Evidence of meeting #4 for Natural Resources in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was public.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
So it doesn't bother you that your predecessor was called and ordered by the minister responsible to change her decision?
3:45 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
I wasn't there, so I really wouldn't like to comment on something that happened before my time.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Can you tell me how many times AECL has appeared before the commission since June 2008? Perhaps if you can't, do you have someone else with you who can?
3:45 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
I think they were there about three times, if my memory serves me right. The most recent was last week, I think February 19, to bring us an update on the so-called leak that happened in December.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
What other subjects have there been at appearances by AECL before the commission since June 2008?
3:45 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Again, I hate to rely on memory here, but—
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
That's why I'm suggesting you may wish to rely on an official or someone else with you who's perhaps been there longer than you have.
You're entitled to do that at these meetings.
3:45 p.m.
Dr. Patsy Thompson Director General, Directorate of Environmental and Radiation Protection and Assessment, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Mr. Chair, my understanding is that there were two other commission proceedings related to the AECL Chalk River site. One was on an environmental assessment being conducted by the CNSC for the Chalk River site and the other one was on a licence amendment.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Why did it take more than a month for the public to be informed of the December 5th leak at Chalk River?
3:45 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
I would like to set the record straight on this. As I said in my opening remarks, we were very surprised at the level of interest. Our offices knew about the leak almost instantly. If memory serves me, the leak happened December 5 and our office was informed December 6. Both organizations deemed the leak to be of such a small magnitude as not to be significant, kind of a routine operational issue that we did not at the time deem it to be worthy, if you like, of reporting to the public. It was all contained in the facilities.
There is a particular rigorous international protocol for when you alert the public. It is a regime from zero to seven, with zero meaning there is really no impact on the environment or on the public. We had decided at the time that this was of no interest to the public.
Obviously, because of the interest, we decided to review our procedures here. We are now in the process of reviewing those procedures, and in the future we will report more on things that we deemed in the past to be routine.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Even though a little more than a year ago we had a crisis in Canada that was widely publicized and discussed in the media and here in Ottawa, and even though the government fired your predecessor, you were surprised at the interest in these leaks. That astonishes me.
3:45 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
It was because a leak was found, it was resolved, the NRU restarted, there were no problems, and the isotope production started again. As far as we were concerned, there was nothing to report.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Has the leak that occurred this past Sunday been corrected? The report yesterday indicated that there was a section of a 2.5-inch-diameter pipe that was the source of the leak. My question is, has that been repaired?
February 24th, 2009 / 3:45 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
My understanding is that it has been isolated and managed in that sense, but I don't know if they actually went and soldered the leak.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
They're collecting the heavy water that's spilling out of the pipe.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
How many years beyond 2011 do you think the NRU reactor could be used to ensure a reliable supply of medical isotopes?
3:50 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
That would be the subject of the proceedings in 2011. As you know, Mr. Chairman, we and AECL have agreed that there should be no surprises in 2011 on what kind of information the commission will need to make an intelligent, informed decision about whether the licence should be extended and for how long. In fact, we've agreed on what the information is that we are looking for. We are in the process now of getting the process going so that in 2011, in a public hearing with all due process, all the information will be tabled, a hearing will be conducted, interveners will have a chance to argue and debate, and then we will take a decision. I'm unable to tell you right now what the outcome of this hearing in 2011 might be.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mr. Regan.
Now, for up to seven minutes, Madame Brunelle.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Good afternoon, sir.
You told us about two mandates that your commission has. Now, these look to me like two opposite mandates. Your first mandate consists in ensuring public and environmental health. Your deputy minister, Serge Dupont, even told us, regarding this matter, that there had been insufficient public information and that this had to be improved. It is good to hear you tell us that you will be doing that.
Your other mandate consists in supplying isotopes to the medical world. The recent breakdown in Chalk River provoked a big crisis in the medical world. How do you reconcile these mandates? Have you really learned something from your past problems? What are the major changes that you have made?
3:50 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
My mandate is very clear. It is written in the legislation. I do not agree with saying that we have two mandates. There is only one mandate: it is public and environmental safety. When making a decision, all the factors must be taken into account. Isotope production is one of these factors, as is environmental safety. The mandate is aimed at ensuring the safety of our operations.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Canada supplies between 50% and 70% of all the isotopes supplied worldwide. We know how important these are for patients. I think I understood—and correct me if I am wrong—that according to your mandate, you are not responsible for ensuring a steady supply of isotopes to physicians and to hospitals under fully secured conditions, obviously.
3:50 p.m.
President, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
You are right: that is not my mission. It only consists in ensuring that our operations are...