City committee examines plans to bury nuclear waste upstream

The City of Ottawa wants the company that runs the Chalk River nuclear waste facility to do more to protect the Ottawa River, and not accept nuclear waste from outside Ontario if it goes ahead and builds a large disposal site.

But councillors on the city committee responsible for water and environmental issuesstopped short of outright opposing two Canadian Nuclear Laboratories projects: creating a mound to dispose of radioactive wasteless than one kilometre from the river, and sealing thecountry's firstreactor nearRolphton, Ont., in specialized grout.

This debate about nuclear waste upstream fromOttawa has been taking place since 2016. Many people haveraisedalarms aboutplans to store waste for thousands of years near a water course, especially one that provides drinking water to more than a million people.

Coun. Theresa Kavanaghcalled for Tuesday'sdebate among Ottawa city councillors, because she says she's a "water lover" who has been concerned about the issue since before her 2018 election. She originally called for council tooppose the plansbut, with colleagues, modifiedthelanguageto addresscity staffconcerns about the entire Chalk River site.

For instance, the city wants no waste imported from other provinces, wants access to data about river monitoring, and a better alert system should a spill take place.

Councillors will also call on the federal environment minister to launcha regional assessment of radioactive disposal projects in the Ottawa Valley.

"We have to havea close watch on what's happening," said Kavanagh.

• Proposed radioactive waste disposal site in Chalk River raises concerns
• 'Insanity' to allow nuclear waste disposal near Ottawa River, Indigenous groups say

Staff say facility better than status quo

Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. saidthe newdisposal site at Chalk River would handlea large amount onemillion cubic metres of "low level" radioactive waste in solid form,mainly from old buildings fromthe 1940s through 1960s that need to be taken down. The small, 43-employee Crown corporation also has small amounts of waste in other locations, but 95 per cent is already at the big, long-standing research site at Chalk River.

The federal government continues to own that facility, but transferred operations to the private sector in 2015.Aconsortium called the Canadian National Energy Alliance, of which SNC-Lavalin owns 50 per cent, has the long-term contract there through its Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL).

City staff responsible for Ottawa's drinking water supply say they feel CNL'sdisposal plans would be better than status quo.

"In principle, we feel that the engineered facility, along with its wastewater treatment, does provide improved protection for the river," said Ian Douglas, a city water quality engineer.

For 25 years, the city has done weekly tests ofriver water for radioactivity, and has seen only smallamounts of the radioactive isotope tritium, far below acceptable levels for drinking water. There had beena spill in 1988, Douglas noted, and higher levels recorded in the 1970s and 1980s.

"The risks [to drinking water] from Chalk River, especially based on the track record, I think are low in terms of having a health impact for our residents," Douglas told councillors.

Waste to lastmillennia

Critics disagreed that the hazardouswaste at Chalk River was "low level,"or that the disposal methods would be an improvement. Storing waste near the surface, in an area prone to earthquakes and near a river would undoubtedly fail in the coming millennia, they said.

"It's really a landfill, and a landfill type of facility is not at all appropriate for these types of wastes," saidOle Hendrickson, who called the wastea "witch's brew."

Hendrickson was one of nearly three dozen public delegations,to address committee during Tuesday'sdetailed discussion.

Many said they lacked confidence in the oversight of the federal regulator Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, arguing the commission appearstoo cozy with CNL. Public delegationscalled for other options, and to not rush, given the federal government is now updating its policy for disposing of radioactive waste.

"We're not talking here about the next election. We're not talking here about the next century. We're talking about millennia forward," said Gordon Edwards, president and co-founder of the non-profit Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

"The pyramids of Egypt are only 5,000years old. These wastes will be around for much, much longer than that."

Nuclear agencies

The nuclear site's owner, operator, and regulator, answered technical questions for hours about nuclear storage andfuture scenarios.

CNL's director of the waste site, Meggan Vickerd,said it's wrong to compare the projectto a municipal landfill, given thehigh-leveldesign it requires. CNL creates models so that the facility might survive an earthquake, flooding, or be habitable ifa future generation settled there, she said.

CNLemployees live and work in the area, and the company also wants to protect the Ottawa River, Vickerd added.

The Chalk River site itself has been studied from all angles and operates safely, saidHaidy Tadrosa director general with Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. She pointed to thecommission's 500 experts, all with a mandate to only approve projects that are safe for the Canadian public.

A vice-president with Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL), meanwhile, said the federal government has $8 billion in liabilities on its books for radioactive waste overall, which it plans to deal with.

"Who really is accountable for these sites? Who is accountable for these wastes? The answer is AECL," said Shannon Quinn.