility. Nowhere is the deep sense of duty to remedy this situation felt as acutely as it is among the men and women of AECL, and most especially among the talented and dedicated employees at the Chalk River facility who have been working around the clock since the outage occurred in May.

As our work has progressed, we have conducted ourselves with the greatest possible transparency. We provide proactive disclosure of our progress on a weekly basis. I have directed that there be clear milestones and reporting of progress against those milestones. This is a project where there continues to be full communication with all of our stakeholders.

We in fact published our 17th status report on August 19. In that update we provided guidance on the duration of the shutdown. This guidance continues to be founded on the best evidence available, including the most up-to-date analysis of the inspection data, progress on repair strategies, and critical path requirements for restart after an extended shutdown. At this time, the selection of the band of weld buildup technique allows us to project that the NRU will return to service during the first quarter of 2010.

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's approval will be required prior to AECL's refueling the reactor. As a result, AECL and the CNSC signed the Protocol for the NRU Restart Licensing Activities on August 14. The protocol outlines the administrative framework, milestones, and service standards for the licensing activities required for restarting the NRU reactor. It is posted at www.nrucanada.ca. This protocol ensures, in that same spirit of transparency, that the full regulatory review process is followed, and when the NRU returns to service, it will operate safely while once again producing isotopes.

To recap our return-to-service plan, we have developed a three-phase program.

The first was to do a condition assessment of the reactor and to select a repair technique. We have completed this phase, but will continue with confirmatory inspection and analysis. Testing of the repair process and special tools will be carried out in the full-height mock-up now constructed in the former NRX facility at Chalk River Laboratories. The mock-up is now being used to test the specialized tools designed to perform vessel cleaning and the removal of material samples for analysis.

The second phase, of course, will be effecting the repair itself. We are using proven technology. A key challenge is accessing the repair sites through a 12-centimetre aperture that is a distance of nine metres away, all performed in a radioactive environment. This requires considerable expertise in designing specialized tooling and conducting training within a full-scale mock-up environment.

Finally, the third phase will be returning the reactor to service, as I mentioned, with the full oversight of the CNSC.

These three phases interlock and overlap to some degree. This approach ensures that we will get this reactor back into service as soon as we possibly can.

I want to state unequivocally our belief that the NRU can be repaired and is indeed well worth repairing. It is very clear in our minds that the repair program is the best available option for continued supply of medical isotopes to patients. We already anticipate looking to renew the current operating licence of the NRU for a further five years, to 2016.

To sum up, since the reactor shut down, we've always sought to communicate what we know. We have based our project plans and our communications surrounding these project plans on evidence, not speculation. We will continue to be fully transparent with Canadians based on what we know today, and we are confident that we can return this reactor to service in the first quarter of 2010.

We truly have an outstanding team of professionals--scientists, engineers, and technologists--who can get this job done. We know the eyes of the country and the world are upon us, and that is why we have the personnel, the supply partners, and the third party independent verification that is appropriate to these circumstances.

I do want to conclude with a brief comment on some of the ongoing debate about the MAPLE reactors and the possibility that they could be a solution for the near-term production of medical isotopes.

Let me reiterate the facts. The MAPLEs were never approved to be put into service. The reactors are in an extended shutdown state. The MAPLEs are not a viable solution for long-term isotope production, and they most certainly are not a solution to the current isotope shortage.

Thank you. We're happy to respond to any questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you very much, Mr. MacDiarmid.

We go now to the questions. First up is the official opposition.

Mr. Bains, you have up to seven minutes. Go ahead.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for coming out this afternoon. I think your comments early on indicated the seriousness of this issue. It's greatly appreciated that you're here this afternoon.

I want to start off by asking you a set of questions. First of all, prior to the shutdown in 2007, how many times did a shutdown at Chalk River trigger a global isotope crisis?

[Hugh MacDiarmid]

That's a question I'm not sure I can answer.

Mr. Pilkington.

[Bill Pilkington, Senior Vice-President and Chief Nuclear Officer, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited]

Actually, I'm not sure I can answer it either.

It has certainly not been in the time that I can recall. Before the NRX reactor was taken out of service, I believe in the early 1990s, there was a second reactor at Chalk River that could back up the NRU. Since that time, I've not been aware of any isotope shortage of the magnitude that occurred at the end of 2007, or the current.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

So the multiple isotope crises that we've seen have happened under Conservative watch. Is that factually correct?

[Hugh MacDiarmid]

That's a comment I'll let you make. I'd prefer to let you make it.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[An hon. member]

You're wise.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Fine.

On June 5, 2008, you appeared before this committee alongside the former natural resources minister. At that time, Minister Lunn stated, and I quote:

The NRU reactor is operating more efficiently and safer today than at any time in history....Canadians can be assured that they will have an adequate supply of isotopes.

At that time, did you provide those reassurances to the minister for him to make that assertion? Again, that was June 5, 2008.

[Hugh MacDiarmid]

Well, we're stretching my powers of recall, but certainly I could imagine that we would have given the minister assurances that it was our very sincere intention to operate the NRU to the best of our abilities and to ensure that it was a reliable production environment for isotopes.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Okay, because the quote speaks for itself, and it clearly indicates a fair amount of confidence in the ongoing supply of isotopes. That's why I bring this quote to your attention.

In the last 20 months, we've seen three unplanned, extended shutdowns at NRU Chalk River, each time triggering a crisis, as I've talked about before. The latest shutdown began three months ago and is scheduled to continue into the next year, as you indicated in your remarks.

On August 12, just a few days ago, the Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of Health issued a release stating that they were very disappointed with AECL's announcement on that day and that they had actually instructed you to provide a return to service plan. Can you elaborate on what that plan is? Is it different from what you articulated in your opening remarks? Have you provided any additional information that you can share with us?

[Hugh MacDiarmid]

It is not in any way different from what I just laid out for you. AECL's governance structure is one that works through a science, technology, and nuclear oversight committee of our board of directors. The board is in turn accountable to the minister.

We did just recently present our repair and return to service plan to our science, technology, and nuclear oversight committee. We gained their authorization to proceed with the repair plan. It very much reflects the timetable that I just gave you.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

So the plan you articulated is actually just a timeline, is that correct?

[Hugh MacDiarmid]

Perhaps I'll let Mr. Pilkington respond. He has direct responsibility for the day-to-day conduct of the project.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Thank you.

[Bill Pilkington]

We are in fact working to a plan and to a schedule. We are continually updating that schedule as we get new information. The point we're at is that we have enough inspection data that we have been able to make a decision on going forward with repair technology. As a result, that adds definition, I guess, to the plan that we will be executing.

At this point, we do have a much better schedule laid out as to when we can bring the NRU back into service.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

You refer to a schedule and to 2010, the first quarter. Is there any specific date you can provide beyond that quarterly date and the year, to give a better indication of that plan and the timeline?

[Bill Pilkington]

We have a schedule that we've put together, and it still does have some uncertainty around it, and that is why we have given the general range of the first quarter of 2010.