Brennain Lloyd of Northwatch has prepared sample comments you can use to write your own, for submission to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency by the March 6 deadline.
Canada is the world's largest exporter of uranium and operates nuclear reactors including on the Great Lakes. Attempts are underway to introduce nuclear power to the province of Alberta and to use nuclear reactors to power oil extraction from the tar sands.
See Northwatch's website Burying Nuclear Waste at the Bruce: OPG's Proposed Deep Geological Repository for an update on the latest round of public comment opportunity to express opposition to the Ontario Power Generation radioactive waste dump(s) targeted at the Great Lakes shoreline.
WRITE NOW!: Comment on the additional information submitted by OPG re: its proposed Great Lakes shore radioactive waste dump
In February, 2016 the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Catherine McKenna requested Ontario Power Generation (OPG) to provide additional information regarding the proposed Deep Geologic Repository for Low and Intermediate Level Waste in Kincardine, ON.
The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) is asking the public to comment on the additional information submitted by the proponent, OPG.
We urge you to write to the CEAA and help oppose the DGR project. The deadline has been extended to March 6, 2017!
Copy the letter we drafted below, fill in your name and date and submit it to the CEAA! [You can submit your comments by email at CEAA.DGR.Project-Projet.DGR.ACEE@ceaa-acee.gc.ca, or by snail mail (ASAP!) at the address given below.]
Click the link below for more information:
Deep Geologic Repository Project
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor, Ottawa ON K1A 0H3
From: [Enter Name/Address]
Date: [Enter Date]
CC: The Honourable Catherine McKenna; Prime Minister Trudeau; Honourable James Carr
Subject: The Canadian Government Needs to Stand up to OPG
Dear Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA):
It is time for the Canadian government to enforce the Environmental Assessment Act. In March of 2016, Honourable Catherine McKenna asked Ontario Power Generation (OPG) to identify specific alternate sites for the burial of nuclear waste and they have refused to do so. OPG’s proposal to construct a deep geologic repository (DGR) for radioactive nuclear waste on the shore of Lake Huron, in Kincardine, ON, should be rejected NOW.
OPG’s “Response to Information Requested from the Minister of Environment and Climate Change” submitted to the CEAA on December 28, 2016 is inadequate for the following reasons:
OPG fails, for the fifth time, to clearly identify specific feasible alternate locations with reference to actual locations for the burial of nuclear waste.
Its updated analysis of the cumulative environmental effects of the Project in light of the proposal for the DGR 2 by NWMO is inadequate and does not follow standard practice for cumulative effects analysis.
Its updated list of mitigation commitments lacks credibility.
OPG states that transporting radioactive waste by road to alternate locations in the province would have greater risk than burying it 900 metres from the shore of Lake Huron. They continue to fail to recognize that the efforts of every other country in the world have produced deep burial sites that have failed to prevent radiological waste from escaping into the surrounding environment.
OPG claims that people in Ontario have little interest in the Project despite a documented history of highly-biased public opinion research and ongoing, widespread public opposition in Canada and the U.S.
Ontario Power Generation’s repeated failure to adequately consider alternate sites for nuclear waste storage and its numerous violations of environmental laws are all the grounds the Canadian government needs to deny the Project.
In April of 2016, on behalf of OPG, the Gandalf Group conducted a poll of 805 Ontarians to assess how the public feels about the proposed DGR (the plan to bury up to 400,000 cubic metres of radioactive nuclear waste less than 1 km from Lake Huron). OPG misrepresented the findings to the government, to the media, and to the public. OPG claimed, in a submission to the Government of Canada, that a majority of the public support the DGR. However, the report actually shows that less than one-third of the respondents support the DGR and that 64% of the Ontario public oppose construction of a nuclear waste dump on the shore of Lake Huron, despite false claims to the contrary by OPG.
Please go the extra step and share this message with your Member of Parliament (MP).
Step 1: Simply find who your MP is by clicking here.
Step 2: Copy and paste the email below and send it off to your MP. Make sure to put their name at the top and your contact information at the bottom.
Step 3: Congratulate yourself!
Together we can ensure the Great Lakes are protected from the threat of radioactive waste!
To read our full analysis of this survey click here or visit our website: sosgreatlakes.org/sosupdates
Read the latest media coverage here.
SUBJECT LINE: WHY DO YOU ACCEPT FALSE INFORMATION FROM OPG?
Dear [Member of Parliament]
As a constituent, I am writing to inform you of a growing concern I have with the Government of Canada over the pending decision on Ontario Power Generation’s proposal to build a permanent nuclear waste dump on the shore of Lake Huron.
I have long opposed this insanity as an unnecessary and unacceptable risk to the Great Lakes and the 40 million people who rely on the Great Lakes for drinking water. I believe any informed person who does not stand to benefit economically from that project, would also share my concerns. However the subject of my immediate concern is the behaviour of the Government towards a seemingly endless supply of false and misleading information about this project and public perceptions of this project.
Earlier this year, OPG submitted its response to a formal request from the Minister of Environment and Climate Change for more information on alternate sites for the nuclear waste dump. In their 700 page reply, OPG told the Minister that alternate sites were too expensive, too dangerous from a transportation perspective and unnecessary because OPG’s public opinion poll showed that a majority of the Ontario public support the project.”
I will comment on the technicalities of OPG’s reply to the Minister at a later date and focus on the completely false information OPG has provided the Minister. Nowhere in the public opinion poll OPG commissioned on the subject, does the data support OPG’s claims. An analysis of the poll conducted by independent public attitudes professionals, shows the exact opposite of OPG’s outrageously false claim “that 70 percent of respondents supported the project.”
The attached analysis shows clearly that nearly two-thirds of respondents oppose construction of a Deep Geologic Repository on the shore of Lake Huron. The analysis also shows why that is the only conclusion of the poll that is representative of Ontario public opinion.
OPG knowingly supplied this false information to the Minister (page 72 of their report) to the media and by extension, to the public. To be clear, this is an organization majority owned by the Government of Ontario deliberately providing false information to the people of Ontario, the people of Canada and the Government of Canada about a project that could threaten the health of 40 million Canadians and Americans.
I am not surprised they have done this. But I am astounded and deeply disappointed that the Government, elected with a mandate to protect our environment, to protect the Great Lakes, stands quietly by and knowingly accepts false information from a proponent of a project that threatens the Great Lakes for the next 100,000 years.
I would like to understand:
• your position on this proposed project;
• your reaction about OPG’s release of misleading information, and
• what steps you intend to take regarding this information.
As the period for public comment on this project is drawing to a close I look forward to timely response to this email.
As reported by the Canadian Press, "A public opinion survey used to bolster claims of widespread support for a proposed repository was misleading and actually found little backing for the project, critics say."