Environment committee  It's not only a question of problems. There is currently research being done at Chalk River. They undergo research and they use radioactive substances. Any time there is anything that touches radioactive substances, there is going to be a transfer. That could be on paper, lab benches or things they use—gloves that they wear—in hot cells.

Environment committee  Thank you for the question. Chalk River, as you noted, has been on site for a wealth of years now—from the very beginning in terms of the Cold War and working through different research. The low-level radioactive waste currently being overseen at Chalk River—we have site inspectors doing regular walkabouts to ensure radioactive waste management and monitoring programs are adhered to—is in things like overalls, cleaning supplies and mopheads.

Environment committee  Thank you for the question. You're right. I don't mean to be—

Environment committee  Yes.

Environment committee  Thank you for the question. I'll answer in English to make sure I use the right terminology, the terminology we work with. As for the discussion that you've just had, we will not be able to speak to specifics on the near surface disposal facility, not just because of the consultation aspect but because the commission's decision speaks for itself.

Environment committee  Thank you again for the question. The quantities of low-level radioactive waste that were discussed for this file are indeed within the commission's rationale for a decision, and that's part of the background and the context in which CNSC staff did their work as well as what the commission had to look at to rationalize its decision.

Environment committee  In general, it's a fear from understanding radiation, a fear from understanding the health impacts of radiation and a fear of its being too close to water bodies and areas where people can get exposed to it. I think that comes up regularly.

Environment committee  There was a wealth of interventions that came, both for the project and against the project. CNSC staff's approach to this was very much down the middle. We were looking at the safety case. We were looking at the information presented, and that information was the basis of our technical evaluation.

Environment committee  Thank you for the question. I recognize that there's a lot of interest around Chalk River. As I mentioned in my opening statement, there are several judicial reviews in play right now on the decision, through concerned citizens. I can't speak to the file, specifically. All of this information you're seeking—in terms of when we started, how much engagement and consultation happened, and what the state of the Chalk River site is based on the proposal to build the near surface disposal facility—is found in the commission's decision.

Environment committee  Absolutely.

Environment committee  What I can share is that the Chalk River site is not a new site. It's a site that has a lot of characterization, a lot of history and a lot of monitoring data, whether that be for water, air, vegetation, animals or ecological sites. There have been a lot of studies at the Chalk River site.

Environment committee  Thank you for that question. Maybe I'll start and then I'll ask my colleague to share her thoughts on this. Let's maybe put it into context. Radiation and nuclear substances are regulated. They are hazardous substances. They are regulated for that reason. We don't prohibit them, because we recognize there are benefits from them.

Environment committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the invitation and opportunity to contribute to this committee's freshwater study. I am a strategic adviser and formerly the director general of the environmental and radiation protection and assessment group at the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.