Natural Resources Committee on March 10th, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

I call the meeting to order.

Good afternoon, everyone. We are here for our second meeting to deal with the motion pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) to carry on a study of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's decision regarding the transport of decommissioned steam generators to Sweden. We have two panels today.

Just before we get to our first panel, we have to approve a budget for witness expenses for this study. You have the budget before you for the two meetings that are scheduled. It comes to $15,000. Are there any questions on the budget, or any discussion?

Go ahead, Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I know we have an uncertain couple of weeks coming, but where do we stand on the trip out to northern Alberta?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

That has nothing to do with this study. This is only for these two meetings.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

This is only the budget for just these two meetings? Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Yes.

Is the budget approved?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Okay, thank you.

Now we will go straight to the two panels for today. We have witnesses with us. One witness is delayed due to air travel; that's no surprise today. We have as well one witness by video conference and one by teleconference. We will start with the presentations in their order on the agenda.

Actually, the first person on the agenda, Mr. Ullrich, isn't here yet, so we will take his presentation if he makes it on time. We will start, then, with Mike Smith, warden of Bruce County, and Mitch Twolan, mayor of Huron-Kinloss.

Go ahead, gentlemen, with your presentations, please.

[Mike Smith, Mayor, Saugeen Shores, and Warden, Bruce County]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. Thank you for the opportunity to appear today and provide Bruce County council's perspective on the steam generator recycling project proposed by Bruce Power.

As you mentioned, I'm the mayor of Saugeen Shores and the Bruce County warden. With me is Mitch Twolan. He is the mayor of Huron-Kinloss and also a member of the Bruce County council.

We'd like to comment on a number of aspects of the project as it relates to the county and the lower-tiered communities in the county. We will first comment on our relationship with the proponent, Bruce Power, and our involvement specifically with this project; second, as a member of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, we will discuss our input, or lack of input, to the position taken by the board and how that position was communicated to the CNSC.

Bruce Power provides information to our communities in various ways. A delegation appears monthly before Bruce County council to report on safety; environmental performance, on and off the site; production; major activities on site, like the current rehabilitation of the units; and community events that the company and staff may be involved in.

Bruce Power is also a member of the South Bruce Impact Advisory Committee, a committee that was formed during the construction of the site. The mandate is to identify issues and address impacts as they affect the health, safety, environment, and economic well-being of the adjacent communities. There are five communities on that committee. Along with Ontario Power Generation, Bruce Power is an active member of the impact committee. It reports monthly.

Specifically on the steam generator project, Bruce Power has hosted a number of well-advertised open houses in our community, and anyone could attend and get information or provide input to the project. There were a number of them throughout the county and the County of Grey.

Bruce County council became formally aware of the project at the May 6, 2010, session. We were informed that the generators were classified as low-level waste, and as a result of their size, Bruce Power intended to seek an approval for a special arrangement certificate from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. The plan was to transport the generators through our community in late September or early October.

The proposed route was to be over county-owned roads and bridges and through three or four of our lower-tier municipalities. An oversize permit was going to be needed to transport the generators over Bruce County roads. As the transport of the generators was going to take place on our roads and through our communities, county council wanted assurances that the project could be completed safely.

Bruce Power offered to provide detailed briefings and to work with our county engineer--who is our professional road and bridge authority--the Grey-Bruce Public Health Board, the medical officer of health, and the lower-tier communities on the transport route. After careful consideration, both the county engineer and the county medical officer of health—I know we're going to hear from her today—concluded that the project did not pose a public health hazard.

With this information, and given Bruce Power's commitment and proven performance in safety, the county council was confident that the proponent could complete the project as planned. It decided to advise the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission at the September public hearing and to do so in the form of an oral intervention.

Bruce County council continues to receive monthly briefings on the project, and Bruce Power officials continue to work closely with our county engineer on the transport route.

At the May 6 county council meeting, we were also informed that the objective of the project was to reduce the amount of material going into long-term storage and recycle the majority of the metal in the generators. Although this is something that the county has no jurisdiction over, we believe it is an environmentally responsible action to take. Upwards of 90% of the material in the generators would be safely recycled, and the remaining 10% would be returned, in approved packages, and stored at the western waste management facility in Bruce County.

I want to mention, again briefly, that both Mitch and I are members of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, and we obviously do not agree with the position they have taken at the CNSC. I say that because we weren't given an opportunity for input prior to that intervention in September. I'll leave that with the committee.

Finally, Bruce County council continues to believe that the project can be completed safely through our communities. We believe that Bruce Power has the ability to complete the project in a manner that will not pose a public or environmental health hazard.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Smith, thank you very much for your presentation.

As I indicated, we will go through all of the presentations before we get to questions and comments.

We have now, by video conference from the Grey Bruce Health Unit, Dr. Hazel Lynn, medical health officer.

Ms. Lynn, as you're making your presentation, there won't be any problem; when questions are being asked later, you will see the questioner, but when you go to respond, you will be seeing an image of yourself. That's just so you're aware of that in advance.

Please go ahead with your presentation. You have up to seven minutes.

[Dr. Hazel Lynn, Medical Officer of Health, Grey Bruce Health Unit]

All right. Thank you very much.

As you said, I'm the medical officer of health for the Grey Bruce Health Unit. I'm a fellow in The College of Family Physicians of Canada and licensed to practise in Ontario. I also have a master's degree in epidemiology and community health from the University of Toronto in 2003.

As part of the course work for the master's, I completed a graduate-level course on radiological health offered at the school of industrial hygiene at U of T. This course covered both ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. Although I'm not an expert in this field, I certainly do understand units of measurement, measurement techniques, and relative exposure risks, and I have participated in various educational opportunities in this field to keep track of the new research and technology.

Public health practice in Ontario is mandated by the Health Protection and Promotion Act. It's defined by the Ontario Public Health Standards. Protection of our health is the cornerstone of the prevention of disease. The Health Protection and Promotion Act provides the legal authority for the medical officer of health to respond to a hazardous situation that threatens the health of the public. The Ontario Public Health Standards then provide the protocol to operationalize the risk assessment process.

The tool combines community surveillance and risk profile process, which is ongoing, and then a probability and consequence matrix that allows us to assign priority values to the identified hazard situations. Most of what we do in life has some hazard, but we have to have priorities in how we adjust our lives accordingly.

Considering the recycling of decommissioned boilers from Bruce Power, my jurisdiction and responsibility are limited to the health hazard assessment associated with the transport of the decommissioned boilers from the Bruce Power site to the port of Owen Sound and on to the ocean transport. More specifically, I need to determine the level of exposure risk and then the consequent health risk to the population of Grey and Bruce counties.

When the plan for transporting the decommissioned boilers was first proposed, the board of health requested information from Bruce Power. Representatives came and presented the project, answered questions, and addressed our concerns. A series of open houses were held, and an information website was set up and maintained. A radiation regulatory official and scientist from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission came to Owen Sound and presented to the city council and to the board of health.

The risk to human health from ionizing radiation exposure increases with the type and the magnitude of radiation and the duration of time the person is exposed. Based on the information provided by Bruce Power and the Nuclear Safety Commission, the type and magnitude of radiation released from the surface of the decommissioned boilers is very low, well below the regulatory limits for transport of such material. Our conclusion is that there is no increased radiological exposure risk related to these boilers if the population stays at least two metres away from them.

To ensure this protective distance is maintained, there will be continuous monitoring for emissions around the boilers. There is a contingency plan for transportation incidents on the roads. There is a police escort for the transport and security personnel at the harbour. These measures are in place to prevent inadvertent exposure to the public. With these measures in place, my conclusion is that the probability of radiation exposure to the population is, for all intents and purposes, practically zero.

The consequence of the exposure is the other side of the hazard matrix. Standing within one metre of the steam generator continuously for one hour would expose a person to a dose of about 80 microsieverts. This is an amount significantly less than a conventional chest X-ray, which is about 140 microsieverts. The consequence of this exposure is also very close to zero.

My conclusion, then, is that the probability of exposure and the consequence of exposure are both practically zero, so this proposal does not present a health hazard to the population of Grey and Bruce counties.

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is the agency with the greatest expertise in the field of radiological health. I appreciate the board of health's willingness to provide information and consult with our community. We are strong supporters of recycling and reusing and we support the CNSC decision to provide the licence to transport these decommissioned boilers for recycling and reduction of the volume of radioactive material that requires long-term storage.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you very much, Dr. Lynn, for your presentation.

We go now to the next presenter on the first panel. By teleconference from the Town of Amqui in Quebec, we have Mayor Gaëtan Ruest.

Go ahead, please, Mayor.

[Gaëtan Ruest, Mayor, Town of Amqui]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to all committee members.

On behalf of my colleagues at the Regroupement des municipalités du Québec pour un futur énergétique socialement responsable, I want to thank you for the invitation to come and testify before your committee today on Bruce Power's plan to import and export radioactive waste.

In our view, the current political situation should encourage Canadian and Quebec parliamentarians to take action to put an end to Bruce Power's plan to proceed with the import and export of its radioactive waste for metal recycling purposes. Here we will be outlining the reasons for our request.

Our organization includes some 300 municipalities that, by resolution, have expressed their intent to promote investment in energy conservation, energy efficiency, the modernization of demand management and, if necessary, the production of new forms of renewable energy within a decentralized perspective. As you will understand, all energy production-related issues are a concern for us and nuclear energy production is no exception.

With respect to nuclear energy and the issue currently under review by the committee, the absence of any integrated nuclear waste management policy in Quebec and Canada is a concern for the members of our organization. In the circumstances, any project involving the production, transportation, categorization and permanent or temporary management of radioactive waste produced in Canada encourages us to get involved.

As a result, Bruce Power's plan has led us to notify the some 185 municipalities in Quebec most likely to be on the land path of the radioactive waste concerned. To date, 125 of those municipalities have endorsed a resolution submitted by our organization to oppose Bruce Power's project and to challenge the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's decision to facilitate its implementation. Those 125 municipalities represent nearly half a million citizens.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mayor, excusez-moi--

[Gaëtan Ruest]

In Quebec, our organization is mainly opposed to the non-essential transportation of radioactive waste or material contaminated by radioactivity resulting from the dismantling, rebuilding or ongoing operation of nuclear reactors. In the case before us—

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Go ahead with a point of order, Mr. Coderre.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Ruest, this is Denis Coderre, member of Parliament. With all due respect, smoke is rising from our interpreters: you are speaking too quickly. Slow down, please; we know where you come from.

[Gaëtan Ruest]

Yes, but I heard that we had 10 minutes for our address. Since I only have seven minutes left, I have to pick up the pace.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

It's like in golf: the person who makes the fewest strokes wins. You don't need to say too many words either.

[Gaëtan Ruest]

Oh, all right.

In the case before us, the metals contaminated by radioactivity from Bruce Power would be transiting through Quebec on their way to Sweden. This explains our involvement in the Bruce Power plan and our decision to attend today's hearing and that organized by the CNSC where we were also represented.

Our organization must express its disappointment with the quality of the consultation process conducted by the CNSC in this case. Committee members should take note of the fact that we learned, to our great surprise, at the hearing that neither the project promoter nor the CNSC had had the courtesy to inform Quebec's political authorities about the nature of the project. The Quebec municipalities potentially concerned by the transportation of the proponent's radioactive waste were also kept in the dark. How then is it possible to explain why a plan to transport radioactive waste produced in Canada, involving the use of Quebec land, could be developed without the political authorities more specifically concerned being informed of the fact?

We were also disappointed by the lack of consideration shown by certain commission members at the hearing before the CNSC following the presentation of our brief. Certain comments suggested that the Quebec municipal councillors who had endorsed the resolution submitted to them had acted without the appropriate knowledge. Our resolution was even compared to a circular letter. When our brief was filed with the CNSC, 30 municipalities had endorsed the resolution at the time. Now there are 138 municipalities.

Allow me to reassure the members of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources. In Quebec, when resolutions are adopted by elected members, they are adopted upon careful reflection. We have appended the wording of the resolution to our presentation and you will be able to determine whether it is appropriate.

Further to the CNSC hearing, we sent a document to Mr. André Régimbald, engineer and director general of nuclear substance regulation at the CNSC, informing him that it would be useful for CNSC staff to read our resolution and that we would like CNSC staff to be able to inform us in a detailed manner of any factual error that it might contain. That request was sent to him on January 26. At that time, 113 Quebec municipalities had adopted the resolution. We are still awaiting a response.

I must note the vigilance of the municipal elected representatives of our organization. Without the alert issued by my colleagues, the plan secretly developed by the Ontario Bruce Power company to use the Great Lakes, the St. Lawrence Seaway and Quebec's road system to transport this radioactive waste to Sweden would not have received all the attention it deserved from the Quebec public and their provincial and municipal elected representatives.

Bruce Power's conduct and the CNSC's attitude have shown Canadians and Quebeckers the sad example of a private business and government agency utterly lacking the slightest respect for democratic rules that should actuate them in a matter with such obvious geopolitical implications.

The factual reasons for not authorizing the Bruce Power project for so-called metal recycling purposes are numerous. Even though they were stated by many stakeholders, the CNSC decided, in spite of everything, to support Bruce Power in its project.

In the circumstances, the members of the Standing Committee on Natural Resources will have a historic role to play. They will have to set aside all partisan political considerations in order to overturn this decision by the CNSC. Based on our analysis of the situation, the decision made by the CNSC has political consequences, and if carefully assessed by parliamentarians, they would want their direct intervention in this matter and the immediate withdrawal of the licence granted to Bruce Power.

In our view, the CNSC has exceeded the limits of its mandate by granting Bruce Power the licence. Did Mr. Binder do so in full knowledge of the facts? Did the CNSC take advantage of the absence of clearly defined policies to favour the nuclear industry to the detriment of the interests of the Canadian public?

One statement by Mr. Binder at the commission's public hearing leads us to believe that he was aware the decision he would have to make in fact exceeded his mandate. The evidence given at the hearing by Mr. Miles Goldstick, from the Swedish Environmental Movement's Nuclear Waste Secretariat illustrates this statement. During his remarks, Mr. Goldstick mentioned that the recycling project proposed by Bruce Power raised significant issues regarding the future management of nuclear waste on a global scale. President Binder called Mr. Goldstick to order, clearly stating that that aspect of the issue exceeded the mandate of the public hearings.

In fact, Mr. Binder should have adopted Mr. Goldstick's argument and added it to other policies in the matter to justify the decision to stay Bruce Power's application. The potential consequences of the interprovincial and international geopolitical issues involved are too serious for the members of this committee to remain silent on this matter.

Now I'm going to speak to the political reasons for withdrawing the CNSC's decision. The CNSC's decision to grant Bruce Power a licence to export and import radioactive waste for recycling purposes is utterly unacceptable from a political standpoint. A rigorous analysis of the situation should have led president Binder to inform the minister responsible for these activities that the political implications of a decision favourable to Bruce Power put it in a situation in which it exceeded its mandate.

In our view, this matter emphasizes the fact that the appropriate political authorities in Canada and Quebec should, on an urgent basis and in cooperation with the public, develop a policy clarifying, first, Canada's policy on the import and export of radioactive waste produced by nuclear reactors that are decommissioned or rebuilt. Second, that policy will have to clarify Canada's policy—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Ruest--

[Gaëtan Ruest]

—on whether it is acceptable to use the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Monsieur--

[Gaëtan Ruest]

—Seaway to transport radioactive waste or that has been rebuilt—

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We have to end your presentation there. You're over time by a couple of minutes already. We do have a transcript of your presentation. All members of the committee have a transcript, so they can read that, but we must get on to the next witnesses.

Thank you very much. There will be questions later on.