House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2011, with 35% of the vote.
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, if the legislation passes, if we pass Bill C-38, could Madam Commissioner please outline for us the effect the legislation would have on CNSC's ability to discharge its regulatory responsibilities, given that this is a temporary measure for 120 days under the proposed legislation? I would ask her to speak to the impact of this legislation and the discharge of her responsibilities as a regulator.
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, the witness used the phrase “significant risk” in the previous answer. Could the witness be more precise and tell us what is meant exactly? The witness spoke of risk to the Chalk River community and risk in a wider sense. What precisely did the witness mean and how would the witness assess the seriousness of the risk that was described?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, in this legislation I would like her reaction specifically on subclause (1)2, which states:
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited may resume and continue the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River only if it is satisfied that it is safe to do so.
Does she have any comment to make on the drafting of that clause?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I would ask Madam Commissioner if she has had an opportunity to review Bill C-38, the legislation tabled before the House today.
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, can I just get a sense of the safety risk that we are talking about? How serious is a one pump situation? What is the nature of the risk of which the public should be aware, the risk that the witness is assessing in that safety case? What kind of risks are we talking about?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, if I understand the answer to the previous question about the safety case, AECL is close to providing a safety case. Could the witness please tell the House how long it would take, upon receipt of a safety case, to assess and certify this reactor as safe?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I will complete my questions.
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I would ask Madam Commissioner if AECL is refusing to supply the safety case or saying, “Give us another day and we can get you one”. What is the position that AECL is taking as to the safety case requirement?
How close are you and AECL? That is what I am trying to figure out.
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, I would ask if the witness could be a little clearer about the safety case requirement. She is saying that they are working together.
The AECL has a potential fix to get this reactor back in service and could “immediately begin to restart the reactor as soon as P-105 is in service and...be at full power in 3 days”. AECL says this in a letter to the Minister of Health and states, “We can operate NRU on an interim basis with P-105” and complete the second pump “within 16 weeks of restarting the reactor”. That is the fix currently being proposed: that AECL can get this reactor back on line very quickly.
What is the holdup? The witness is saying AECL has not submitted a safety case. Could she be more precise about what she requires in order to sign off on the safety side?
An Act to permit the resumption and continuation of the operation of the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River December 11th, 2007
Mr. Chair, could the witness characterize the relationship between her organization and AECL since November 20, 2007, as both of them search for ways to solve this problem?
Just so the context is clear, Madam Commissioner, there are reports that you are at loggerheads. I want to understand exactly how you are working together to resolve this problem.