Why did the CNSC say it would request an IAEA review of the NSDF safety case in 2018 and then back away?

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has an Integrated Review Service for Radioactive Waste and Spent Fuel Management, Decommissioning and Remediation (ARTEMIS) that provides independent advice on radioactive waste management policies and projects.

On Thursday, May 17, 2018, Ramzi Jammal, former Executive Vice-President and Chief Regulatory Operations Officer of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), who is now the acting CEO of the CNSC, presented an update on the CNSC’s regulatory activities at the 42nd International Nuclear Regulators Association Meeting in Gyeongju, Republic of Korea. 

His presentation, “Canadian Update to the International Nuclear Regulators Association”, is on the CNSC website at https://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/resources/presentations/2018.cfm (scroll down to May 17th).

On Slide 27 of his presentation on “RECENT NOTABLE ACTIVITIES”, under Peer Review Missions, he says 

“The CNSC to request an IAEA review mission for radioactive waste and spent fuel management, decommissioning and remediation programs (ARTEMIS) to review the safety cases for CNL’s proposed major projects” (last line on slide 27, below)

The reference to “CNL’s proposed major projects” means i) the Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) project at the Chalk River Laboratories, ii) the proposed entombment of the Nuclear Power Demonstration reactor located on the Ottawa River 25 km upstream from Chalk River in Rolphton, Ontario, and iii) the proposed entombment of the Whiteshell-1 Reactor on the Winnipeg River in Pinawa, Manitoba.  

All three projects have been criticized by retired staff from Atomic Energy of Canada Limited as not conforming to IAEA safety standards.  An IAEA ARTEMIS review could resolve this.

An access to information request for information about why the CNSC backed away from its intent to request an ARTEMIS review, was unsuccessful in discovering the reason. The material provided in response to the request is presented below. There is not much in it, but it is curious that one long email from someone at the IAEA is entirely redacted. Why the secrecy about this we wonder?

Leave a comment