Ontario Power Generation’s proposed deep geological repository would be situated at the Bruce site on the shores of Lake Huron.
Hub Staff
A motion to support Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) deep geological repository (DGR) by way of a letter to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) was again before Saugeen Shores Council on Monday, February 27.
The topic of what to do with nuclear waste has been a subject of concern for some time - not only in the region of the Bruce nuclear site, the proposed site for OPG’s DGR, but also in the broader nuclear community.
OPG’s DGR project has been underway since 2004 when, by resolution, the Municipality of Kincardine endorsed moving forward with the proposed facility for low and intermediate level waste.
In February, 2016, a motion of support was before Saugeen Shores Council and was deferred as a result of a request by Environment Minister Catherine McKenna for additional information, including possible alternative sites; and again on February 13 this year when Councillor Dave Myette requested the motion be withdrawn due to the absence of two councillors as well as a desire to grant interested groups and members of the public an opportunity to have their say.
The motion before Council on February 27 was a shorter version of the one two weeks prior. Councillor Myette said that it had been reduced to a simple action statement in a desire to make it more “palatable”, which proved to be effective as the motion was passed with Councillor Cheryl Grace the only vote opposed.
There were three delegations concerning the DGR ahead of Monday’s vote, two against the proposed facility and one for.
Former Kincardine Mayor Glenn Sutton, who has a long history in the nuclear industry, spoke in support of the project, citing upgrades and enhancements to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico since “two unrelated events in February 2012 and a drum breach later on.”
“This led to the need for significant improvements to the physical plant and safety values,” said Sutton, citing “improvements made and equipment upgrades, safety improvements and emergency procedures.” Sutton said WIPP reopened for operations on January 4, 2017.
He provided councillors with an update from the fifth International Conference on Geological Repositories (ICGR) in 2016 as well as site-specific studies from the Western Waste Management Facility (WWMF). Sutton also made mention of OPG’s alternative locations study.
“The proposed DGR motion in the Municipality of Kincardine has a willing host community which alternatives do not,” said Sutton.
He added that OPG had reiterated its commitment to not proceed until it has the support of Saugeen Ojibway Nation, on whose territory the site stands.
Saugeen Shores resident John Mann took to the podium to express his long-standing opposition to the DGR, saying that decision makers would be wise to take the necessary time to ensure that the right decision is made.
Mann said the urgency which is often alluded to as a reason to move ahead with the project is "nonsense". “There’s no urgency, let’s spend the 10 years, let’s spend the 20 years, figure it out,” said Mann.
SOS Great Lakes President Jill Taylor spoke in opposition to the proposed waste facility, citing a “lack of conformance to federal legislation, lack of diligence on the part of OPG and CNSC (Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission).”
Taylor said that in response to Minister McKenna’s request for specific alternative locations, OPG first provided pinpoint locations which are unsuitable for a DGR, then undertook a regional approach. “By casting the net so wide, the so-called alternatives end up being entirely impractical which defeats the purpose of assessing alternatives in the first place,” said Taylor.
A Joint Review Panel (JRP) was appointed in January 2012 by the federal Minister of the Environment and the CNSC President to assess environmental impact. Taylor said their final report had been incorrectly touted as a document of support when its conclusion that the DGR was sound was “conditional” and its approval was based on “100 conditions which OPG has not yet demonstrated can be satisfied.”
Councillor Myette laid out what he called undeniable truths. First, that there is already a repository at the Bruce site with holdings “above ground and slightly below ground” and in its current state, albeit safe, the spent fuel is “significantly more exposed to the elements” than it would be in the proposed deep geological repository.
Second, that there are no areas in Ontario or Canada that are uninhabited and expecting “some other municipality to embrace the waste generated by the prosperity that we’ve enjoyed is irresponsible.”
And finally, that the most dangerous time to deal with nuclear waste is when it’s being transported, adding that keeping it as close to the permanent location as possible was one of the “significant advantages” of OPG’s DGR project.
Councillor Neil Menage said he believes it’s his responsibility to support a solution. “We have the facility, we have the security... we have the ability to deal with it on site.”
Menage made mention of acts of terrorism and climate change and said that with the way the world is going, we don’t know what’s next. He said the Goderich tornado was a perfect example and that it changed the way Bruce Power operates. “Between the Fukoshima Act and the Goderich Tornado Act, they have upped their safety programs.”
The councillor said that although he didn’t believe every aspect of OPG’s proposal was “the best of the best” and thought that there had been “mistakes made along the way”, he did believe in the scientific community and in the JRP process.
Councillor Cheryl Grace said that OPG’s report released on January 3, 2017 was “mocked” by a January 10 Toronto Star article with regard to GPS coordinates for alternative DGR sites, “a stately home in Toronto... a condominium in Collingwood... a property across the road from an organic winery in Niagara on the Lake".
In addition, two Minnesota sites and one Quebec site, Grace said were "clear legal errors as an OPG repository would not be able to be built outside of Ontario."
She said the errors were corrected January 13 following the release of the Star article but “one would think getting it right would be important to OPG for a report where the stakes are so high.” She called including incorrect information “sloppy” and “troubling” and said it “calls into question OPG’s assurances that this project will be safe.”
Councillor Grace said the report referenced a survey in which 70 percent of respondents said they supported the project but brought to question information they had been given prior to coming to that conclusion. For example, respondents were told that DGRs have safely stored waste around the world including in the US, Sweden, Germany, Finland and Korea.
Grace said repositories in Sweden, Finland and Korea are not in fact DGRs but rather “near surface” repositories. And DGRs in Germany and the US have experienced leakage (Germany’s ASSE and Morsleben), an explosion and malfunctioning filtration system (WIPP in New Mexico) or are not yet operational (Germany’s Gorleben and Konrad). “A high level DGR in South Korea is planned but its operation is years away,” said the councillor.
Grace said that a primary argument in favour of the proposed site is the expense and risk of transportation and asked “isn’t it possible that shipments of used fuel from points east - Darlington, Pickering (Ontario), Gentilly (Quebec), Point Lepreau (New Brunswick)” would be travelling to the Bruce site. “OPG’s report is silent on this possibility,” said Councillor Grace.
She said she believes Saugeen Shores Council represents a community who is “deeply divided” and “without a secret ballot referendum based on an unbiased question, we cannot confidently state how the majority of our residents stand on this issue.”
She said the argument that a community who has benefitted economically from a nuclear generating station has a duty to host the waste has been used worldwide to persuade host communities; and when a repository is proposed beside a Great Lake “which provides water to millions in two countries, that argument pales in comparison to our duty to protect our precious natural resource.”
Deputy Mayor Luke Charbonneau said there comes a time when Council has to make a call.
Charbonneau said that he’s been listening to presentations on the low and intermediate level DGR “for more than a decade now”, attended the ICGR in 2013, toured the Bruce site, and said it seems to be “scientific consensus” that the best, safest way to deal with both used nuclear fuel and low and intermediate level waste is in “passive isolation below ground”.
“Over and over again that is what we hear from experts around the world,” said Charbonneau. “I have to accept that conclusion because I think it’s grounded in science.”
Following the vote, Taylor said she was “undaunted”, saying that “the truth is that the DGRs across the world have failed.” She said she believed that Minister McKenna was going to make the right decision as “she has good council on her side”.
Councillor Grace said the charge from the Minister was asking public stakeholders, governments and Indigenous groups to comment on the merits or shortcomings of the OPG report and she felt the motion before Council “did not adequately instruct” in that regard.
