Evidence of meeting #43 for Natural Resources in the 40th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cleanup.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Electricity Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
For environmental damage, the cleanup or the measure would have to be ordered by a competent authority under federal or provincial legislation.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Again, I'm imagining a potential dispute between a homeowner...or a dispute between a province and the feds. The province may say they want to clean it up, but the feds may say they're the regulatory authority on that issue and don't deem it to be worthy of cleanup.
Can they also say what extent of cleanup is applied? There are all sorts of different levels of thoroughness of cleanup.
Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Electricity Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
In the case of a homeowner, it would be property damage. Going forward, they would say that their property was damaged, but they would have to prove there was damage to their property in order to obtain compensation.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Then clause 17 applies only in the case of crown lands. Is that what we're discussing?
Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Electricity Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
This is something broader than just property damage.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
If someone has a farm with an affected river that goes through their land and they deem it to have affected the soil on their land, if they seek compensation or to have a cleanup happen, are they now under the clause 16, which we've dealt with already, or are they under clause 17?
Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Electricity Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
If their property was damaged, they would have a claim under the previous provision, under clause 13.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
What environment are we talking about, then? Is it not privately owned? Is that the idea?
Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Electricity Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
That's correct. If you were talking about public lands--and you used the example before of Lake Ontario--it would be ponds, lakes, etc., that might not be owned.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
This is helpful.
So we're talking about crown lands and not those privately held in terms of environmental damage in clause 17. We're also talking about bodies of water that are not privately held. Those are the two main areas of the environment. It's not the atmosphere?
Senior Legislative Counsel, Advisory and Development Services Section, Department of Justice
The environment includes the atmosphere under federal legislation. The environment is air, water, and soil under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, which might be one of the sources of an order to clean up something. The environment is recognized to be air, land, water, and soil.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I'm sorry, would CEAA apply under something like clause 17? Would CEAA be a reference point? That seems unusual, because CEAA doesn't apply in other ways in the nuclear industry.
Senior Legislative Counsel, Advisory and Development Services Section, Department of Justice
I was speaking of the definition of “environment” found in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, cleanup orders can be issued.
Senior Legislative Counsel, Advisory and Development Services Section, Department of Justice
No, under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act they might say to clean something up.
NDP
Senior Legislative Counsel, Advisory and Development Services Section, Department of Justice
Then Bill C-20 says, you've made an order under CEPA to clean this up; therefore, it's compensable under this. This is compensation legislation.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I have a question about reference again.
We had some cross-border issues when we were talking about the economic compensation. When the department looked at the equivalent under environmental cleanup within the U.S. jurisdiction, what did we find?
Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Electricity Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
If there's an incident in the United States affecting Canada, then Canadian victims would be able to make a claim against the American operator.
Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Electricity Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
That's correct. We have a reciprocal arrangement with the United States, and it's under that reciprocal arrangement that an American victim would be able to seek compensation under our legislation.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Where is that reciprocal arrangement, just so we can reference it later on?
Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division, Electricity Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources
It's a regulation....
Senior Legislative Counsel, Advisory and Development Services Section, Department of Justice
I think it's under section 64.