radioactive waste

MEDIA RELEASE: Federal Court of Appeal Upholds Victory for Kebaowek First Nation and Allies in Species at Risk Case Against Chalk River Nuclear Waste Project 

hendricksonjones Leave a comment

Kebaowek, May 29, 2026 – Kebaowek First Nation, Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area, the  Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, and Sierra Club Canada Foundation welcome a significant  victory following the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal to dismiss Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’  (CNL) appeal regarding the Species at Risk Act permit issued for the proposed Near Surface Disposal  Facility (NSDF) at Chalk River. The Court upheld the Federal Court’s earlier ruling and ordered Environment  and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) to reconsider its decision to grant the permit. 

The permit would have authorized CNL to destroy endangered species and their habitats in order to  construct a massive radioactive waste disposal facility less than 1.1 kilometres from the Ottawa River (Kichi  Sibi), a watershed that provides drinking water to millions of Canadians. 

In its decision, the Federal Court of Appeal concluded that ECCC failed to adequately explain how it  determined that all reasonable alternatives had been considered and that the best solution had been  selected, as required under the Species at Risk Act. The Court emphasized that the Minister’s reasons  lacked sufficient transparency, intelligibility, and justification, and directed ECCC to conduct a new  determination. The Court also confirmed that the Federal Court’s interpretation of section 73 of the Species  at Risk Act is not binding on ECCC and that the Minister must independently provide a clear and reasonable  analysis when reconsidering the permit application. Furthermore, the Court found that the public notice  issued by ECCC failed to provide a meaningful explanation to Canadians about why endangered species  would be harmed in support of the project. 

The ruling represents another important legal milestone in the ongoing efforts to protect species at risk,  uphold environmental laws, and ensure accountability in decision-making surrounding the proposed NSDF. 

“The Federal Court of Appeal has confirmed that Environment Canada must go back and do its job properly.  This decision reinforces what we have been saying from the beginning: decisions that threaten endangered  species, sensitive ecosystems, and our sacred river must be based on a transparent, rigorous, and lawful  process. Kebaowek remains committed to protecting the Kichi Sibi, defending our responsibilities to future  generations, the drinking water of millions of citizens of Quebec and Ontario, and ensuring that Indigenous  rights and environmental protections are respected every step of the way,” said Chief Lance Haymond of  Kebaowek First Nation. 

The area selected by CNL for the NSDF is home to numerous species protected under the Species at Risk  Act, including the Blanding’s Turtle, Little Brown Bat, Northern Myotis, Tri-coloured Bat, Canada Warbler,  Golden-winged Warbler, Whip-poor-will, Eastern Wolf, and Black Ash. The proposed site consists of mature  forests, wetlands, streams, and critical habitat that have remained largely undisturbed for decades. 

The Eastern Wolf is one of several endangered species living in the area proposed for the Near Surface Disposal Facility at Chalk River Laboratories. Photo, Michael Runtz,

The organizations argue that CNL’s site selection process failed to adequately assess alternative locations  that may have posed fewer risks to endangered species and their habitats. The Court’s decision now provides an opportunity for ECCC to conduct a more rigorous and transparent review of the evidence before  making a new determination. 

“This decision is an important victory for science, transparency, and common sense. The Court recognized  that the public deserves meaningful explanations when decisions are made that could result in the  destruction of endangered species and their habitats. The ecological value of this site is extraordinary, and  it deserves careful consideration before irreversible damage is permitted,” said Ole Hendrickson,  spokesperson for Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area. 

“This ruling confirms that environmental protections under the Species at Risk Act cannot simply be treated  as a procedural box to check. We will continue working to ensure that all reasonable alternatives are fully  examined and that the protection of species at risk remains a central consideration. More generally, we will  work to ensure that the principle of “justification” is enshrined in Canadian law, as recommended twice by  the International Atomic Energy Agency,” said Dr. Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for  Nuclear Responsibility. 

“The Court’s decision reinforces a fundamental principle: Canadians have the right to understand why  environmental harm is being authorized and whether less damaging alternatives exist. This case is about  accountability, transparency, and ensuring that environmental laws are applied as Parliament intended.  Sierra Club Canada Foundation remains committed to supporting efforts that protect biodiversity and uphold  the public interest,” said Gretchen Fitzgerald, Executive Director, Sierra Club Canada Foundation. 

This decision builds upon two important Federal Court rulings related to the proposed NSDF project. In  March 2025, the Federal Court ruled that the Species at Risk Act permit issued for the project must be  reconsidered because reasonable alternative locations were not properly assessed. In a parallel case, the  Federal Court also ruled in favour of Kebaowek First Nation regarding the implementation of the United  Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the duty to consult in the NSDF  licensing process. That landmark decision is currently before the Federal Court of Appeal and is expected  to help clarify how Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and UNDRIP should be applied in federal  regulatory decision-making across Canada. 

While the Court has returned the matter to ECCC for redetermination rather than permanently rejecting the  permit, the organizations intend to actively participate in the reconsideration process. They will continue to  present evidence demonstrating that alternative locations exist and that the proposed Chalk River site is  not the best option for protecting species at risk and their habitats. 

The organizations also note that CNL may seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, although  leave applications are granted only in a small number of cases involving issues of national importance. 

Kebaowek First Nation, Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area, the Canadian Coalition for  Nuclear Responsibility, and Sierra Club Canada Foundation remain united in their commitment to protecting  the Ottawa River watershed, safeguarding endangered species, and ensuring that environmental decision making respects both ecological integrity and Indigenous rights. 

For more information on Kebaowek First Nation’s efforts to halt the NSDF project, visit Stop Nuclear Waste website.

For more information on how to support Kebaowek First Nation’s legal efforts, visit Kebaowek First Nation  – Raven Trust 

-30- 

Source: Kebaowek First Nation Kebaowek First Nation, Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area,  Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility and Sierra Club Canada Foundation 

For media inquiries or interview requests: 

Mathilde Robitaille-Lefebvre 

Media Relations 

m.robitaille-lefebvre@seize03.ca 

819-852-4762

Hill Times Op-Ed ~ A beautiful hillside

hendricksonjones 1 Comment

This op-ed was published in the Hill Times on April 29, 2026. On May 28, 2026 the Federal Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Kebaowek First Nation, allies and endangered species. The decision is here.

Can Canada’s Species-at-risk Act protect endangered wildlife on federal land? A pending Federal Court of Appeal ruling might hold the answer.

There’s a beautiful, wild, south-facing hillside, close to the Ottawa River, not too far upstream from Parliament Hill. It is densely forested with mature stands of deciduous and coniferous trees and partly surrounded by five named wetlands that drain through Perch Creek and Perch Lake into the Ottawa River. 

In summer the forest is full of birdsong. Many migrating songbirds pass through the area. Rare songbirds nest in the woods on the hillside. You might hear a Wood Thrush singing, or Whip-poor-wills, or Canada Warblers, or Golden-winged Warblers, all of which are listed as threatened under the Species at Risk Act. The old trees provide ideal roosting habitat for three species of endangered bats, the Little Brown Bat, Northern Myotis and Tri-coloured Bat.

The iconic Canada Warbler is one of several endangered species living in the area proposed for the Near Surface Disposal Facility, Photo, Emmett Hume, Creative Commons Attribution 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Canada_Warbler_on_Bough.jpg

After a summer rainfall, little streams and rivulets flow down the hillside into the wetlands at its base. These wetlands and nearby Perch Lake provide abundant food for birds and bats and for many small mammals, which in turn attract larger mammals. They also support many aquatic animals such as fish, frogs, waterfowl and turtles, including endangered Blanding’s Turtles. 

The hillside forest is vibrant and green, blanketed with mosses and lichens and full of diverse species of trees including endangered Black Ash. The sandy warm soil on the southwest-facing slope supports three active Black Bear dens. A deer yard provides an ideal winter feeding ground for endangered Eastern Wolves that have dens nearby. 

This rich web of diverse animal and plant life is unique and rare. It likely evolved here because of the hill’s southern exposure, abundant water and extensive riparian zones where land and water meet. Lack of human interference was key. Humans have not been permitted to wander here for 80 years because it is located on the Chalk River Laboratories property, a fenced off, no-go zone since the first nuclear reactor was built there in 1945.

Incredibly, this is the very spot Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) has chosen to build its controversial, giant, above-ground nuclear waste dump called the Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF). CNL chose the site mainly to reduce hauling costs for one million tons of radioactive waste it plans to put in the dump. After clearcutting the forest, they would blast the hillside with explosives to flatten it, turning 37 hectares of forest into half a million tons of rock rubble.

CNL is owned by a multinational private-sector consortium that operates Canada’s federal nuclear laboratory under a $1.2 billion per year contract with the Government of Canada.

Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) granted CNL a permit to destroy endangered species and their residences in order to build the NSDF. According to the Species at Risk Act, such permits should only be granted if the applicant considered all reasonable alternatives and adopted the best solution to reduce impacts on endangered species. 

The ECCC permit decision was successfully challenged in Federal Court by Kebaowek First Nation and allies who believe that ECCC did not receive complete information about how the site was chosen and made errors in granting the permit. CNL appealed the lower court decision and the appeal hearing was held on November 12, 2025 in Ottawa.  A ruling from the Federal Court of Appeal is expected soon; it will determine whether the permit gets sent back for redetermination by ECCC or not. The fate of a unique and irreplaceable wildlife habitat hangs in the balance.

Lynn Jones is a member of Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area. She is based in Ottawa

Growing stockpiles of radioactive waste beside the Ottawa River upstream of Parliament Hill causing widespread concern

hendricksonjones Leave a comment

February 3, 2026

The Ottawa River flows through an ancient rift valley that extends from near North Bay through Ottawa toward Montreal. The area is seismically active, and experiences dozens of minor earthquakes each year. Stronger earthquakes also occur such as the magnitude 5 quake in June 2010 that caused shaking, evacuations and damage in Ottawa including shattered windows in Ottawa City Hall and power outages in the downtown area.

Experts say Ottawa is at risk for a big earthquake.The Government of Canada is currently in the process of shoring up and earthquake-proofing the buildings on Parliament Hill. The project will take 13 years and cost billions of dollars.

Incredibly, at the same time as billions are being spent to earthquake-proof Canada’s Parliament Buildings, the Government of Canada is paying billions of dollars to a US-based consortium that is importing large quantities of radioactive waste to the Ottawa Valley.

Soon after it took control of Canada’s nuclear laboratories and radioactive waste in 2015, the consortium, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL), announced its intention to consolidate all federally-owned radioactive waste at Chalk River Laboratories, alongside the Ottawa River, 180 km upstream of the Nation’s Capital. There was no consultation or approval from the Algonquin Nation in whose unceded territory the Chalk River Laboratories is located, nor any consultation with residents of the Ottawa Valley about the plan.

CNL is importing nuclear waste from federal nuclear facilities in Manitoba, southern  Ontario and Quebec. The imports comprise thousands of shipments and thousands of tonnes of radioactive debris from reactor decommissioning, and dozens of tonnes of high level waste nuclear fuel, the most deadly kind of radioactive waste that can deliver a lethal dose of radiation to an unprotected bystander within seconds of exposure.

High level waste shipments from Becancour, Quebec have already been completed. They involved “dozens of trucks” and convoys operating secretly over several months, from December 2024 through July 2025, under police escort, to move 60 tons of used fuel bundles to Chalk River. Tons of high level waste from Manitoba will follow soon.

Since there is no long-term facility for high level waste at Chalk River, nor is there any such facility anywhere in Canada at present, CNL built silos (shown in the photo below) to hold the waste at a cost of 15 million dollars. This high level radioactive waste is ostensibly in storage at Chalk River, but there is no guarantee it will ever be moved. 

(Source p.222)

CNL plans to put the less deadly waste into a giant, above-ground radioactive waste mound called the Near Surface Disposal Facility, a controversial project currently mired in legal challenges. The dump would hold one million tons of radioactive waste in a facility designed to last about 500 years. Many of the materials destined for disposal in the dump, such as plutonium, will remain radioactive for far longer than that.  According to CNL’s own studies, the facility would leak during operation and disintegrate after a few hundred years, releasing its contents to the surrounding environment and Ottawa River less than a kilometer away. 

Shipping containers filled with radioactive waste are piling up at Waste Management Area H on the Chalk River Laboratories property, awaiting a time when they can be driven or emptied into the NSDF. At last count there were 1500 shipping containers there, shown in the photo below. 

(Source)

It would be hard to choose a less suitable place to consolidate all federal radioactive waste than in a seismically-active zone beside the Ottawa River that provides drinking water for millions of Canadians in communities downstream including Ottawa, Gatineau and Montreal.

Concerns about imports of radioactive waste to the Ottawa Valley are widespread and growing.

In 2021, Ottawa City Council unanimously passed a resolution calling for radioactive waste imports to the Ottawa Valley to stop. Ottawa Riverkeeper recently called for transportation of radioactive waste to the Chalk River Laboratories to stop until a clear, long-term plan for the waste is available. A December 2025 letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney from Bloc Québécois and Green Party MPs along with First Nations and many civil society groups requested a moratorium on shipments of Canadian radioactive waste to Chalk River. 

Action is urgently needed to halt the imports of radioactive waste to the earthquake-prone Ottawa Valley.

Photo above shows Chalk River Laboratories, beside the Ottawa River upstream of the Nation’s Capital, in the ancient, seismically-active rift valley. 

Letter to Mark Carney ~ Pour une gestion transparente et responsable des déchets radioactifs

hendricksonjones 1 Comment

December 12, 2025

English version follows below.

Lettre-Déchets-Nucléaires-PatrickBonin_vfDownload

Towards a transparent and responsible management of radioactive waste

December 2 2025

Several political parties and civil society organizations are dismayed to learn thatCanadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) has decided to consolidate radioactive waste (forwhich the federal government is responsible) at the Chalk River Laboratories site. This decision was made without consultation with First Nations or the public, and without parliamentary debate. Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) is only a private contractor,not a government agency.

For the population, there is no public accountability and concern is growing. Why concentrate everything at Chalk River? CNL is not intending to permanently store high- or intermediate-level waste at Chalk River. Those wastes will likely be moved again. Chalk River is an unsuitable location for radioactive waste consolidation because it islocated on the Ottawa River and the area is prone to seismic tremors.

Used nuclear fuel has the highest level of radioactivity; it is being transported to ChalkRiver from nuclear reactors in Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec for interim storage pending the construction of a proposed deep geological repository (DGR). CNL intendsto have the same used fuel eventually transported to the DGR. But such a repositorystill does not exist and may never be licensed or approved. Whether the DGR isultimately built or not, issues surrounding the transportation of radioactive waste have to be addressed.

There are increased risks and costs of transporting used fuel twice: first from thenuclear power plants to Chalk River, and then from Chalk River to a second destination.This leads to extra safety risks and a waste of public money. The government is justmoving the waste around at great expense and added risk without solving the problempermanently, as there is still no proven safe solution despite 45 years of effort.

The proposed transportation of intermediate-level waste to Chalk River from thedecommissioning of nuclear reactors is similarly ill-advised.

Public concern was heightened by the news of the secretive transport of tonnes of usednuclear fuel from Bécancour, Quebec, to Chalk River during the summer of 2025, alongpublic roads and bridges, without any explicit authorization or opportunity for publicconsultation or even proper notification.

• We call on the federal government for a moratorium on the shipment of Canadianradioactive waste to Chalk River because of the increasing risk of radioactivecontamination and the lack of an acceptable due process.

• We call on the federal government to ban all imports of radioactive waste from othercountries, including disused medical sources, discarded tritium light sources, or usednuclear fuel.

• We call on the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to conduct a strategicassessment of the transportation of high- and intermediate-level radioactive waste onpublic highways, in accordance with section 95 of the Impact Assessment Act. Theresults of this assessment would contribute to future impact assessments of nuclearfacilities. The goal would be to examine, for example, the cumulative impact at ChalkRiver and to provide a framework for upcoming environmental assessments of nuclearpower plants and reactor decommissioning projects.

Patrick Bonin, M.P.Bloc Québécois critic for the Environment and Climate Change

Elizabeth May, M.P.Green Party of Canada

André BélangerFondation Rivières

Alain BranchaudSNAP Québec

Ginette Charbonneau Physicist and spokesperson for le Ralliement contre la pollution radioactive

Et al….

Ottawa River Nuclear Waste Dump ~ Species-at-Risk Appeal hearing and rally November 12, 2025

hendricksonjones Leave a comment

A hearing this Wednesday November 12 in the Federal Court of Appeal, before a panel of three judges, will be a test of Canada’s commitment to protect threatened and endangered species and may determine whether the giant Ottawa River nuclear waste dump can be built or not. You can watch the hearing on Zoom by registering at this link, and you are also invited to a rally, “Stand up for Wildlife,” from noon to 2 pm outside the courtroom on Sparks St. in Ottawa.

Background:

Earlier this year we celebrated the successful legal challenge to the granting of a Species-at-Risk permit to Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) for the construction of the nuclear waste dump known as the “NSDF.” The legal challenge was brought by Kebaowek First Nation, Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area, the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, and Sierra Club Canada Foundation.

You may recall that CNL is owned by a multinational private-sector consortium that operates Canada’s federal nuclear labs under a $1.6 billion per year contract with the Government of Canada. CNL needed a Species-at-risk permit in order to construct its controversial, giant, above-ground nuclear waste dump beside the Ottawa River because the site they chose for the dump is on federal land smack dab in the middle of irreplaceable wildlife habitat that is home to many species at risk. A permit would allow CNL to destroy habitat and residences for threatened and endangered species in order to construct its giant dump.

In order to get a permit, a proponent must prove that it carefully considered all possible alternatives and chose the one with the least impact on endangered species. CNL did not do this. In fact, it is on record as saying it chose the location because it would reduce transportation costs. In his ruling issued on March 14, 2025, Justice Russel Zinn said the environment minister’s issuing of the species-at-risk permit was “unreasonable due to fatal flaws” in interpreting and applying the federal Species at Risk Act, adding that the issuing of the permit must be reconsidered. 

Unfortunately for threatened wildlife and for Canadian taxpayers, who foot the bill for everything the multinational consortium does under its contract with the government, the case was appealed by CNL. Hence, the evidence will be reviewed again on November 12, this time in the federal court of appeal, by a panel of three judges.

The legal case here is fairly cut and dried; it will be interesting to see how it plays out. But behind the straightforward legal arguments lies a shocking story of disregard for wildlife that we discovered when we applied for the initial judicial review and received 4,000 pages of material connected with the permit application. Among other things, we learned that CNL knew that the site was very rich in biodiversity, but chose it anyway. The site is located on a south facing densely forested hillside that rises 140 feet above five named wetlands at its base, critical habitat for endangered Blanding’s turtles. The forest stands have old growth characteristics and provide prime habitat for endangered bats and songbirds such as the Canada Warbler, Golden-winged Warbler and Eastern Whip-poor-will. To create a flat surface for the NSDF, clear cutting and extensive blasting would convert 28 hectares of forested hillside into 170,000 cubic metres of rock, with unknown but likely adverse effects on the surrounding wetlands. More than 10,000 mature trees would be cut down, including provincially-endangered Black Ash trees. Kebaowek First Nation found three active bear dens on the site, and evidence of extensive use of the site by threatened Eastern Wolves. Both bears and wolves are species of great cultural importance to Algonquin peoples. 

Seethis post on the Concerned Citizens website, for more detail on CNL’s disregard for wildlife in its choice of a site for the NSDF.

The beautiful artwork below is by Destiny Cote of Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg. Eastern Wolves are one of the threatened species that would be adversely affected by the NSDF.

Canada’s inadequate nuclear regulatory regime highlighted in Hill Times letters to the editor

hendricksonjones Leave a comment

This letter appeared in the July 7 edition of the Hill Times. (subscribe here)

It was in response to a letter by Jeremy Whitlock, indefatigable cheerleader for all things nuclear. His letter, published on June 23, 2025 is here.

Jeremy Whitlock was responding to this letter, published in the Hill Times on June 16, 2025:

Canada is failing to meet a fundamental principle of nuclear safety according to international experts

A March 2025 report  by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) flagged a serious problem in Canada’s nuclear governance regime. Canada has not incorporated the fundamental safety principle of justification into its legal framework, despite being urged to do so by an international peer review team in 2019.

The IAEA principle of justification in nuclear safety requires that any practice involving human exposures to ionizing radiation be justified during the licensing process for a facility. It must be demonstrated that the overall benefits of the project to individuals and society, outweigh the potential health detriments of the radiation exposures it will cause.

Justification is necessary because there is no safe level of exposure to ionizing radiation from nuclear reactors and radioactive waste. Ionizing radiation causes cancers of all kinds, many other chronic diseases and damage to the human gene pool. Human-made nuclear waste will remain hazardous and radioactive for millions of years.

Canada’s failure to justify nuclear projects is a serious deficiency that urgently needs to be addressed given the Government of Canada’s professed interest in funding and expanding nuclear electricity generation in Canada. We need to ask: can we justify creating more and more radioactive waste that future generations will have to deal with even though they will receive zero benefit from the activities that created it.

Other serious deficiencies were flagged by the IAEA experts in 2019. For example, Canada allows pregnant nuclear workers to be exposed to a radiation dose four times larger than is tolerated by IAEA standards. This issue remains unaddressed five years later.

These problems are just the tip of the iceberg. An environmental petition to the Auditor General of Canada in 2019 described many problems with Canada’s nuclear governance regime suggesting it compares unfavourably with more robust regimes in other OECD countries.  See Hill Times letters to the editor: “Who will fix Canada’s nuclear governance gaps?” and “Reforms needed at the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission,” for more details.

Lynn Jones, Ottawa (Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area)

Three legal challenges to the NSDF

hendricksonjones 2 Comments

The giant Chalk River radioactive waste megadump, known as the NSDF, was approved by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission on January 8, 2024 after a protracted and badly flawed environmental assessment. For background on problems with the NSDF see this post. Two months after the CNSC approval of the license, a permit was issued by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada to allow destruction of endangered species and their habitats and residences in construction of the NSDF.

Two legal challenges to the CNSC decision to license the NSDF were initiated in February 2024. A challenge to the species at risk permit was initiated in March 2024.

Legal Challenge 1 ~ Kebaowek FN vs Canadian Nuclear Laboratories

Kebaowek First Nation applied for a judicial review of the CNSC decision to license the NSDF on grounds that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission’s failed to secure Algonquin First Nations’ free, prior and informed consent for disposal of hazardous waste in their territory as mandated by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.  The case was heard by Justice Julie Blackhawk in a two-day hearing July 10 and 11 in Ottawa. The lead lawyer for Kebaowek, Robert Janes KC, was brilliant in arguing the case. He has represented First Nations many times in the Supreme Court. Justice Blackhawk’s decision is pending and may take several more months. Donations to the GoFundMe campaign to help cover Kebaowek FN’s legal costs are greatly appreciated. The campaign page is here.

Legal Challenge 2 ~ Concerned Citizens et al vs Canadian Nuclear Laboratories

Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area, Ralliement contre la pollution radioactive, and the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility applied for a judicial review of the CNSC decision to license the NSDF. The three groups are challenging the decision on a number of grounds including excessive radiation doses, failure to adequately describe or control what would be put in the dump and failure to consider cumulative effects . (More details about the grounds and a link to the factum here.)

The case was heard in federal court by Justice Whyte Nowak in Ottawa on November 19 and 20, 2024. The judge is expected to render her decision sometime in the next several months.

Legal Challenge 3 ~ Kebaowek First Nation et al vs Canadian Nuclear Laboratories

This challenge is an application for review of the decision by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada to issue a permit to destroy several species at risk and their habitats and residences during construction of the NSDF. Kebaowek First Nation is joined in this application by Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area, the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility and Sierra Club Canada Foundation. The applicants argue that the NSDF proponent did not examine all possible options, and did not choose the one least likely to affect species at risk, as required by the Species at Risk Act and therefore should not have been granted a permit. They present evidence that the proponent in fact chose an option that it knew to be richer in biodiversity and potentially more damaging to species at risk because it would reduce its costs for transporting waste.

The hearing is scheduled for February 5th and 6th, 2025. The factum was filed on September 27, and is appended to the end of this post.  Members of the public can attend the hearing in person, or register to watch it on Zoom. To register for the Zoom go to:https://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/court-files-and-decisions/hearing-lists and scroll down the page to the beige Advanced Search bar. Just below that bar on the right hand side is a search box. Type “Kebaowek” in the search box. Then click on the green pencil in the square box icon, to register to watch on Zoom.

See also: Permit to allow destruction of endangered species on site of giant Ottawa River radioactive waste dump challenged in Federal Court 27,Mar 2024

~~~~~~

Photo below of Algonquin First Nations members and allies protesting the NSDF on Parliament HIll in February 2024. (photo, North Renfrew Times)

The challenge of long-lived alpha emitters in the Chalk River legacy wastes

hendricksonjones 3 Comments

January 22, 2024 (revised September 17, 2024)

Why is so little Chalk River waste suitable for near surface disposal? 

Extensive research work at the Chalk River Laboratories on nuclear reactor fuels, and in the early days, on materials for nuclear weapons, produced waste with large quantities of long-lived alpha emitters.  This waste is difficult to manage and can even become increasingly radioactive over time.  

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, because of the presence of long-lived alpha emitters, waste from nuclear research facilities is generally classified as intermediate level, and even in some cases, as high level. This waste cannot be put in a near surface disposal facility because its radioactivity will not decay to harmless levels during the period that the facility remains under institutional control.   

Alpha emitters decay by throwing off an alpha particle, the equivalent of a helium nucleus, with two protons and two neutrons.  The external penetrating power of an alpha particle is low, but alpha emitters have extremely serious health effects if ingested or inhaled. They can lodge in your lungs and cause cancer.

Research at Chalk River and all other nuclear laboratories is ultimately based on three long-lived alpha emitters — thorium-232, uranium-235, and uranium-238. These are the “naturally occurring” or “primordial” radionuclides.  They were created by large stars and then incorporated into the Earth and the solar system when they formed some 4.5 billion years ago.  The waste inventory proposed by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories for the Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) includes over six tons each of thorium-232 and uranium-238.

Each “natural” alpha emitter initiates a decay chain with roughly a dozen radioactive isotopes of other elements such as radium, radon, and polonium.  These elements also occur naturally, but in much smaller amounts because of their more rapid decay. 

When a radioactive element releases an alpha particle, the atomic weight of the product goes down by four.  Uranium-238 decays to uranium-234, with a 245,000-year half-life. Uranium-234 decays to thorium-230, with a 75,000-year half-life. Thorium-230 decays to radium-226, with a 1,600-year half-life.  Shorter half-lives mean greater initial radioactivity. Radium-226 decays to radon-222, with a 4-day half-life.  Radon-222, a gas, builds up in the basements of houses built over uranium-rich rocks.  When it is inhaled it decays into polonium-218, a highly toxic, cancer-causing substance with a 3-day half-life. “Naturally occurring” alpha emitters are clearly harmful.

Hazards increase when uranium and thorium are mined and concentrated from ores and used in their pure form.  Marie Curie, who spent much of her career isolating radium and polonium from uranium, died of radiation-induced leukemia at age 66. She was buried in a lead-lined tomb because her corpse emitted so much radiation.

When thorium-232, uranium-235, and uranium-238 are irradiated in a reactor, as at Chalk River, they absorb neutrons and produce significant quantities of new, man-made, long-lived alpha-emitters.  Irradiated uranium-238 absorbs a neutron and temporarily forms uranium-239.  Uranium-239 transmutes to neptunium-239, which quickly transmutes to long-lived plutonium-239, with a half-life of 24,000 years. 

Plutonium-239 is “fissile” – it can readily support a chain reaction.  It is what the early Chalk River researchers produced for the manufacture of U.S. nuclear weapons, by separating the plutonium from irradiated reactor fuel.  They also used the separated plutonium to make “mixed oxide” (MOX) reactor fuel, mixing it with fresh uranium.

Thorium-232, when put in a nuclear reactor, will absorb a neutron and transmute to uranium-233, with a half-life of 160,000 years.  Uranium-233 also can support a chain reaction, so it can be used in atomic bombs and reactor fuels as well. Chalk River researchers did a lot of work to separate uranium-233 from irradiated thorium-232.

All reactor fuel contains uranium-235.  It is the only naturally occurring isotope that readily undergoes fission and can sustain a chain reaction.  But not all uranium-235 atoms undergo fission in a nuclear reactor.  Instead they can absorb either one or two neutrons and form yet two more very long-lived, man-made alpha-emitters, uranium-236 (half-life of 23.4 million years) and neptunium-237 (half-life of 2.14 million years). 

Nuclear engineers don’t like uranium-236 because it acts as a “neutron poison”, absorbing neutrons instead of undergoing fission.  The longer that uranium-235 fuel remains in a reactor, the more uranium-236 and neptunium-237 are produced. 

Uranium-236 is certainly a part of the Chalk River waste. It is the longest-lived of all the man-made alpha emitters, but for some reason it was omitted from the NSDF inventory.

As noted above, thorium-232, uranium-235, and uranium-238 are the start of three naturally occurring decay chains.  A fourth decay chain starts with man-made neptunium-237 and ends with thallium-205 (the element before lead in the periodic table).  Neptunium and its “progeny” have all decayed away during Earth’s 4.5-billion-year history, but production of neptunium-237 in nuclear reactors (and uranium-233 by thorium-232 irradiation) has “resurrected” this hitherto extinct fourth decay chain.  

Americium-241, found in significant quantities in Chalk River waste, is another starting point for the man-made nepturium-237 decay chain.  Nuclear reactors have also greatly augmented the amounts of radionuclides in the uranium-235 decay chain by producing plutonium-239, and in the thorium-232 decay chain by producing uranium-236.

Early research done at Chalk River to extract (or “reprocess”) plutonium-239 and uranium-233 from irradiated fuel and irradiated thorium targets has created a legacy of buildings (e.g., the Plutonium Recovery Laboratory) and soils (e.g., the Thorium Pit) that are contaminated with long-lived alpha emitters.  Reprocessing was dangerous and caused several accidents. The resulting contamination has never been cleaned up.

Until 2018, highly enriched uranium-235 targets were irradiated in the NRU reactor at Chalk River, followed by dissolving the targets in nitric acid and extracting the fission product molybdenum-99, a “medical isotope”. After extraction of “moly-99”, the other fission products, and the long-lived alpha emitters uranium-236 and neptunium-237 (produced when uranium-235 atoms absorb neutrons instead of undergoing fission), remain in the medical isotope waste.  This waste resembles high-level spent fuel waste and represents one of Chalk River’s most dangerous legacies.

Fuel reprocessing, medical isotope production, and other research activities at Chalk River have produced very significant amounts of waste containing ­­long-lived alpha emitters.  This waste is unsuitable for near-surface disposal.  Much of it is mixed with shorter-lived fission products and cannot be separated from them.  This mixed waste should not be put in the NSDF. 

Detecting alpha emitters in mixed waste is expensive and challenging. Putting inadequately characterized waste in the NSDF would invalidate its safety case.

Unfortunately, the NSDF Project lacks adequate waste characterization procedures.  If the project is allowed to proceed, workers and future Ottawa valley residents could be exposed to unknown quantities of long-lived alpha emitters and suffer the serious health effects associated with them.

~~~~~~~~~~

Will CNL put nuclear reactor components in the NSDF?

hendricksonjones Leave a comment

August 12, 2024 (en français ici)

Will CNL put nuclear reactor components in the NSDF?

The lack of clarity about the nature of the waste intended for disposal in the NSDF has been a concern since the NSDF project description was published in March 2016.  In our group’s comments on the project description, submitted in June 2016, we stated

For the public to have adequate information about the nature of the radioactive waste proposed for inclusion in the NSDF, the environmental assessment must provide much more detail than simply stating that the waste “will be required to meet waste acceptance criteria.”

CNL has prepared a document, NSDF Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) that CNL says “will ensure the short- and long-term protection of the public, the environment and workers.”  But is this true?  And do the NSDF Waste Acceptance Criteria allow CNL to place reactor components in the NSDF?

The calandria from the NRX reactor accident in December 1952 and two calandria from the NRU reactor are buried at shallow depths in the waste management areas of Chalk River Laboratories.  This is stated in the Overview Decommissioning and Cleanup Plan for Chalk River Laboratories: 

“Several special burials (NRU and NRX calandrias) were also made in concrete containers or directly in the trenches.”

The Waste Acceptance Criteria allow the disposal of waste classified as Type 6 – Oversized waste:

“Oversized debris, including waste that does not fall within the definition of waste types 1 to 5, primarily due to its size or shape. The process applicable to infrequently performed activities (section 6.4) is used to approve the placement of type 6 waste.”

The Infrequently Performed Operations override clause in section 6.4 states: 

“The eligibility of wastes that do not meet all the requirements set forth in the WAC (including Type 6, Oversized Waste) may be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.”

Reactor calandrias would almost certainly exceed the “Dose Rate Limits and Means of Handling and Transferring ” in Table 7 of the WAC.  However, the Waste Acceptance Criteria allow these dose limits to be exceeded if waste packages are shielded: 

“Shielded Waste Packages could be used to ensure waste complies with the dose rate limit in Table 7.”

CNL has made a presentation to the Chalk River Laboratories Environmental Stewardship Council about its work to uncover the NRX calandria, currently buried at shallow depth in Waste Management Area A.  The notes from Council meeting number 53 on Thursday, March 21, 2024, state that a council member asked for an update on this work:

Has anything else been happening with the NRX Calandra [sic] with the Calandra [sic] in Waste Area A?

The Seventh Canadian National Report for the Joint Convention provides more details about Waste Management Area A:

The first emplacement of radioactive waste at the CRL site took place in 1946 into what is now referred to as Waste Management Area A. These emplacements took the form of direct disposal of solids and liquids into excavated sand trenches. The scale of operations was modest and unrecorded until 1952, when the cleanup from the NRX accident generated large quantities of radioactive waste (which included the reactor’s calandria) that had to be managed quickly and safely. At that time, approximately 4,500 m3 of aqueous waste, containing 330 TBq (9,000 Ci) of mixed fission products, was poured into excavated trenches. This action was followed by smaller dispersals (6.3 TBq and 34 TBq of mixed fission products) in 1954 and 1955, respectively. Waste is no longer accepted for emplacement in Waste Management Area A.

The 2014 Comprehensive Preliminary Decommissioning Plan notes the limited records for drummed and bottled liquids buried prior to 1956 and for solid wastes buried prior to 1955. 

The 2023 Overview Decommissioning and Cleanup Plan for Chalk River Laboratories indicates CNL’s intention to transfer all the contents of WMA A to the NSDF: “the preliminary scenario presented is the removal of wastes from WMA A and its disposal in the NSDF.”

CNL’s lack of transparency regarding the waste destined for the NSDF, despite the requirements of the General Nuclear Safety and Control Regulations (GNSCR), is one of the main points of one of the legal challenges to the CNSC’s decision to authorize construction of the facility.  

The Memorandum of Fact and Law for the federal court case (Court File No. T-226-24) between Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area, the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility and le Ralliement contre la pollution radioactive (Applicants) and Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (Respondent) says the following:

The Commission’s failure to require the specific and comprehensive information set out in GNSCR s. 3(1)(c) and (j) has an enormous impact on the integrity of the Decision as a whole. This failure undermines the Decision’s main conclusion that the NSDF will not produce significant adverse environmental and health effects. All CNL’s calculations estimating the amount of radioactive material that the NSDF would release into the environment and would expose a member of the public to were based on the Waste Acceptance Criteria being followed. Since materials can be placed in the NSDF even if they do not meet the Waste Acceptance Criteria, all the calculations and estimations are a fiction. There is no guarantee that the amount and type of substances that end up in the NSDF will be the same amount and type as that upon which the calculations for the safety assessments were made.

~~~~~~~~

Photos from Globe and Mail article (19 March 2023) “Jimmy Carter, Chalk River and the dawn of Canada’s nuclear age”

Chalk River NRX-Reactor leak, 1953 -- calandria removed from reactor being lowered into calandria bag. Photograph shows south-east sid
The NRX calandria is lowered into a protective bag and driven away to a disposal site in May 1953.CANADIAN NUCLEAR LABORATORIES

Now, 70 years after the cleanup, the largest artefact from the accident is about to see the light of day once again.

The burial mound of the NRX calandria, as seen earlier this month. Later this spring, a project team will resume work on excavating and then cutting up the calandria for longer term storage.CANADIAN NUCLEAR LABORATORIES/SUPPLIED

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission enabled Chalk River debacle in the making ~ Hill Times letter to the editor

hendricksonjones Leave a comment

Published in the Hill-Times on Mar 4, 2024

https://www.hilltimes.com/story/2024/03/04/canadian-nuclear-safety-commission-has-enabled-this-debacle-in-the-making-at-chalk-river-protesters/412986

Dear Editor

The “NSDF,” a giant, above-ground landfill beside the Ottawa River, for one million tonnes of radioactive waste, approved by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission on January 9, is a debacle-in-the-making. 

The NSDF fails to meet International safety standards according to experts who for years were in charge of the waste at Chalk River. Industry veterans say much of the waste is too long-lived for permanent emplacement in an above-ground mound.  

The facility is expected to leak during operation and break down and release its contents to the environment after 550 years, while many of the dangerous, post-fission, man-made radioactive toxins in the mound will remain hazardous for many millennia. Plutonium and other radioactive pollutants will leak into the Ottawa River that drains into the St. Lawrence River at Montreal. This leakage will contaminate drinking water for millions of Canadians. All radioactive contaminants increase risks of cancer, birth defects and genetic mutations in exposed populations. The larger the population exposed, the greater the incidence of maladies.

Ten out of 11 Algonquin First Nations that have lived in the Ottawa River watershed for millennia say they do not consent to the NSDF on their unceded territory. The Assembly of First Nations and more than 140 municipalities including Ottawa, Gatineau and Montreal have passed resolutions of concern and/or opposition to the facility.

We wonder who the beneficiaries of the NSDF would be, besides shareholders of the three multinationals involved: SNC-Lavalin (now called Atkins Réalis), and two Texas-based multinationals, Fluor and Jacobs. The three multinationals comprise the “Canadian National Energy Alliance,” contracted by the Harper government in 2015 to quickly and cheaply reduce Canada’s multibillion dollar federal nuclear waste cleanup liability.

Canada’s deficient nuclear governance regime and its “nuclear-industry-captured” regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, have enabled this debacle-in-the-making to be taken seriously and to receive a license for construction.

Two legal challenges to the CNSC’s decision have been launched in Federal Court. More may follow if a species-at-risk permit to clearcut the NSDF site is approved .

There is a positive way forward for the Liberal government. The Federal Cabinet could request an ARTEMIS review by the International Atomic Energy Agency. ARTEMIS reviews are expert peer reviews, available to all member states of IAEA.

An ARTEMIS review could provide the Government of Canada with valuable advice about how to manage its legacy radioactive waste. Responsibility for managing this waste was handed over to profit-seeking multinationals in 2015 by the Harper government. Costs to taxpayers have ballooned since then. An ARTEMIS review could advise the Government of Canada on how to get value for money in its radioactive waste management projects while ensuring that safety is the top priority.

House of Commons e-petition 4676 calling for an ARTEMIS review garnered 3000 signatures in 30 days over the recent Christmas and New Years holiday period. The petition also called on the Government of Canada to uphold the principle, from the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, that “free, prior and informed consent” must be obtained before hazardous waste is stored in the territory of Indigenous people.

We and others have written to the Prime Minister and several Cabinet Ministers urging Cabinet to request an IAEA ARTEMIS review as soon as possible for the benefit of all Canadians and future generations.

Gordon Edwards, PhD, Montreal

Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility

Lynn Jones, MHSc, Ottawa

Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area