The Old Fort William Cottagers…�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â�¬.�ï�¿�½�Â�. Association (Sheenboro) has learned that there are very serious problems with CNL…�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â�¬.�ï�¿�½�Â�.s proposal for a Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) at Chalk River.
First, CNL wants to bring radioactive waste from several other places around the country to Chalk River …�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â�¬.�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â� about 100,000 cubic metres of waste. OFWCA has said no to this plan.
The proposed mound will be massive. The mound…�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â�¬.�ï�¿�½�Â�.s footprint will be about 40 acres and 6-7 storeys high. It will hold one million cubic metres of radioactive waste by 2070.
There has never been a disposal site for radioactive waste in Canada. Canada doesn…�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â�¬.�ï�¿�½�Â�.t even have regulations for a facility like this one.
The site CNL has chosen is adjacent to the Ottawa River (one km away and 100 metres from Perch Creek which drains into the River). The site is surrounded by wetlands …�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â�¬.�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â�…�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â�¬.�ï�¿�½�Â��ï�¿�½�Â� swamps which are already very contaminated from accidents at the reactor.
CNL is telling everyone in their ads and interviews that this Engineered Containment Mound is proven and safe. This is not true. There is no other mound in the world for radioactive waste. It is the technology for a municipal dump. International regulations state that only very low-level waste can go into a mound like this one.
CNL is hiding what they plan to dispose of in this mound. CNL tells us that only 1% of the waste will be intermediate-level waste. That is not a small amount, it is 10,000 cubic metres.
CNL’s draft environmental impact statement (EIS) disregards International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) classifications. CNL repeatedly states that the intermediate-level waste will have short half-lives and that most of the waste will be demolition debris from some old buildings. However, experts have discovered in the EIS that CNL plans to dispose of some radioactive materials with long-lived radionuclides that will be hazardous for hundreds of thousands of years – some for millions of years. This mound cannot survive even a tiny fraction of the time those materials will endure. (See: http://tinyurl.com/n6lr89h)
Either CNL is deceiving us or they do not know themselves what they are putting in this mound.
Leaks from this mound will inevitably end up in our River. There are so many things that could happen to create a leak – some simple (like a breakdown in a pump or a power failure), others more dramatic, like storms etc. Endless rain could overwhelm the system. (See: https://tinyurl.com/lklofxa)
By 2070 the mound should be full. CNL will cover the mound. The covers and bottom liners will corrode and breakdown. Just with a tear in the top cover the whole mound would fill up like a bathtub and overflow sending contaminants into the wetlands and Creek.
To preserve our healthy and safe environment, CNL must do better than this proposal: 1. find a site at least 25 km from the River and 2. investigate alternatives for storage or disposal.
A better plan may mean CNL needs more employees not less.
