Environment Committee on March 3rd, 2022

[Jim Delaney]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We will go to Ms. Taylor Roy.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you very much.

I'll just follow up on Dan Mazier's question.

Let me start by thanking the witnesses for being here this evening. I would in particular like to recognize the work that Ms. Velshi has done with women in STEM as well and the support she has given to that important area.

On the issue of the deep geological storage site, if indeed there isn't one, if there is no community found to host this site, what impact do you think that would have on future nuclear energy sites in Canada?

[Mollie Johnson]

Jim, do you want to jump in?

[Jim Delaney]

I would reiterate as well that the NWMO would continue to work to identify an informed and willing host community for the disposal of that radioactive waste. The process itself would continue on. It would just mean either re-engaging with some of the communities that it has already engaged or going back and identifying other communities that might be an informed and willing host community.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you.

Would that in any way give you pause in thinking about small modular reactors or new nuclear facilities if indeed no community has stepped forward or agreed to host a deep geological repository and given that it seems there's not really a plan B right now in terms of dealing with the long-term storage of this waste?

[Rumina Velshi]

Ms. Taylor Roy, maybe I can give you the regulator's perspective on this.

As you have heard many times, the used fuel waste is stored safely and can be stored in the same manner for decades while the NWMO restarts its process to find a willing host community. From a regulator's perspective, that's not a prerequisite for nuclear generation.

I do want to thank you for acknowledging my work on women in STEM.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

You're welcome.

If you're saying that the waste can be safely stored without a deep geological repository, why are we searching for one?

[Mollie Johnson]

Just to begin, when we look at the best practices internationally, the deep geological repository has been identified as a best practice across international standards. It is the approach that was agreed to in 2007. That was the adaptive phased management approach.

The NWMO—they were here before you previously—has been doing this work with communities in a way that is identifying a number of communities that may be willing partners. They identify the opportunities, the risks, the benefits and also the financial benefits that would come along with being a host community. Then they really identify the communities that wish to be that host.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you. I understand the process. I was just wondering....

This is just a best practice. You're saying that Canada doesn't have to adopt this best practice when, in fact, there is not a community that is willing?

[Mollie Johnson]

At this point there are two communities that are still interested in becoming a host community.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

I'm just asking in the eventuality, since we don't have one right now.

That also goes to a question I have about the approval of CNL's proposal to build and operate the engineered containment mound at Chalk River.

For our study, I was wondering if there are any kind of lessons learned or reflections on how you would deal with another approval of this sort, having gone through this process and nearing a final decision. Perhaps are there any that you would apply to the deep geological repository—the community involvement or the engagement with indigenous groups, etc.?

Do either of you have any recommendations for us in terms of how these consultations should be handled given what you have learned from this experience at Chalk River?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have 30 seconds.

[Rumina Velshi]

Maybe I will start and Ms. Johnson can go after.

We are constantly learning. Certainly around reconciliation, it's a journey. I know the next time around we will maybe start a lot earlier, engage much further and just be better partners in this and have stronger relationships than have been established.

All I can say is that we're constantly improving.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Ms. Pauzé now has the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I would like to ask Mr. Jammal something.

Earlier he referred us to his website. But I would like to ask him to send the document I was talking about to the clerk: i.e., the acceptance criteria that have been established for the near-surface waste management facility that is planned for Chalk River. We don't want the old version, we want the new version.

I now turn to the Department of Natural Resources officials.

Ms. Johnson, just as the committee is trying to shed light on the prevailing failures, and perhaps lack of transparency with respect to waste, your department is revising the policy framework on this issue; the Nuclear Waste Management Organization is developing a strategy, and the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, through the commissioner, is preparing a report.

But the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is already conducting hearings on the proposed near-surface waste management facility at Chalk River. At the same time, it is also conducting hearings on the Rolphton reactor's decommissioning, which is contrary to what the international agency says.

In your view, shouldn't we first suspend the projects, which don't have a licence, pending the findings of the Auditor General's office and the work of our committee, out of respect for these people and for the MPs who are working on this?

Then decisions will be made about the storage of radioactive waste.

[Mollie Johnson]

On this issue, there are a number of times the federal government undertakes reviews and simultaneously has the obligation to continue to undertake its responsibilities and manage the business in front of it. This is one of those cases. Our perspective on this is that the policy will continue to move forward. We, as the CNSC and others are subject to the performance audit of the CESD. When those results are available and the review is complete, that will put us in a position to make the adjustments at that time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have 10 seconds left for a comment, Ms. Pauzé.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

We should take into account the work that we do here very seriously, and the work that the Auditor General does through the Commissioner of the Environment.

As time is short, I'm just going to ask for one more document.

How much money does the country make from the import of nuclear waste? What are the profits?

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Thank you.

Ms. Collins, you have the floor.

[Mollie Johnson]

To my knowledge, I'm not aware of profits that—

[The Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We have to go to Ms. Collins right now. Those were the two and a half minutes that Madame Pauzé had—even more than two and a half minutes. Maybe you could work that answer in at another time.

We go to Ms. Collins now for two-and-a-half minutes.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Maybe we could get that in writing from the department.

I also had mentioned in my previous comments the City of Ottawa's resolution and the safeguards to protect.... I didn't actually hear about any additional actions that have been taken. If there are any additional actions that have been taken since that resolution, I'd love it if the witnesses could follow up in writing on that to our committee.

[Technical difficulty—Editor] for small nuclear reactors reprocessing waste. [Technical difficulty—Editor] as Dr. Ramana stated, “reprocessing makes little difference to long-term management of nuclear waste while making nuclear weapons proliferation easier.” He mentioned that Canada shared technology in the past with other countries, who then used it in their nuclear weapons programs. Especially given Putin's recent threats of nuclear warfare, this is a deep concern.

To any of the witnesses, if you are thinking through technological developments around small nuclear reactors and waste, how can we mitigate the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation?

[Mollie Johnson]

Maybe just to start, Canada remains committed to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the full implementation of all of the safeguards from the IAEA. Safety and those agreements that we are party to are primary.

There are SMR technologies that do look at reprocessing, but as we mentioned earlier, those are under development and none of that would overtake the agreements we have.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Thank you.

You mentioned that the International Atomic Energy Agency had an Integrated Regulatory Review Service, which conducted a peer review of Canada's radioactive waste policies in 2019. They found that the government should enhance the policy and the strategy for radioactive waste management and that the CNSC should consider better aligning its radiation protection requirements with IAEA safety standards. Can you speak to that and how those concerns have been addressed?