LETTER

Pontiac MP William Amos addresses Chalk River Nuclear Waste Proposal

 

I take seriously my responsibility to enhance public dialogue regarding the proposed “Near Surface Disposal Facility” (NSDF), which is part of a private-sector plan to deal with the legacy waste at the Chalk River Nuclear Site. There is no doubt this is a file of significant regional and national interest. It merits our sustained focus and an effort to tone down the rhetoric.

For over a year, I have engaged directly and extensively with stakeholders (cottagers, environmental groups), mayors and councillors, indigenous communities, the project proponent (Canadian Nuclear Laboratories - CNL), my Parliamentary colleagues, and Canada’s independent and expert regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). If there is agreement on one aspect, it is that we have no choice but to achieve world-class management of the radioactive liability that Chalk River represents.

To be clear, it is not the job of a Member of Parliament to evaluate the technical merits of the CNL proposal or to determine whether the long-term storage of low- and intermediate-level radioactive materials will “likely cause significant adverse environmental impacts”, as required under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012. This is the Commission’s responsibility, whose team of expert public servants is legally-mandated to analyze every public safety and environmental concern. From flood and earthquake considerations, to terrorist threats and multi-generational impacts, this independent federal regulator will examine the entire picture.

The Commission is undertaking a transparent public process that allows citizens to voice their opinions and preoccupations. Pursuant to applications for participant funding, groups such as Ottawa Riverkeeper, the Canadian Environmental Law Association, and indigenous organizations, such as the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation Tribal Council have sought and obtained a portion of the $100,000 dedicated to ensure that technical evidence may be advanced by non-governmental entities. The deadline for public comment on CNL’s draft environmental impact statement has been extended until August 16, to account for the need to translate all project information into French.

My job is to encourage all interested Canadians to share their views on the proposed project through this official process. All comments are posted on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry for public review. All observations, including those related to the adequacy of the information presented by the proponent, will be considered and addressed by the Commission. Should it be determined that further information is required, the backer will be requested to re-submit until federal officials are satisfied with a final environmental impact statement.

Following receipt of a final environmental impact statement, commission staff will prepare an environmental assessment report (made public 60 days prior to the public hearing process) to inform the decision process. Public participation in the public hearings will be offered through the submission of written and/or oral interventions.

So, let’s get the facts on the table and build a critical and open dialogue through the official process. It’s the best way to responsibly address the many health, safety and environmental concerns that ultimately stem from an historic nuclear waste problem we cannot ignore.  

William Amos
MP for Pontiac