Environment Committee on March 3rd, 2022

[Mary Taylor]

I would have to look into that. I'm not aware of any educational programs at this point in time, but to be certain I would have to take that question and come back.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Okay.

I'll go back to Mr. Chapman.

From all the data, research and scientific evidence you've seen, are DGRs the safest way of storing high-level nuclear waste?

[Steve Chapman]

Mr. Chair, because we haven't assessed and arrived at a decision, either under CEAA 2012 for what was then a low-level and intermediate-level DGR, and we haven't had a new application come forward for another DGR, I can't comment on that.

What I can comment on is the robustness of both the process that the Impact Assessment Agency has and also the Nuclear Safety Commission has to review these types of projects.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

We have Mr. Longfield.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to start with Ms. Taylor. I'm wanting to form my question to echo some concerns that we heard from Chief Michano around leaving things in the ground and walking away from it. I think it's a fair comment to make that we would be leaving things in the ground for millions of years—for seven generations plus, plus, plus.

When we look at what we're leaving in the ground and what ground we're leaving it in, how deep are we talking about? Is this Canadian Shield? Is this something that Canada does differently from other countries in terms of us having granite and thousands of feet to drill into? Could you comment on what are we actually talking about with a deep ground repository?

[Mary Taylor]

I'm afraid that I'm not an expert on the depth of these particular facilities. I can assure you, though, that when a project like that is put forward and a proponent puts an assessment in front of us, we would be looking at the geological formation and we would be looking at the hydrology of the area and then making sure they've characterized the effects in a true manner. We would also look at the efficacy of any mitigation measures they propose and then provide our advice accordingly.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you.

I've been fortunate to spend a lot of time underground in mines in Canada, and I know that when you get out of the cage, you're in a different world. When we're talking about river effects and groundwater effects, the Ottawa River and what we're talking about at Chalk River, we're going from a safe situation to an extremely safe situation if we can find the right repository. Is that a fair comment, Ms. Taylor?

[Mary Taylor]

I think it's difficult to answer in a general manner.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Right.

[Mary Taylor]

Every project gets assessed on its own merit, and I don't have in front of me the details of all the possible hydrological systems in play.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Sure. Thank you.

Finally, I'm just trying to wrap up our study here, with the minute or so we have left. Is there a lead agency? Maybe the Impact Assessment Agency could talk about who takes the lead in these discussions when you're setting up governance. Is each project assigned a lead?

[Steve Chapman]

Mr. Chair, as I mentioned at the beginning, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada is responsible for conducting the assessments. At the same time, we recognize that the Nuclear Safety Commission also has overlapping responsibilities. It is the reason why we set up a memorandum of understanding to deal with exactly the I guess governance issues, or how these projects will be assessed.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Right, because we have two government departments, that always makes me uncomfortable: Do you go to NRCan or do you go to Environment and Climate Change? You have two bosses, and I've heard it said in the past that you don't have a boss....

[Steve Chapman]

Mr. Chair, we have an excellent working relationship with the Nuclear Safety Commission. We've done coordinated assessments with the Nuclear Safety Commission in the past, and I have full confidence that we will be able to undertake assessments in a coordinated manner in the future.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Great. Thank you. Also, then, we have international oversight. We have checks on our checks, and then we audit those checks through international oversight as well.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for a very good discussion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you, Mr. Longfield.

Mr. Seeback, you have your hand up.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Chair, before the end of the committee meeting, I think that we need to discuss meetings over the break. After consultation with my colleagues, we would prefer not to have a meeting over the break weeks coming up.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

That is noted.

Mr. Duguid, you have something to say.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

Yes, Mr. Chair.

If I could indulge the committee for 54 seconds, March 22 is UN World Water Day. There is a consortium of organizations involved in water: at the University of Saskatchewan; Global Water Futures, which is a research leader in the world; UN-Water; and I believe UNESCO will be there.

This group has planned an event that happens to overlap with the time of this committee. I think three or four members of this committee have been invited to participate as panellists.

Madam Pauzé, you would have received an invitation. I know that Laurel Collins, you, Mr. Chair, and I have received invitations as well.

I wonder if we could schedule our meeting for the evening that day. As you know, we often get bumped to the evening because of the procedures committee. I wonder if we could indulge the committee to do what we do when we get bumped by the procedures committee, which is to have it in the evening.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We'll look at that. We do have to be out of here any second now.

Ms. Collins.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

I just want to speak to my support for both of the Conservatives, given that it's their study, but also for Mr. Duguid's proposal to move to the evening.

I also want to note that Ukrainian government officials have reported that Europe's largest nuclear plant is on fire. I am not sure, but is there a way for us to acknowledge what is happening, especially given that we are studying nuclear issues right now, and to condemn what is happening?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Absolutely. I have no doubt that there is unanimous consent around condemning the terrible situation that's going on and obviously creating a real mess.

[Terry Duguid, Liberal, Winnipeg South, MB]

I agree, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Ms. Collins, you said something about the Conservative study. I'm sorry, I missed that part.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

It's just that on the break week, I believe Mr. Seeback had proposed not having—