RNNR Committee Meeting

The Standing Committee on Natural Resources met in a televised session at 3:01 p.m. this day, in Room 237-C, Centre Block, the Chair, Leon Benoit, presiding.

Omar Alghabra moved, — That the Committee, within the next two days, invite the Minister of Natural Resources and Ms. Linda Keen to appear before it on nuclear safety issues including safety issues at the Chalk River nuclear reactor.

Debate arose thereon.

Lloyd St. Amand moved, — That the motion be amended by adding the words “, in that order,” after the words “to appear”.

Debate arose thereon.

David Anderson moved, — That the amendment be amended by adding after the words “nuclear reactor” the following: “and that the Minister be re-invited to respond to Ms. Keen's testimony and to answer further questions from the Committee”.

Debate arose thereon.

After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of David Anderson and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 7.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Lloyd St. Amand and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 4.

After debate, the question was put on the motion, as amended, and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 4.

The motion, as amended, read as follows:

That the Committee, within the next two days, invite the Minister of Natural Resources and Ms. Linda Keen to appear, in that order, before it on nuclear safety issues including safety issues at the Chalk River nuclear reactor.

Catherine Bell moved, — That the committee, as a result of the Auditor General’s report into Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) submitted to the Minister of Natural Resources in September 2007, December 2002 and November 1996:

• develop terms of reference for an independent investigation into AECL and the relationship between AECL and Natural Resources Canada; and,

• that the terms of reference be set to include determining whether the current or previous Ministers of Natural Resources Canada, or their staff, inappropriately interfered with AECL; and,

• what actions this or previous Ministers took over the past ten years to address problems identified by the Auditor General or by any internal reviews that may have been completed; and,

• that the investigation be completed by an Officer of Parliament or by an independent eminent Canadian approved by this committee; and,

• that this committee report terms of reference for an investigation to Parliament within two weeks .

Debate arose thereon.

David Anderson moved, — That the debate be now adjourned.

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 10; NAYS: 1.

Catherine Bell moved, — That Atomic Energy Canada Limited (AECL), the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), produce the following documents, with the exception of confidential documents which may be omitted with a written explanation to the Committee, in order that the Committee has a better understanding of the on going problems at the National Research Universal Reactor at Chalk River Labs:

Atomic Energy Canada Limited Documents that relate to:

-The Root Cause analysis submitted to CNSC Public Meeting on January 9, 2008;

-The SDR (and the one page summery) submitted to CNSC Public Meeting on December 6, 2007;

-All correspondence between AECL and CNSC relating to upgrades to the National Research Universal (NRU) reactor after 2005;

-All correspondence between AECL and NRCan related to upgrades to the NRU reactor after 2005;

-All correspondence between AECL and NRCan regarding Chalk River between August 28, 2007 and January 10, 2008;

-The Auditor General’s Special Examination Reports from 2002, and 1996;

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Documents that relate to:

-All correspondence between CNSC and AECL relating to upgrades to the National Research Universal (NRU) reactor after 2005;

-All correspondence between CNSC and NRCan related to upgrades to the NRU reactor after 2005;

-All correspondence between CNSC and NRCan regarding Chalk River between August 28, 2007 to January 10, 2008;

-Any Auditor General’s Special Examination Reports on CNSC;

-Documents relating to 7 upgrades require of the NRU after 2005, the status of the upgrades and whether or not they were completed;

Natural Resources Canada Documents that relate to:

-any correspondence between the Ministry (including the Minister) regarding upgrades to the NRU at Chalk River since 2005;

-any briefs on safety and/or upgrades to the NRU since 2005;

-any internal documents on the status of the upgrades to the NRU since 2005;

-any correspondence received from AECL and/or CNSC on problems with the NRU.

Debate arose thereon.

David Anderson moved, — That the debate be now adjourned.

The question was put on the motion and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 10; NAYS: 1.

At 4:00 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.