COM 0212.068 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Nuclear Sunset: Economic Costs of the Canadian Nucleaz Industn~ http://k~slc.ccnr.orF/sunsetl.html problems in order to mew. ;;ommercial obligations. [135] Shy. tly after the NRU was back in operation, The NRX was shut down for maintenance and repairs in January 1992, after it had operated continuously for most of 1991. AECL initially decided that the reactor would be shut down permanently in 1995, and that until that time, it would continue to provide back-up isotope production for the NRU for periods often weeks per year. [136] However, by March 1993 AECL had decided that the reactor would not be restarted, based on a re-evaluation of its condition and age; the expected radiation doses to staff; and expected emissions of radioactive contaminants. [137] AECL's original plan had been to keep the NRX running as back-up for the NRU until the MAPLE-X10 was in operation. The 40-year-old NRU has been an ongoing problem, experiencing numerous leaks and power losses. Former AECL Research President Terry Rummery described it in 1993 as AECL's "biggest financial headache". [138] The urgency over the MAPLE-X10 construction, and the reason for the eventual cancellation came about because of a contractual obligation to Nordion International Inc.. In March 1988, the federal government had announced its plan to prig°atize AECL's Radiochemical Company and its Medical Products Division. The former was incorporated under the name of Nordion International Inc., and the latter as Theratronics International Ltd.. In September 1988, AECL "sold" Nordion and Theratronics to Canada Development Investment Corporation (ODIC a federal crown corporation) for eventual transfer to private ownership. On November 1, 1991, ODIC sold Nordion for $165 million to MDS Health Group. $150.5 million from the sale was transferred on paper to the federal government. [ 139] AECL also entered into a 23-year contract for the exclusive supply of radioisotopes to Nordion. At the time, AECL noted that "The nature of the business requires the corporation [AECL] to make significant investments in production and ~~s~aste handling facilities." [140] AECL has not acknowledged these costs in its accounting... "There is no evidence that a provision has been made in the financial statements for these costs. This is yet another contingency cost liability that is not accounted for by AECL in the financial statements." [141 ] Some time after the sale to Nordion. it became obvious to AECL that it had drastically underestimated both the cost of operating the NRU reactor, and the capital cost of the new MAPLE-X10 reactor. However, MDS/Nordion, having already entered into a contract on the basis of lower costs, was understandably reluctant to pay more for their isotopes in order to compensate for AECL's incompetence. MDS went to court, claiming that AECL was obligated to of 64 04/08/97 2227'46