Accessibility and Access Keys [0]

Skip to Content [1]

SRB Technologies

June 26th 2008

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Announces Decision to Issue an Operating Licence to SRB Technologies (Canada) Inc.

Following a 2-day public hearing held on April 3 and June 12, 2008 in Ottawa, Ontario, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) announced today its decision to issue a two-year operating licence to SRB Technologies (Canada) Inc. (SRBT). The licence will permit SRBT to resume its processing operations at its Class IB facility located in Pembroke, Ontario.

Read the full report from the CNSC website

June 2007

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission recently granted SRB Technologies of Pembroke Ontario an amendment to their Nuclear Substance Processing Facility Possession Licence. The amendment authorizes SRBT to receive tritium-filled light sources for assembly and direct onward sale – in short, they can’t process tritium but they can keep on handling it. Ottawa Riverkeeper believes the public was not adequately consulted on this decision.

April 2007

public hearing

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) will hold a one-day public hearing on the application by SRB Technologies (Canada) Inc. (SRBT) for an amendment to its Nuclear Substance Processing Facility Possession Licence for its facility located in Pembroke, Ontario. SRBT has applied for authorization to receive tritium filled light sources for assembly and sale of radiation devices.

One-Day Hearing: April 12, 2007
Place: CNSC Public Hearing Room, 14th floor, 280 Slater Street, Ottawa, Ontario

The public is invited to comment on SRBT’s application for a licence amendment by providing a written submission. There is no opportunity for the public to make an oral presentation at the hearing; however, the public is invited to observe the proceeding.
Requests to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission by March 30, 2007 (new date).

To read the CNSC Revised Public Hearing notice, click here.

To read Ottawa Riverkeeper’s letter to the CNSC stating our concerns about SRBT’s application, Riverkeeper Letter to CNSC [pdf file: 0.29mb]

To read about SRBT’s latest request in the news, click here.

31 January 2007 Decision

CNSC Announces Decision NOT to extend SRBT’s operating licence to process tritium.

Victory

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission’s (CNSC) recent decision legitimizes concerns that Ottawa Riverkeeper, The Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and many others have with respect to the ongoing contamination issues at SRBT’s operating facility. The CNSC’s 35 page decision references Ottawa Riverkeeper’s intervention in several places throughout the document.

The CNSC tribunal has done the right thing, but Ottawa Riverkeeper would like to know why the situation was allowed to get so serious. The contamination issues were on the CNSC’s radar for many, many years while public safety was at risk, despite the CNSC’s mandate to protect health and the environment. Ottawa Riverkeeper was shocked that SRBT’s plan to divert tritium-contaminated water into the City of Pembroke’s waste water treatment plant was even being considered by regulating authorities.

November 2006 Decision

November 30, 2006: CNSC Announces Interim Decision to Extend SRB Technologies (Canada) Inc.’s Current Operating Licence For A Two-Month Period

Ottawa Riverkeeper spent 11 hours on Monday November 27th at a “public hearing” of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). The hearing was a meeting of the tribunal of the Commission which heard evidence as to whether or not SRB Technologies should receive a renewed license to process tritium at its current location in the City of Pembroke. At present the groundwater contamination at the site is so severe that the company is operating under several restrictions.

Background information about the tritium releases and SRBT’s plan to send contaminated water to the Town of Pembroke’s waste water treatment plant (which dumps into the Ottawa River) can be found on this page if you scroll down.

Ottawa Riverkeeper’s submission to intervene at the hearing with an Oral Presentation can be found here.

Transcripts from the November 27th hearing can be accessed here.

The first 5 hours of the hearing consisted of presentations from SRB Technologies and staff of the CNSC. After each presentation the Commissioners ask tough questions that SRBT and CNSC staff must answer. There was an abundance of interesting information to note during this question period and what jumped out at me as being important and relevant is:

Although day 2 of the hearings are touted as being for the public, it wasn’t until 2 pm that the Commission began to hear oral presentations from the intervenors. There were 93 interventions on the agenda (a combination of oral and written) and each intervenor is given a mere 10 minutes before the panel. If you are interested in reading submissions from any of the intervenors you can request them from the CNSC.

Interesting intervenors to make note of:

Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County: Dr. Ole Hendrickson has been working tirelessly on this issue for over a decade. He was the only intervenor to be allowed to present on both days of the hearings. He and his lawyer from CELA emphasized the perverse use of the CEAA exemptions as well as the grave consequences of the CNSC staff recommendation to remove important restrictions under which SRB has been operating for the last year. These operating restrictions have reduced emissions over the past year.

Graeme Brown from Port Hope spoke about the massive pile of contaminated sewage sludge that they are now dealing with in Port Hope.

Dr. Rosalie Bertell, an expert in radiation and radionuclides clearly explained that the CNSC’s models for calculating “DOSE” are not health based and underestimate the harm caused by tritium to human health by 20 times.

Charles Caccia gave a fantastic intervention in which he clearly stated that democracy and transparency are essential for good decision-making. He also stated that Canada’s 7,000 Bq/l guideline for tritium in drinking water is in urgent need of revision, given that other jurisdictions such as the European Union use 100 Bq/l and the scientific advisory committee that reviewed the evidence in Ontario in 1994 recommended 20 Bq/l. When Linda made a dismissive statement at the end of his intervention about the public being confused, Mr. Caccia came back with “With all due respect Madam President, the public is NOT confused”.

Pembroke residents gave powerful presentations about the levels of tritium contamination measured in their home grown vegetables. They can no longer have gardens in their own backyards since eating the vegetables will put them at a considerable risk for cancer…a risk they are no longer willing to take.

The entire CNSC procedure is daunting and humiliating to say the least. The Commission’s Review Panel obviously begins to lose focus after 6 or 7 hours and it feels like the public is talking at a brick wall. However, I am constantly reminded by more experienced intervenors and lawyers that it is important to go through this process and get all evidence or testimony put on the record for future public inquiry.

I try to keep focused on the ecological health issues but I can’t help but asking broader questions. The public and the City of Pembroke take all the risks and SRB Technologies reap all the rewards. There has got to be more to this case… who is the real winner and is there more than glow-in-the-dark signs at stake?

Background

SRB Technologies uses tritium to make signs that glow-in-the-dark. They have been operating in Pembroke long enough to seriously contaminate the soil and groundwater around the plant. Nuclear safety inspectors have found groundwater around the facility contaminated with radioactivity levels up to 80 times higher than what is considered safe.

SRB’s operating licence expires on November 30th and they are applying to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to renew their licence. Their plan to address current pollution problems is to collect contaminated rainwater from their roof and discharge it into the Ottawa River through the Pembroke city sewer system – a system not designed to handle radioactive tritium.

In the plan, filed with regulators at the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the company says its proposal is safe for people and the environment because the radioactivity would be diluted with all the city’s sewage and then have a further “immediate and substantial dilution upon discharge to the environment [the Ottawa River].” According to calculations in the company’s plan, the contaminated water collected must be diluted 300 times in order to meet safe radioactivity levels specified by drinking water guidelines. The CNSC staff issued a report saying they approve of the cleanup idea, but are refusing to comment because the proposal is the subject of a hearing scheduled next week on the renewal of SRB’s operating licence.

Ottawa Riverkeeper believes that SRBT’s plan to pump highly-contaminated stack drippings and groundwater into Pembroke’s sewer system is a bad idea for everyone involved. It puts the municipality of Pembroke at risk as they are liable for the waste that leaves their sewage treatment plant. It puts the Ottawa River at risk and therefore not only the aquatic ecosystem, but also those of us who drink water from the river. It also puts the credibility of the CNSC at risk if they approve such a plan with unknown risk and grant an extended operating licence to a company with such a poor track record with respect to environmental protection.

Ottawa Riverkeeper cannot believe the “solution to pollution is dilution” mentality is still alive and well. It is important to note that it is not the concentration of these radionucleides that we need to be concerned about, but total loading over time. Dilution of the waste will not lessen the environmental or health impact. These wastes are bioaccumulative and they build up over time in organisms.

See the related news items on this topic:

Pembroke firm pledges to improve record on handling tritium

Valley awash in pollution fears

SRB hearing continues on Monday

Inspections of sign firm urged

Company plans to dump radioactive waste into Ottawa River

SRB Technologies seeks glow of approval from Nuclear Safety Commission

Firm hoping sewage mix dilutes radioactive water

Radioactive Issue

Dr. Rosalie Bertell on the Dangers of Radioactive Waste

TAKE ACTION

SRBT’s current license expires on November 30th. There is a public hearing planned at the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission on November 27th. At this hearing Commissioners will hear evidence and opinions as to whether or not and if so, for how long, SRBT should receive a license to process tritium at its current location in the City of Pembroke.

This is our chance to voice our opinions and tell the Commissioners what we think. Mostly in the past, the Commission has heard from SRBT, its staff and other vocal supporters like the City of Pembroke. The Commission really needs to hear from others in the community about their concerns. Ottawa Riverkeeper will be presenting a case to the Commission, urging them to address the pollution issue at the SRBT site and forbid the diversion of the contaminated wastewater into Pembroke’s sewage treatment facility.

Please consider intervening at this hearing!

Interventions can be in the form of a letter expressing your views, or an oral presentation. Oral presentations are limited to 10 minutes and are usually made in person before the Commission in the public hearing room at the CNSC’s offices in Ottawa on the day of the hearing.

If you wish to make an intervention, whether written or oral, you must submit your request to intervene in writing by November 16th to:
Commission Secretariat
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
280 Slater St.
P.O. Box 1046, Station B
Ottawa, ON K1P 5S9
E-mail: interventions@cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca

For more information on how to intervene, see the CNSC’s website http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/commission_hearings/participation/

Members of Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County do not believe SRBT should receive a license at this time. Here are their top six reasons why SRBT should not get its license renewed to process tritium at its current location in the City of Pembroke.

1- the company has seriously polluted groundwater in Pembroke with tritium; it is likely that contamination will continue to increase if tritium emissions are allowed to continue (because of tritium’s long half-life, even with no further emissions, it will take over one hundred years for the existing contamination to decrease to background levels)

2- the company does not yet have an approved decommissioning plan and has not posted a financial guarantee for decommissioning, even though as a Class 1 Nuclear facility, it was required to do so under the new Nuclear Safety and Control Act that came into force in 2000

3- SRBT’s proposed plan for dealing with highly-contaminated stack drippings and groundwater is to dump them into Pembroke’s municipal sewer system thereby contaminating the sewer system, the treatment plant, sewage sludge and the Ottawa River.

4- the company and CNSC staff admitted recently that there is no model that can accurately predict the behaviour of SRBT’s tritium emissions within a 200 meter radius of the plant; thus there is no way to control exposures to members of the public who, live, work, play and travel in (or very close to) this circle; the company should not have been located where it is and should be relocated to an alternate location where an appropriate buffer zone exists or can be created

5- tritium is a radioactive form of hydrogen that readily combines with oxygen to make a radioactive form of water; tritiated water goes everywhere that water goes in the environment and in the human body; tritium has a particular affinity for genetic material and, once incorporated into biological molecules such as DNA, can cause birth defects, genetic mutations, cancer and many other health problems; there should be no routine emissions of this persistent radioactive toxin in populated areas

6- although SRBT’s operations have been restricted in the past year by the CNSC and its emissions have been reduced significantly as a result, these emissions are still high by standards in other jurisdictions


Print this page - Email this page