CTV News | Lunn knew of reactor issues in September: report

Canada -   

Lunn knew of reactor issues in September: report

Viewer

CTV News Video

Mike Duffy Live: MPs debate the nuclear dispute
CTV Newsnet: Dion speaks at National Press Theatre
CTV Newsnet: Dion speaks at National Press Theatre, part two

Font-size:      Share  Print  Comments(75)

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Wed. Jan. 9 2008 11:58 PM ET

Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn may have known in September that the Chalk River reactor needed improvements to protect public safety, months before it was shut down, according to an auditor general report released Tuesday.

Auditor general Sheila Fraser said she presented a report on Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL) to the corporation's board on Sept. 5, 2007.

The cover page of the audit says: "We would like to draw your attention to a significant deficiency related to the unresolved strategic challenges that the Corporation faces ... it is our view that this report contains information that should be brought to the attention of the Minister of Natural Resources. Accordingly, following consultation with the Board, we will be forwarding a copy of the report to the Minister."

The report goes on to highlight "three strategic challenges" AECL faced, including "the replacement of aging facilities at Chalk River Laboratories (CRL)."

Liberal MP Omar Alghabra, the natural resources critic, had asked Fraser's office to audit AECL. He has suggested Lunn was slow to take action on the aging Chalk River reactor.

"We have reports -- and the minister has yet to answer these questions -- that he may have known about this way before December third," Alghabra told CTV's Mike Duffy Live before the audit was released. "If he knew on Nov. 22 or even sooner, why didn't he act sooner?"

Earlier Wednesday, oposition leaders called for the resignation of Lunn, following accusations that he improperly interfered with an arm's-length nuclear regulator.

Lunn is currently engaged in a very public dispute with Linda Keen, the president of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), over the shut down of the Chalk River nuclear reactor in Ontario late last year.

"We believe that the minister should be fired, the prime minister should apologize for having put into question the neutrality of a senior official," Liberal Leader Stephane Dion told reporters Wednesday.

The CNSC is responsible for setting licensing, health and safety rules for the country's nuclear facilities.

In a letter dated Dec. 27, Lunn threatened to fire Keen for her involvement in keeping the reactor closed.

"These events have cast doubt on whether you possess the fundamental good judgment required by the incumbent of the office of President of the Commission, and whether you are duly executing the requirements of the office," wrote Lunn.

He ended the letter by saying he was considering making a recommendation that Keen's "designation as President of the Commission be terminated."

On the CNSC website, Keen has posted both Lunn's letter and her response -- in which she says:

"The nature of the allegations which have been made, coupled with your threat to have me removed as President, seriously undermine the independence of the CNSC."

The Liberals want Lunn to appear before the Natural Resources committee to explain his actions regarding the Chalk River isotope crisis. They also want Keen to appear.

On Wednesday, the Green Party of Canada called for Lunn's resignation for his "interference with and threats to the independent nuclear regulator."

"Minister Lunn's threats... cross the line of appropriate political deference to an independent regulator. Such directives and threats weaken the credibility of nuclear safety in Canada," Green Party leader Elizabeth May said in a press release.

The Green Party wants a full inquiry into the nuclear industry.

On Tuesday, the NDP called on the government to create a special committee to investigate what went wrong.

"Instead of making allegations, the Minister should ask his colleagues to get to work and fix the government appointment process, something Harper promised to do," said NDP critic for government operations Charlie Angus.

"The Commissioner is an independent watch dog and should not be taking the fall for the Minister's incompetence. The Minister should have systems in place to ensure that things like this don't happen."

Chalk River problems

The Chalk River reactor stopped production for scheduled repairs on Nov. 18 and was expected to restart within five days.

But the CNSC refused to allow the reactor to restart after finding it had been operating without a backup emergency power system for cooling pumps for 17 months.

The reactor produces radioactive substances used in diagnostic tests for cancer, heart problems, and bone ailments. It provides enough medical isotopes for about 25 millions tests and treatments each year.

As a result of the extended closure, an international shortage of the substance occurred and thousands of tests were delayed and/or cancelled.

"What was going on was a major international health crisis, because of essentially an argument between two agencies over paperwork," said Conservative MP Jason Kenney.

"The issue was not really substantially about safety, it was about licensing, about one part in a back-up system that would only be relevant in a once-in-50,000-years seismic event."

In December, emergency legislation passed by Parliament side-stepped the CNSC's objections and allowed the Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. to restart the reactor for 120 days in order to alleviate the isotope shortage.

Judy Wasylycia-Leis, the NDP health critic, said the government should have been aware of the reactor's problems long before the situation escalated.

"Issues around Chalk River have been raised time and time again -- issues about safety," she said. "The Conservative government chose to ignore the problems and to wait until a crisis loomed before the Canadian population."

With files from CTV's David Akin and The Canadian Press

Comments are now closed for this story

Allan Eizinas
said

Watching this battle between the head of Canada's Nuclear Safety Commission and Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn is discomforting.

It is like smelling a gas leak in your home, calling for assistance and then watching the Fire Chief and Police Chief in a fistfight once they arrive on the scene.

Hey folks – People trust the government and experts to guarantee their safety. Get your act together or there will never be another nuclear reactor built in Canada.




Greg from Kitchener
said

Oh here we go... the "I am a Hero" Mr. Green Guru Dion, making a stance! being a leader! I think he should fire himself.



Doug
said

Minister Lunn should have fired Linda Keen, rather than just threaten it. Regulators are supposed to be able to weigh consequences. If Linda Keen can't see that the health of thousands of sick people who depend on the isotopes produced at Chalk River is more important than the very remote chance of a reactor problem related to a back-up power supply, then she deserves to be sent packing.


barry
said

This sounds more like Stephen Harper manipulating in the background. I can't see one of his ministers making any moves without Harper pulling the strings. It's dirty politics as usual for the Tories. Lunn should be removed for getting involved where he isn't supposed to.


Elizabeth Atkinson
said

As a Professional Engineer it is my paramount duty to consider the benefits of a project to society vs the risk to the public. It is only acceptable to proceed with a project where the benefits to society outweigh the risks. In this case, it was the duty of parliament to re-open the reactor as the risk to the public was minimal. The government and opposition parties should be commended for their quick action in this situation. Ms. Keen should be fired as she failed to consider the societal benefits vs. the risk in her decision - not only that but she does not have the technical or managerial qualifications to run the NSC.


Roch
said

Keen has clearly demonstrated she is incompetent to fulfill her role, after last month's crisis, and she should be immediately replaced by someone with a background, education and understanding of nuclear energy before she makes even more serious errors on judgement.


Dave in Surrey
said

Dion should fire Lunn by putting a vote of confidence on record for the poor performance of the Conservatives... Canadians have lost confidence Harper and his inept team can handle the role of governing Canada...

Time to end this governments reign and time for a new competent team to step up and run this country the way Canadians deserve!!!


Jim R
said

I watched Mr. Van Loan trying to defend Mr. Lunn and his "responses" appeared to have nothing to do with the questions he was being asked. The questions could have been anything -- he was just reciting "the message", completely disregarding the questions as posed. Normally Mr. Van Loan is cool under fire, but his colleagues shouldn't be getting him into such awkwardly indefensible positions that even he (the master) cannot handle.

If Mr. Harper does not fire Mr. Lunn, then I hope there will be a CPC leadership convention very soon.


Jeannette Bolli
said

Let me get this straight...a country in this planet is running a nuclear reactor without a back-up cooling system?....This is the only place where radioactive isotopes for medical tests can be obtained? ...In an emergency like this we cannot pay for shipments of product or travel of patients from/to somewhere else?...Aren't we investigating the reason for this lack of inspections/remedial action earlier on?


Po
said

Geez, is it just me or is this not the first time one of Harper's ministers proves to be completely incompetent (remember Ms. Ambrose and now Mr. Baird who probably both need to read their job descriptions).

So the situation now is that there is no international shortage of the medical isotope but we have a nuclear reactor in Chalk River that doesn't have a backup system in case of a meltdown? Is it just me or are Canadians living around Chalk River being overlooked? Should their safety not be the primordial concern of our politicians?


Ian
said

Can we change the link that says "Please add comments" to read "Please add shamelessly partisan comments"? That would lend an air of credibility to this whole comment process.


Michael
said

I don't understand why Stephane Dion wants Lunn fired. It was Dion's party which put up a fight to get the reactor started in the first place. Stephen Harper's party took quick action so that thousands of cancer patients got their treatment. I'm really losing faith in Dion's liberals, all they do is politic, they put no ideas forward at all.


Ivel Nhoj
said

Linda Keen showed poor judgment and deserved exactly what she got. The risks were minimal, and the isotopes were in dire need. If she is not capable of making this judgment call she should not be in her position.

Leach
said

It sure seems to me that the Liberals are arguing on both sides of the fence on this one. I guess when you're the opposition you have to grasp at whatever straws are present.


A. Conda
said

The CNSC's mandate, in part, is to minimize risk with regard to safety of a nuclear reactor installation in Canada. They did that. AECL, the owner/operator of the reactor at Chalk River was to develop and implement a plan to meet the backup system requirement. I understand they did that as the funding requirement was sent to the Minister in October 2007. In December the reactor was re-started without an adequate safety back-up system. The CNSC will not do the work of installing the backup system, this is up to it's owner, AECL. Why was the backup system requirement not immediately acted on?


Paul
said

for you who can't read... re-read the ALL the information, including the LAW mentioned in ALL the correspondence.

Keen should not be fired. She did her job and someone else didn't!


CM
said

Typical Dion

He attacks Harper for not getting the reactor back on-line to save the sick people - then he attacks him for getting it back on-line.....

Is whining Dion's only capability?


Richard Padgett
said

There are two issues here. First, would loss of cooling capacity result in a melt-down (as with Chernobyl)? If so, Keen was right and Lunn wrong. If not, Keen was simply making a point - perhaps one that needed to be made, but still.... Second, is Keen an independent regulator? If so, Lunn is wrong and should resign. If not, this makes me uneasy, nuclear power plant maintenance not being something I would trust to politicians!


Craig
said

First, Dion and the Liberals continually criticize the government for not doing enough, now they want Minister Lunn's head for taking a stand.

You cannot have it both ways Dion. Stephane Dion does this on every issue, he states something then changes his mind to fit the polls.

That is not leadership. That is what killed Paul Martin.


John
said

I have read both letters from Gary Lunn and Linda Keen and from what has been stated, Atomic Energy of Canada voluntarily shut down the reactor because they had not met their license requirements. Linda Keen was not responsible for for the shutdown. So all you people get your facts straight before you start accusing her of being unfit for the job.

cloke
said

What really disturbs me is the idea that appointees to any office want to have the authority to overide parliament. I worry that the appointed supreme court is ruling this great country and disecting the constitution to suit their interpretation, Why should we elect members to govern us if an appointee can invalidate their decisions.


Observer
said

Harper and his team did the right thing. They had to blame her to get through the partisan bickering from the opposition so that isoptopes could be delivered to patients worldwide once again. IF he didnt put this enormous pressure on everyone to get it back running than it could have been weeks before the plant was running again. I believe this shows complete competance of the government and the natural resource minister.

Pat_Pending
said

Keen's role is to ensure that the millions of people living next to nuclear reactors are free from danger. It is NOT her role to ensure that the world has a plentiful supply of radio isotopes. The safety of the reactor is, and must be, her ONLY CONCERN. If, in the opinion of her trained and knowledgeable staff, the reactor was unsafe, it is her duty to ensure that the reactor be shut down, regardless of the need for medical isotopes. If parliament wants to overrule the regulator, that's fine, but it must be done UPFRONT, not BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. It is very distressing that the head of the nuclear watch dog was threatened with dismissal for doing her job and ensuring the safety of people living next to that reactor.


Roch
said

The question is, why did the Liberals vote to force the reactor to re-open?

It took all party agreement to make that happen.




Bill Workman
said

Many people seem to be assuming that there is a direct authority link between Canadian governments and quasi-judicial bodies such as the CNSC (or for example, in most provinces, universities). This is usually simply not true, by design and also written into legislation. The reasons for this devolution of responsibility to such bodies are generally couched in terms of such things as "leaving matters to those who know best", "local control" and "reducing the size of government". However, governments usually want it both ways: when things go wrong, they can blame the "detached" organization (as they now seem to be doing), or if things go right, they can take the credit for organizing things so well. The bottom line is that, under the way most governments in Canada operate, for a government to tinker with the internal operations of such bodies is to break its own rules.


Jonathan
said

maybe i do not understand this whole issue but was it not Dion who was screaming in December to have the reactor turned back on because of the shortage? So the Conservative government turns it back on and Dion Screams that they turned it on with out the upgrades. Again maybe i am missing some information but reading these stories makes me think Dion does not know what is going on and he is looking for any chance he gets to bash the Conservatives.


John from Saskatchewan
said

Elizabeth Atkinson: As a 'Professional Engineer' did you have access to the studies or reports that were completed allowing you, above all others, to conclude that the public risk was minimal? I would assume that you must have had such access, since you obviously had access to her background report from her human resources file that allowed you to conclude that she is underqualified and incapable of doing her job - even though it is her second five year term... It's painfully obvious that wen need more 'Professional Engineers' such as yourself calling the shots.

What's even more painfully obvious - most people don't even appear to address the article before posting comments...


JM
said

Elizabeth Atkinson: ...Ms. Keen should be fired as she failed to consider the societal benefits vs. the risk in her decision...

And next time when the scientists and technologists who work on the NRU decide to go on strike again, as they've done in the past, lets fire them all as well for the same reasons.




cloke
said

Why should anyone advocate the notion that appointed heads of units should have the right to override ministers of departments. Look at the supreme court. Appointed but with the right to override government rulings.


Shamaro
said

This has become a very politically loaded fight and a very public one at that. We all know Gary Lunn is Conservative, is Linda Keen a Liberal, NDP? In my opinion, one person is trying to make the other person look bad, no matter how you look at it.


Neil
said

How about the media explaining what "arms length" means. Who is this person responsible to ? God ? Is it responsible for the elected government to watch an "expert" assert authority which results in people dying.
The whole mess shows that the people in these arms length agencies do not always provide a vital service that people depend on. I do not like "political interference", but do not confuse that with an elected minister acting in a responsible manner. I would hope that the opposition parties would do the same if in power.


Kevin Dallaire
said

The CNSC is supposed to be INDEPENDENT of the Ministry of Natural Resources. Independence is required to eliminate any potential conflict of interest between its mandate to guard the public's safety and any other concerns that may come up such as the recent shortage of isotopes. From reviewing the letters posted, and the entire evidence presented, it appears that the CNSC was operating only within its mandate under the existing legistlation that governs it. Furthermore, the situation was clearly communicated to Natural Resources earlier. The CNSC is simply doing its job to ensure the safe operation of the nuclear facilities within our country. The interference from the Minister of Natural Resources is clearly outside his jurisdiction. Everyone should read the entire set of correspondence before jumping on the bandwagon. The really interesting question is why did AECL start up operations without the emergency back ups as required under its license. Who knew about that? While everyone is asking questions about who shut down Chalk River without thinking about patients, I wonder what questions they'd be asking if the CNSC allowed itself to be pressured by the government and then there had been a meltdown?


Nathan
said

Has anybody thought that there could be multiple parties at fault here?


Kevin
said

Let's look at this from the perspective of all the political parties and see what it tells us about their motives and how we can expect them to operate if they were ever in power.
The Liberals appointed Linda Keen and by insisting that the production of Isotopes be halted she showed no regard for the many thousands of Canadians and others around the world who would suffer due to her decision. It is clear as an appointee of the Liberals she was far more interested in trying to embarras the government then protect peoples health. Also by publicly posting the exchange between her and Minister Lunn she again clearly demonstrates the liberal philosophy of making political mileage at every opportunity.
The NDP have called for another inquiry, what a surprise! I believe thats the 5th one they've called for in the last 3 months. We can expect endless calls for inquiries from Layton and his gang because it allows them to appear to be pro-active without actually having to make a stand. Imagine an NDP government endless inqueries, wasted millions and a return to deficit spending.
The Conservatives are true to form whether you like them or not. They take action! Health versus safety was the issue and they weighed the risks and made the choice while at the same time forcing the liberals to support or not there decision. The liberals caved in once again and are now trying to make an issue out of Lunn versus Keen.
Finally the media should be exposed for their biased reporting on the issue. Who was the nuclear engineer who reported to parliment on the risks involved if the reactor was restarted afterall he was the only qualified person involved in this whole matter. Remember what he said? Of course not it hasn't appeared in any of the media reports on this issue. And please ctv tell us what qualifications Linda Keen has to be the head watchdog of our vital nuclear industry?



Mark
said

I believe that the Chalk River reactor has been running for a LONG time. Chalk River has had problems with safety back-up systems requiring repair, modernization etc., for a LONG time. The PC's have been in power for what, two years? Who was in power prior to the PC's for some 12+ years? Yet the problems continued...

Tell me again how this is the Conservatives fault? I would ask Mr. Dion to speak to Mr. Martin and Chretien about Chalk River.


Andrew in Edmonton
said

Is it not the job of the gov't to question what goes on in Federally regulated industry? Should Canadians just blindly accept what some senior bureaucrat says, who I believe is appointed by the Federal Gov't. Too many peaople in this country are sheep and do not want the boat rocked. Kudos to the Gov't for demanding more from bureaucrats. All people in gov't service should be held accountable for their actions and if they fail there should be consequences.


Bob
said

Ms. Keen did her job. The operators of the reactor did not follow the recommendations. How can Canada allow a reactor to operate without adequate cooling systems. Why were they not installed years ago. The Minister is inapropriate in his remarks about Ms. Keen. he should be leveling his sights on those who operate the Chalk River reactor.
There should be no talk of a "small chance" of a nuclear accident. Any incident in a nuclear reactor is an event that should be reviewed and if the management did not follow the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission regulations there should be an open and transparent review of the reasons why they did not act.
This was a major international black eye for Canada not caused by Ms. Keen but by the operators of the Chalk River reactor.
The Minister should immediatley apologize to Ms. Keen and the CNSC staff.


GP
said

I think that there is enough blame for everyone here. The Liberals are trying to have it both ways, the Conservatives are playing politics with the safety of a nuclear reactor that is long past its intended life, and Ms. Keen made a poor call in retrospect but perhaps a good one at the time…we just don’t know all the facts in her case.

Unfortunately Canadian politics is looking more and more like the dysfunctional America system every day. It’s about getting and keeping power and satisfying self-serving interests. Time to send a message. I ask all Canadians that are tired of these clowns to take a chance and send a message by voting for the any Green Party candidate that has a depth of understanding past just environmental issues. It's working in Europe, why not give it a try here for one election.



larry
said

I believe if anyone should be fired, it should be Ms. Keen. However, Mr. Lunn's letter was inappropriate in saying that he was considering firing her and that she needed to explain her actions. Better to ask her to just explain her actions and once she did, then decide to fire her or not and act on it.
He should have realized that his letter would end up in the public domain with so many 'left' supporters in the public service.


DEF Sask
said

For once, I agree with the government on their action and response. The costs to multiple thousands of people far outweighed the risk to continue without the backup cooling system -- it had already been operating 17 months without one anyway. And being 'arms length' does not mean that the government cannot call for remedial or corrective action where a regulatory body is not performing as it should. Get real: independence does not mean there should be no accountability.


Elizabeth Atkinson
said

John from Saskatchewan:
According to expert opinion from university professors, nuclear engineers and others who testified in parliamentary hearings, yes the risk to the public was minimal. As for Ms Keen, what are her qualifications? She has a degree in Agricultural Sciences, great if she worked at the Wheat Board but probably not appropriate for a nuclear safety organization. Perhaps someone with a Mechanical and/or a Nuclear Engineering background would be more appropriate.


Jeff
said

What seesm to have been forgotten is that AECL was operating a reactor in violation of their permit. Did they do this knowingly, or unknowingly? In either case it raisies questions about the competency of the firm to run a reactor. Thankfully there is an independent agency tasked with oversight of these companies and devices. I support the call for an independant review before any heads roll.




MJ
said

"Canadians have lost confidence Harper and his inept team can handle the role of governing Canada..."

Well...not exactly. I am a Canadian, and I certainly have not lost confidence in Prime Minister Harper. As always, his government shows conviction and clarity of vision.


M.E. Archer
said

I'm with A. Conda on this one. Why weren't the back-up systems for this reactor given priority? Wasn't the minister told how critical this reactor is? Did he ignore his briefings? Wasn't the person in charge of this reactor already fired for incompetence? Maybe the minister should be next....


Dana
said

Of more importance now is what the plans are to actually do the work of replacing the back-up cooling pump.

The reactor will still need to be shut down to do that. As well the supply of isotopes will have to be assured from an alternate source. We know there is an alternate source because we've had to acquire them from them in the past.

And since everyone has either forgotten or is wilfully neglecting to mention - the Chalk River reactor is old enough that it was the location of the very first civilian nuclear accident in the world in 1952 followed a few years later by the second ever in 1958.

Furthermore the reactor is situated in an earthquake zone and there have been a few small ones lately.

Politics be damned. This is a major safety issue on more than one front and should not be left to self-seeking publicity hounds in Parliament, of any persuasion, to monitor or oversee.




Kevin
said

I trust that everyone here who is criticising Ms. Keen for her actions has taken the time to read her response to Mr. Lunn in its entirety. The CNSC has posted all of the correspondence on their web site at

http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/newsroom/issues/corr_page.cfm

On it's face, it appears that AECL dropped the ball by failing to comply with the terms of their license, then compounded the problem by playing chicken with the CNSC. Lunn, meanwhile, has made an ass of himself by overstepping the bounds of his statutory powers, failing to know what was going on in his own office, and trying to turn Ms. Keen into a scapegoat.


JJ
said

Should the opposition parties be fired because they supported the Conservative to re-open the nuclear reactor?


James - Chatham Ont.
said

RE; Elizabeth Atkinson's comments. I disagree with your view on the role of Ms. Keen as a Professional engineer. Her foremost responsibility was to ensure the safety of the running of the plant. If operating standards state that the pumps in question should be on emergency power, it is her responsibility to ensure that is the case. To not do so could have left her open to professional negligence charges should an incident at the plant occur.

It is AECL's and the government's responsibility to follow the operating standards and to ensure that there is an adequate supply of isotopes, not the CNSC.

Ms. Keen's and CNSC's actions in this matter where correct.


John
said

Canada opted for operating as a technocracy i.e. no political appointments back in the late 60's and early 70's. It sounds great but it makes our system non-accountable to the voters. Top level bureaucratic positions should be appointed by a new government in power. The new broom should sweep clean thereby bringing back accountability.


Ted
said

Those mentioning a possible melt down of the Chalk River nuclear reactor seem to be totally unaware of the relative danger here. The potential danger involved with a small scale medical radioisotope reactor are miniscule compared to one for power production. The problems with this reactor were well known throughout the last tenures of the Liberal Governments. They failed to get on line new reactors. The United States is watching this situation and is planning to get into the medical isotope business if Canada continues to drop the ball. The Liberal party should focus on this, which is important to the Canadian nation, instead of focusing on an incompetent bureaucrat who failed to put the situation into perspective and lets be honest was just plain arrogant and self serving.


JK
said

Simply put, Ms. Keen was obligated to shut down the reactor. Rules are in place for a reason. If the government and the population disagree with the rules, then change them. If the government disagrees with the decision made by Ms. Keen, then go through the channels that are in place to have her removed.

These watchdogs and commissions exist for a reason. Granted, the reactor ran without incident for years - but for all of you who believe that is a valid argument, I suggest you google Chernobyl and see what is left of that city...


peter jones
said

Is there a problem with a back up system NOT working for 17 months?

Perhaps Mrs Keen decided to galvanize the goevernment into correcting this issue, and was willing to spark a mini-crisis to get Ottawa off its bum and prioritize nuclear safety.



wayne ewen
said

I work in nuclear facility that is regulated by the CNSC and on more than one occasion they have shut us down for not being in total compliance with their requirements . They rule to the letter of the law no matter how ridiculous it is.Their mandate is to be the most dominant nuclear regulatory force in the world.


Chris
said

Dion is always hysterically trying to find something to "stick" to Harper. He could care less about the national interest or anything beyond his own election hopes. He is not up to the job of even opposition leader, let alone Prime Minister.

Matt
said

Ms Keen refuses to let the reactor restart to supply the needed isotopes.

Parliament (including Dion) legislate an override to get the reactor back up.

Even Dion though her judgment was flawed enough to pass a law overrulling her.

Minister Lunn simply wrote a letter questioning her judgment.

If she lacks the judgment to perform her role, she should be removed. If Dion thought her judgment was acceptable, they didn't need to overrule her.


Chris
said

It seems some people have a hard time reading, the reactor has back ups, the back up that has not been installed is for earthquakes. There does not seem to be a safety concern in my eyes, when was the last earthquake in that area that caused all backups to fail.

Human life is worth something. Public safety should be at the top of any list of priorities.

The delays at picking and the other reactors in Ontario, I guess are attributed to this new regulation also.
People get your head out of the sand, chances that this reactor for the 120 days they have started it up for, to have a massive accident that would cause leaks, the odds of winning the lottery are much better.


Brett
said

Good Grief People... get your facts straight.
There is more then adequate cooling for the reactor. And there is even a fully functional backup pump in case of emergency.
What we are talking about here is the 3rd backup pump that was taken off-line for repairs. Still leaving the main backup pump online.
In other words, Linda Keen decided to keep the reactor shut down because if the thousands of fail-safe's failed, and the extremely unlikely chance that they couldn't shut it down, the backup pump kicks in. And then for some unknown reason, they still cant shut the reactor down, and the even more unlikely situation that the backup pump doesn't work, then they are in trouble.
Risking lives because the backup to the backup to the backup was not online, is irresponsible. That is why the entire House voted to bring it back online.
Linda Keen was having a pissing contest with the AEC, and put thousands of lives in danger. Lunn's letter is fully warranted.


Chris L
said

The reactor had been operating without a backup emergency power system for cooling pumps for 17 months, was Keen sleeping?
She should be fired!


JSmith
said

If Homer Harper say that a nucular power plant can continue to operate without functional backup system for cooling pumps, he must certainly be right. Unsurprisingly, Harper stands at 30% in polls.


Gar
said

Keen is a Liberal hack who should have known what was going to happen the old Liberals still can not believe they are not in power and will try any underhanded thing possible even if it endangers people as long as the conservatives will be blamed


neilpk
said

I find the conservative mindset of some writers, and of the federal government incomprehensibly short sighted. Would the tories and their apologists have us believe that nuclear reactors don't really need backup cooling systems? It's true redneck fashion to imply "safety's for nerds"!


Rod
said

Keen should be jailed for risking the lives of thousands of cancer and heart patients.

These guys are paid (very good dollars) to use their best judgment, which clearly the tax payer is not getting.

Firing Lunn is like saying Keen was right, which according to the nuclear professionals AND house of commons, she wasn't!


David Koch
said

Apparently 1 of 2 backup pumps was not installed, the system may be able to work with only one pump in emergency.

These are arms length agencies/gov policies that haven't changed between both PC and previous Liberal govts. It seems like throwing rocks in a glass house to be critical of original situation when nothing has changed for years.

What one can be critical of or praise is the govt response after it became involved directly.


Austin
said

At the end of the day, Ms. Keen did her job, and Lunn did his. She upheld the administrative law, and he over-rode her lawful decision by re-opening the facility in the public interest. Game over.


Blair
said

I believe Ms Keen has made the best decision for nuclear safety in Canada and for the surrounding area of Chalk River (which includes Ottawa). CNS has nuclear standards and expects nuclear plants in Canada to oblige given the high risk or danger that a nuclear leakage could bring (Chernobyl). She has done her job.

In a hierarchial government, pressure and an overuling decision was made by parliament to reopen Chalk River due to the high demand of isotopes on this nuclear plant??! Sure. How do you weigh human risk? Always a difficult question! Does a preventative major disaster prevail over a current ailing need? What is worse??!! We are currently experiencing extreme weather conditions which I'm sure has increased the risk of a disaster - and what about terrorist activity? Does this mean we are prone to attack. Should we not take preventive care here??!

Minister Lunn was wrong in attacking President Keen the way he did. This is a sensitive issue and can bring emotional responses however a high position in the Canadian government demands a composed character not an arratic one. Lunn should have respected the decision made from the independent body of CNS and its president. Instead he has started a bureaucratic and political fight that is an embarrassment to Canada! Harper has done a decent job as a minority government and if he wants to keep a strong opinion of the public he needs to discipline Lunn.

Aside from the political battle - we need to seriously attend to Chalk River! This plant needs to get up to the standards of the CNSC ASAP and once this has been completed the government needs debate the dependency the world has on a 50 year old plant. That is unacceptable. We live in a world where substitute products and alternate supplies surround us. Other plants, other countries need to provide for this highly demanded isotope!




Barb
said

Well I wondered how long it would be, before Mr,Dion give another flip flop he changes his mind like a bouncing ping pong ball. and Inquiries is a new fad I can,t believe the liberals are saying they want to know where the money went.Maybe we should have an inquiry to find out what they did with our tax dollars they seem to can't find.


fall out boy
said

No back up pumps for 17 months!!!??? what's a nuclear disaster between friends? despite the remote possibility of catastrophic failure a nuclear facility should have all its back up systems working - wouldn't ya say Homer J.


PH
said

What I've been able to determine from reading on this subject is that.

1. CNSC added a new requirement for seismically protected backup generators for 2 coolant pumps. The 2 coolant pumps already had backup generators, they weren't seismically protected. The plant had been running for ~50 years without seismically protected backup generators.

2. There are 8 coolant pumps, it takes one pump to pump the coolant.

3. AECL got one of the backup generators upgraded, the parts for the other generator weren't all available.

4. CNSC refused to allow the plant to restart without the second seismically protected backup generator.

In order for there to be a problem there would have to be an earthquake large enough to knock out the power grid (or maybe 2 power grids if the plant is on multiple grids), the backup generator without seismic protection would have to fail and so would the seismically protected backup generator. Even then the reactor could be shut down by inserting the control rods that stop the fission.

The odds of a problem are astronomical at least millions, perhaps billions or higher to 1.

Keen was responsible to calculate the odds and weigh the risk against the certain risk to Canadians of losing the supply of isotopes.

Keen failed miserably. She should be fired and IMHO the government has cause.

This looks to me like a bureaucratic power play. Instead of coming to a compromise, like getting the second backup generator done in 6 months, Keen chose to display her power.

The head of AECL has already resigned (he may have got a similar letter). Keen needs to go too.


Brenda Williams
said

I think the point is not about politics.
It's about global safety and an organization that shut their facility down for scheduled repairs which obviously did not include installing a working back up system and would have started up their reactor AGAIN for who knows how long without the proper safety measurements implemented. As far as I am concerned, they are the ones that should be to blame for not being able to provide their product. If a trucking company cannot deliver goods to their client because their truck did not pass inspection it is not the fault of the inspector that fails their vehicle.
If this situation had not come to the public's attention now after 17 months of operationing in a non safe capacity, how much longer would it have continued? I am grateful that we have found out and I would like to know how it was possible for the facility to operate for 17 months without having the proper back up system in place in the first place.
As far as the correspondence between the two parties go, this is just another example of bullying in the workplace. Bullying someone who is doing their job is unacceptable.
If we are worried about other countries and their capability to use nuclear facilities responsibly then we better make sure our own house is in order or we might find out that Iran or North Korea or the US are imposing sanctions on our country because we are idiots who are endangering not only our own citizens but the rest of the world.



Preston Jacob
said

There is an aspect to this controversy which has been poorly reported. The Act of Parliament that created the CNSC explicitly states that it can only consider the safety of the reactor and not other considerations. At the time, this was intended to ensure that the economonic consequences of shutting down a power reactor did not lead to unsafe practices. To change this, even for one case required Parliment to act (which ultimately happened) Lund et al were upset at the CNSC and Keen because they felt that an order from the Minister should have been enough. All of the credible comment I have heard indicates that the government was clearly in the wrong and that the powers of cabinet do not extend to changing laws passed by parliament.


Ian
said

I agree with Doug. The Isotope issue was one that needed a tough government stance which it got and there was no excuse for Keen to balk at re-opening chalk river. Dion is once again just making noise because that's all he ever does. Big talk no action. It's about time that the government ran the country instead of the bureaucrats who are appointed and not elected and who sit there collecting their big fat salaries.


Flanagan
said

Lunn is another in a long line of political hacks who never asks the question: "what is good for my country", but rather the age-old partisan Canadian political question; "what is good for my party"

Keen, a career bureaucrat was smeared by Harper. No wonder senior members of the public service fear and despise these clowns...


Sean Calder
said

First of all, for all of you in a panic about there being no backup for the cooling system, understand this.

The issue was about having a backup for an already existing backup. Basically, a second backup system that was seismically protected in the event that an earthquake took out the regular backup system.

Second, Mr. Lunn's actions. The Opposition is complaining about Mr. Lunn "interfering" with this agency, and then turning around and complaining why he didn't to it sooner? Come one, either he can, or can't interfere. Make a decision!

As for reading the letters/correspondence, I've read all 38 pages of Ms. Keen's rebuttal, and while the AECL didn't seem to be able to figure out what they wanted to do, the CNSD was content to sit on their hands over it and wait the AECL out, claiming they are only acting in accordance with the law.

Forget about mitigating and extenuating circumstances. Forget about being responsible enough to weigh risk vs safety. Forget about being pro-active in getting things done so that this never happened.

No. Instead, it took Mr. Lunn to see that they were going NOWHERE fast, and took appropriate action in the interest of public health and cut through the bureaucratic BS from BOTH agencies.

And as for Mr. Lunn's letter, he himself was not going to fire her. He was going to submit a recommendation to the appropriate authority, but was giving her an opportunity to explain her actions in this matter.


Jay
said

It is funny reading people's comments when they obviously have not looked at the facts.

First of all, for those who find it stupid for Minister Lunn to have threatened Ms. Keen of being fired, it is actually a legal necessity. Ms. Keen, as she has stated on numerous occasions, serves "at good behaviour". This means that she may not be fired at the Government's whim. In this type of situation (which reminds me much of the Jean Pelletier fiasco)the Government must advise the individual that it considers she has not fulfilled her obligations or has behaved in a way that is deemed unethical. Once the Government has signified its intention, Ms. Keen has the right to defend herself against the accusations she faces. This is exactly what both parties have done, although it is quite unusual for this exchange to be done publicly.

As for the political interference question, Canadian jurisprudence has strongly established the arms-length relationship that must exist between, quasi-judicial tribunals and the Government. Now, I feel it is important to clarify that Government and Parliament are two different things. The Government is the Party that is in power, in this case the Conservatives. Parliament, however, includes all Members of Parliament which were elected by the citizenry. While the CNSC must indeed respect any laws passed by Parliament, the ministerial code of conduct clearly states that Ministers are not allowed to try to influence a specific case appearing before a tribunal (the Minister of Justice for example would not be allowed to tell a judge he must find Pickton guilty of first degree murder).

The questions raised by this controversy could have an enermous effect on Canadian regulators and other tribunals.

So please, before commenting, forget your political affiliations and instead look at the very important legal questions that are arising from this situation.

As for who is right and who is wrong, time will tell. In the meantime, I am sure quite a few lawyers are going to make some good money trying to clear this thing up.


Dan
said

It appears that Keen was following the letter of the law, as was her job. Her job is to ensure the safety of our nuclear infrastructure, NOT to ensure a supply of radioactive isotopes. Government Ministers and even prime ministers do not have the authority to arbitrarily alter the laws that govern our nuclear facilities, or to request specific exemptions. That is why parliament had to pass a law so that Chalk River could re-open without the legally required safety systems in place. I'd imagine we'd all be in here condemning Keen had she allowed Chalk River to remain open, despite their inability to abide by regulatory safety standards, and an accident occurred. It does not matter how likely or unlikely an accident is, the law is the law.


Share with your social Network:

 

Advertisement

Contest

User Tools

About the tools

Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.

Share it with your network of friends

Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.

Share this article with Facebook

Share this article with Digg

Share this article with Newsvine

Share this article with delicious

Share this article.
Send Email

Share this article with Twitter

Share this article with StumbleUpon

Share this article with Reddit

Share this article with Yahoo! Buzz