[All] Fw: Nuclear emergency response

Tue Dec 1 11:43:10 EST 2015

Tonight Scarborough's Councillors, have put forth a motion to the Executive Committee to ask the City to review and make suggestions for improving Ontario's nuclear emergency plans. Here is the response I submitted.
Lulu 
    ----- Forwarded Message -----
  From: Louisette Lanteigne <butterflybluelu at rogers.com>
 To: "exc at toronto.ca" <exc at toronto.ca>; Minister MOECC (MOECC) <minister.moecc at ontario.ca>; Write2us (ENERGY) <write2us at ontario.ca>; "premier at ontario.ca" <premier at ontario.ca> 
 Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2015 11:34 AM
 Subject: Nuclear emergency response

Hello everyone
My name is Louisette Lanteigne and I was a delegate of the Darlington Nuclear Power Plant licence renewal process.
There here are parallels with how current oil spills response shares the same flaws as Nuclear emergency responses.

Currently I have an Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) review underway to standardize spills protocols for toxic spills in Ontario because I found out that first responders aka: Fire Departments, have powers that trump that of the MOE and other agencies even though they lack the training and ability and marterials to reasonably contain spills. Because they have a focus on protection of human life, they are given discretionary powers as to when ministry agencies are called. This creates a conflict when you consider the fact the are often sponsored by firms like Enbridge. It also creates a conflict should the municipality be the one who damaged the pipelines by way of construction. Sometimes delays can allow evidence to float away downstream. Sometimes they lack equipment to capture it.  Using FOI, I secured transcripts where City of Toronto Administrative staff instructed staff to not speak with the MOE Spills Action Centre after a Hazmat 2 incident took place in the Humber River back in 2014. I had the choice to sue the city or to facilitate an EBR review. I figured if I sued, it would only remedy the one issue at the one location so I chose to make system change Province wide rather than to sue on the one issue at that one location. My EBR request references these documents and the review is being supported by the MOECC ministry.
When it comes to Nuclear emergencies,  it is the Fire Department who is the first one to handle the issues even though they lack expertise to contain spills and the same kids of conflicts exist. We cannot allow these loop holes to continue. Not all incidents may be reported based on the use of discretionary powers and the need is there to mandate full disclosure of all incidents big or small that may pose a public risk. We need to centralize incident data so that all municipalities and government regulators in the immediate and adjacent areas are on the same page looking at the same data and monitoring the ongoing responses so that if an incident escalates we can respond faster in a unified manner. We need to build a cross jurisdictional data bridge to assure accountability, transparency and to create historical data to flag repeating issues that may be rooted in things like geological risks or aging infrastructure etc.  
I am concerned that radio warnings may be less effective now that most folks use their own cell phones for music. I would like to see a Regional Emergency app for people to download to keep them informed of various public announcements regarding nuclear emergencies, weather related hazards or other safety concerns. In the age of climate change, we need to craft tools of communication like that. Perhaps it can be integrated with Facebook or twitter as well. 
At the Darlington Nuclear Power Plant hearing, the CNSC Chair asked for someone to explain the current emergency protocols should an incident take place at the Darlington Nuclear Plant. Environment Canada was there, Darlington's representatives were there along with Municipal Officials etc. but not a single person spoke. The Fire Marshall had left the room previously and nobody could respond. In my view, this issue flagged the fact that there may be a non disclosure agreement in place that gags discussion on emergency protocols even within the hearings of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. The same thing exists with oil pipeline safety protocols. Enbridge makes municipalities sign non disclosure agreements.  In my view this is completely unreasonable, undemocratic and does not facilitate true public consultation when critical data of this nature is kept secret from the public. This is a form of SLAPP. It is a Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation that used the law to block the public from this critical information regarding the safety of the public and the commons. How can this totalitarian system exist? This conduct should be deemed illegal because it defies common sense!  How on earth are we the people supposed to respond to a nuclear crisis if we don't have access to the existing safety protocols prior to incidents? How can we scrutinize the effectiveness of the system or suggest improvements to further protect the public and infrastructure if they won't even inform us of the existing rules? This only reflects a bad faith ethic.  You don't keep your light hidden under a bushel. If the policies are good why hide them?
In my view, based on costs, risks and associated liabilities, I support the phase out of nuclear rather than the continued use of it. I hope these ideas will help to form your opinion for tonight's decisions. 
Thank you kindly for your time. 
Louisette Lanteigne700 Star Flower Ave.Waterloo Ont.N2V 2L2   
   - 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20151201/ad6d3cae/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2015 Minister correspondence ENV1283MC-2015-634    Final.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 80806 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20151201/ad6d3cae/attachment.pdf>