�ݺ�ߣ

1

?

?

?

?
?
March
?3,
?2016
?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?
March
?8,
?2016
?

?
Right
?Honourable
?Justin
?Trudeau
Office
?of
?the
?Prime
?Minister
80
?Wellington
?Street
Ottawa,
?Ontario
K1A
?0A2

?
Re:
?Request
?for
?a
?twenty-?�\year
?review
?of
?the
?Nuclear
?Safety
?and
?Control
?Act

?
Dear
?Prime
?Minister
?Trudeau,

?
We
?are
?writing
?to
?ask
?you
?to
?initiate
?a
?public
?review
?and
?modernization
?of
?the
?Nuclear
?Safety
?and
?
Control
?Act
?(NSCA).
?
?Modernization
?of
?the
?NSCA
?is
?urgently
?needed
?in
?light
?of
?the
?lack
?of
?
institutional
?independence
?on
?the
?part
?of
?Canadian
?Nuclear
?Safety
?Commission
?(CNSC)
?and
?lessons
?
learned
?from
?the
?Fukushima
?disaster.

?

2
March
?11th

?marks
?the
?fifth
?anniversary
?of
?the
?devastating
?earthquake
?and
?tsunami
?that
?triggered
?
the
?Fukushima
?nuclear
?disaster
?in
?Japan.
?
?Fukushima
?is
?a
?human
?tragedy
?that
?we
?never
?want
?to
?
happen
?in
?Canada.
?
?Five
?years
?later,
?over
?a
?hundred
?thousand
?people
?are
?still
?displaced
?from
?their
?
homes,
?and
?thousands
?of
?others
?live
?in
?areas
?contaminated
?by
?Fukushima��s
?fallout.
?
?
?

?
Although
?the
?earthquake
?and
?tsunami
?are
?often
?typically
?portrayed
?as
?the
?cause
?of
?the
?accident
?in
?
Canadian
?media,
?the
?Japanese
?government��s
?investigation
?concluded
?that
?the
?nuclear
?accident
?
was
?clearly
?��manmade��
?due
?to
?a
?lax
?and
?industry-?�\friendly
?nuclear
?regulator.i

?
?
?That
?is,
?the
?Japanese
?
regulator
?and
?Fukushima��s
?operator
?were
?aware
?of
?the
?tsunami
?risk,
?but
?did
?not
?act
?on
?the
?
information.
?
?To
?address
?the
?human
?and
?institutional
?causes
?of
?the
?Fukushima
?disaster,
?Japan
?and
?
the
?European
?Union
?increased
?legal
?requirements
?for
?the
?independence
?and
?transparency
?of
?their
?
nuclear
?regulators.
?
?
?

?
There
?has
?been
?no
?such
?initiative
?to
?enhance
?the
?CNSC��s
?independence
?or
?transparency
?in
?light
?of
?
Fukushima.
?
?While
?the
?CNSC
?carried
?out
?a
?review
?of
?the
?technical
?failures
?that
?lead
?to
?radioactive
?
releases
?at
?Fukushima,
?it
?did
?not
?consider
?how
?institutional
?failures
?and
?industry-?�\led
?regulation
?
caused
?the
?accident.
?
?
?This
?should
?be
?addressed
?as
?part
?of
?a
?public
?review
?process
?leading
?to
?the
?
modernization
?of
?the
?NSCA.

?
Over
?the
?past
?several
?years,
?the
?independence
?of
?federal
?environmental
?agencies,
?including
?the
?
CNSC,
?has
?been
?seriously
?eroded.
?
?In
?2008,
?Natural
?Resource
?Minister
?Gary
?Lunn
?dismissed
?Linda
?
Keen
?as
?president
?of
?the
?Commission.
?
?He
?cited
?Keen��s
?management
?of
?the
?shut-?�\down
?of
?Atomic
?
Energy
?of
?Canada
?Limited��s
?(AECL)
?NRU
?(National
?Research
?Universal)
?reactor
?and
?resulting
?
radioisotope
?shortage
?as
?the
?justification
?for
?her
?removal
?as
?Commission
?president.
?However,
?
Keen
?has
?stated
?publicly
?this
?was
?��an
?excuse��
?and
?the
?real
?reason
?for
?her
?removal
?was
?her
?refusal
?
to
?grandfather
?safety
?standards
?for
?AECL��s
?1970s
?CANDU-?�\6
?reactor
?design.ii

?
?
?Either
?way,
?Keen��s
?
removal
?damaged
?public
?confidence
?in
?the
?CNSC
?and
?highlighted
?some
?potential
?conflicts
?in
?the
?
responsibilities
?of
?the
?CNSC
?president.iii

?
Since
?then,
?the
?impartiality
?of
?the
?regulator
?has
?been
?publicly
?questioned
?and
?concerns
?have
?been
?
raised
?about
?transparency
?and
?reduced
?public
?participation
?in
?decision-?�\making.
?
?
?Some
?reasons
?for
?
this
?perception
?of
?partiality
?include:
?
?

?
? CNSC
?President
?Michael
?Binder
?publicly
?criticized
?Quebec��s
?independent
?environmental
?
assessment
?boardiv
,
?le
?Bureau
?d��audiences
?publiques
?sur
?l��environnement
?(BAPE)
?when
?it
?
acted
?within
?its
?jurisdiction
?and
?recommended
?that
?Quebec
?not
?proceed
?with
?uranium
?
mining
?because
?it
?is
?socially
?unacceptable
?to
?Quebecers.v

?
? An
?Environics
?poll
?of
?federal
?scientists
?found
?CNSC
?scientists
?were
?one
?of
?the
?most
?likely
?
among
?federal
?departments
?to
?be
?asked
?to
?alter
?studies
?for
?non-?�\scientific
?reasons.
?
?CNSC
?
staff
?were
?second
?most
?likely
?(57%)
?to
?be
?aware
?of
?cases
?where
?the
?health
?and
?safety
?of
?
Canadians
?had
?been
?compromised
?due
?to
?political
?interference.vi

?

3
? The
?issuance
?of
?a
?10-?�\year
?license
?to
?the
?Darlington
?Nuclear
?Generating
?Station
?operator
?�C
?
an
?unprecedented
?increase
?in
?license
?duration,
?which
?will
?significantly
?reduce
?public
?input
?
and
?capacity.
?
?
?
? The
?Minister
?of
?Natural
?Resources,
?who
?has
?the
?authority
?to
?dismiss
?the
?President
?of
?the
?
CNSC
?at
?will,
?retains
?the
?dual
?role
?of
?overseeing
?the
?safety
?regulator
?and
?also
?��promotion��
?
of
?the
?industry.
?
?
?
? Statements
?and
?actions
?by
?the
?CNSC
?indicating
?it
?favours
?nuclear
?energy
?production
?and
?
its
?expansion
?instead
?of
?acting
?as
?a
?neutral
?objective
?safety
?regulator.vii

?viii

?

?
While
?CNSC��s
?predecessor,
?the
?Atomic
?Energy
?Control
?Board
?(AECB),
?did
?have
?a
?legislated
?mandate
?
to
?��promote��
?nuclear
?power,
?this
?mission
?was
?thankfully
?removed
?from
?the
?CNSC��s
?mandate
?
under
?the
?NSCA.
?
?
?Despite
?this,
?the
?factors
?listed
?have
?contributed
?to
?the
?perception
?that
?the
?CNSC
?
has
?become
?promotional
?of
?the
?industry
?it
?regulates.ix

?

?
You
?have
?affirmed
?that
?the
?Government
?of
?Canada
?values
?the
?independence
?of
?federal
?authorities,
?
as
?well
?as
?transparency
?and
?public
?participation
?in
?decision-?�\making.
?Modernizing
?the
?NSCA
?is
?in
?
line
?with
?these
?values.
?
?The
?Act
?needs
?to
?be
?strengthened
?in
?order
?to
?ensure
?the
?CNSC
?is
?truly
?
independent.

?It
?has
?been
?twenty
?years
?since
?the
?NSCA
?was
?passed
?by
?Parliament.
?
?
?Legislation
?often
?undergoes
?a
?
public
?review
?after
?twenty
?years.
?
?According
?to
?documents
?acquired
?through
?Access
?to
?Information
?
(ATI),
?the
?CNSC
?is
?interested
?in
?also
?making
?amendments
?to
?the
?NSCA
?related
?to
?security
?issues.
?
?
?
The
?Commission,
?however,
?views
?a
?20-?�\year
?review
?of
?the
?NSCA
?as
?potentially
?negative
?because
?it
?
would
?involve
?��scrutiny
?by
?ALL
?stakeholders��.x

?
We
?disagree.
?
?We
?think
?an
?open
?and
?public
?review
?of
?the
?NSCA
?is
?necessary
?to
?address
?lessons
?
from
?Fukushima
?and
?to
?restore
?the
?necessary
?independence
?and
?public
?trust
?in
?the
?institution.
?
?

?
Based
?on
?our
?dealings
?with
?the
?CNSC,
?the
?following
?are
?some
?topics
?that
?should
?be
?addressed
?as
?
part
?of
?a
?legislative
?review
?to
?ensure
?an
?independent
?regulator
?and
?public
?safety:
?
?

?
�� strengthening
?the
?independence
?of
?the
?Commission;
?
?
�� improving
?transparency
?and
?opportunities
?for
?meaningful
?public
?participation;
?
?
�� requiring
?a
?sustainable
?development
?approach
?to
?environmental
?assessments;
?
?
�� affirming
?the
?necessity
?for
?Aboriginal
?engagement
?in
?CNSC
?decision-?�\making
?processes;
?
?
�� clarifying
?federal
?roles
?and
?responsibilities
?for
?nuclear
?
?emergency
?management;
?
?
�� legislating
?term
?limits
?for
?licences
?in
?order
?to
?ensure
?informed
?periodic
?public
?input;
?and
?
�� shifting
?the
?oversight
?of
?the
?CNSC��s
?to
?a
?Ministry
?without
?a
?mandate
?to
?promote
?nuclear
?
power.
?
?

?
We
?would
?be
?happy
?to
?discuss
?this
?issue
?with
?your
?staff
?and
?the
?Minister
?of
?Natural
?Resources,
?and
?
to
?provide
?clarifications
?on
?the
?problems
?identified
?above,
?as
?well
?as
?possible
?legislative
?solutions.
?
?

4

?
Truly,
Dominique
?Bernier
?
?
Coordonnatrice
?et
?coporte-?�\parole
?
?
Coalition
?pour
?que
?le
?Qu��bec
?ait
?meilleure
?
mine
?
Lois
?Corbett
?
Executive
?Director
?
?
Conservation
?Council
?of
?New
?Brunswick
Gordon
?Edwards
?
President
?
Canadian
?Coalition
?for
?Nuclear
?Responsibility
David
?Geary
?
Communications
?Director
?
Clean
?Green
?Saskatchewan

?

?
Fran?ois
?Lapierre
?
Spokesperson
?
Association
?de
?protection
?pour
?
l'environnement
?des
?Hautes-?�\Laurentides

?

?
?

?
Ugo
?Lapointe,
?
?
Canadian
?Program
?Coordinator
?
MiningWatch
?Canada
?
?

?
Brennain
?Lloyd
?
?
Coordinator
?
Northwatch

?

?
Mark
?Mattson
?
Founder
?and
?President
?
?
Lake
?Ontario
?Waterkeeper
?

?
Theresa
?McClenaghan
?
Executive
?Director
?
?
Canadian
?Environmental
?
?
Law
?Association
?
?

?

?
Kaitlyn
?Mitchell
?
Staff
?lawyer
?and
?National
?Program
?Director
?
EcoJustice
?

5

?
Michael
?Poellet
?
Chairperson,
?
?
Inter-?�\Church
?Uranium
?Committee
?
?
Educational
?Cooperative
?

?

?
Christian
?Simard
?
Directeur
?general
?
Nature
?Qu��bec

?

?
Shawn-?�\Patrick
?Stensil
?
Senior
?Energy
?Analyst
?
Greenpeace
?Canada
?

?
Chris
?Rouse
?
Founder
?
New
?Clear
?Free
?Solutions

?

?

?
Please
?send
?correspondence
?to:
?

?
Shawn-?�\Patrick
?Stensil,
?
Senior
?Energy
?Analyst,
?Greenpeace
?Canada
?
33
?Cecil
?St.,
?Toronto,
?Ontario,
?M5T
?1N1.
?

?
CC:
?

?
James
?Gordon
?Carr,
?Minister
?of
?Natural
?Resources
?
Catherine
?McKenna,
?Minister
?of
?the
?Environment
?
Rona
?Ambrose,
?Leader
?of
?the
?Official
?Opposition
?
?
Thomas
?Mulcair,
?Leader
?of
?the
?NDP
?
Elizabeth
?May,
?Leader
?of
?the
?Green
?Party
?
Kathleen
?Wynne,
?Premier
?of
?Ontario
?
Philippe
?Couillard,
?Premier
?of
?Quebec
?
?
Brian
?Gallant,
?Premier
?ministre
?du
?Nouveau-?�\Brunswick
?
Brad
?Wall,
?Premier
?of
?Saskatchewan
?
Julie
?Gelfand,
?The
?Commissioner
?of
?the
?Environment
?and
?Sustainable
?Development
?
?
Pierre
?Arcand,
?Minister
?of
?Energy
?and
?Natural
?Resources
?
?
David
?Heurtel,
?Minister
?of
?Sustainable
?Development,
?the
?Environment
?and
?the
?Fight
?Against
?
Climate
?Change
?
Bob
?Chiarelli,
?Minister
?of
?Energy
?

6
Glen
?Murray,
?Minister
?of
?the
?Environment
?and
?Climate
?Change
?
i
The National Diet of Japan, The official report of The Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent
Investigation Commission, 2012, pg. 16.
ii
Rennie MacKenzie and Ann MacLachlan, ��Ex-CNSC president looks at options after losing
challenge to dismissal,�� Nucleonics Week, Vol. 50, Number 16, April 23, 2009.
ii
Rennie MacKenzie and Ann MacLachlan, ��Ex-CNSC president looks at options after losing
challenge to dismissal,�� Nucleonics Week, Vol. 50, Number 16, April 23, 2009.
iii
MacKenzie, Brenda (2010), ��The Independence of the Nuclear Regulator: Notes from the
Canadian Experience��, Nuclear Law Bulletin, Vol. 2010/1.
iv
Michael Binder(CNSC president) to the Honourable David Heurtel (Minister of Sustainable
Development, Environment and the Fight Against Climate Change), letter, July 27, 2015.
v
In addition, the BAPE made the reasonable recommendation that Quebec not proceed with
uranium mining until Quebec established its own regulatory oversight for uranium mining and until
scientific and technological uncertainties are addressed. Bureau d��audiences publiques sur
l��environnement (BAPE), Les enjeux de la fili��re uranif��re au Qu��bec, Rapport 308, Mai 2015
vi
Environics, Survey of Federal Scientists 2013: Barriers to Effective Communication and Use of
Scientific Evidence, Prepared for the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada.
vii
Tyler Hamilton, ��Nuclear regulator's impartiality questioned,�� the Toronto Star, December 1, 2009.
viii
Shawn McCarthy, ��Impartiality of federal panel reviewing nuclear-waste plan under scrutiny,�� the
Globe and Mail, Sep. 23, 2013.
ix
For example, on January 19, 2015 the CNSC send out an email titled ��"Environmentalists Urged
to Sign Letter to Support Nuclear Energy." The Canadian Environmental Law Association,
Greenpeace, Lake Ontario Waterkeeper, Sierra Club of Canada and Northwatch subsequently
informed the Minister of the Minister of Natural Resource 2015 in a letter February 4, 2015. The
CNSC subsequently removed the posting from its website.
x
Access to Request A-2015-00025, Request for: ��whatever briefing notes or presentations
supported agenda item ��Status Report on Potential Amendments to the Nuclear Safety and Control
Act�� at the January 22, 2015 Management Committee meeting. The tracking number is ccm-
000584.��

�ݺ�ߣ

Letter: Request for a 20-year review of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act

More Related Content

Letter: Request for a 20-year review of the Nuclear Safety and Control Act