Language selection

Government of Canada / Gouvernement du Canada

Search

Independent Environmental Monitoring Program: Nuclear Power Demonstration Waste Facility

Site name Nuclear Power Demonstration Waste Facility
Licensee Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL)
Facility name Nuclear Power Demonstration Waste Facility (NPDWF)
Facility location Rolphton, Ontario
Land acknowledgement The CNSC acknowledges that the NPDWF is located within the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishnaabeg peoples.
Facility description Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) is licensed by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) to operate the Nuclear Power Demonstration Waste Facility (NPDWF).

The reactor at this site operated from 1962 to 1987 and was Canada’s first nuclear power reactor to supply electricity to Ontario Hydro’s grid. In 1988, the facility was partially decommissioned, with the reactor shut down and the fuel and power-generating equipment removed from the site. 

Air emissions from the NPDWF are the result of active ventilation, and no liquid effluent is discharged from the NPDWF site. Waters collected from the NPDWF are transported to CNL’s Chalk River Laboratories facility for treatment and release. 

Currently, the NPDWF is partially decommissioned and CNL’s proposal for in-situ decommissioning is under review by CNSC staff. CNL safely manages low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste at the site.  
Environmental protection requirements In accordance with regulatory requirements under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act, all licensees must maintain a comprehensive environmental protection program to monitor and control nuclear and hazardous substances released from the facilities they own and operate. As part of every licensee’s environmental protection program, concentrations of contaminants in the environment must be determined and the potential exposure pathways to the public must be assessed and mitigated.

Our IEMP results from 2018 and 2023 are consistent with the results submitted by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, supporting our assessment that the licensee’s environmental protection program is effective. The results add to the body of evidence that people and the environment in the vicinity of the Nuclear Power Demonstration Waste Facility are protected and that there are no anticipated health impacts from facility operations.  

Legend

Nuclear Power Demonstration Waste Facility

1 The < symbol indicates that a result is below the provided laboratory analytical detection limit.

2 N/A – not available

1 The < symbol indicates that a result is below the provided laboratory analytical detection limit.

2 For radiological parameters (expressed as Bq/L, Bq/kg or Bq/m3) where no federal or provincial guidelines exist, our screening levels were established based on conservative assumptions using CSA standard N288.1-20, Guidelines for Modelling Radionuclide Environmental Transport, Fate, and Exposure Associated with the Normal Operation of Nuclear Facilities. The screening level for a particular radionuclide in a particular medium (e.g., water, air, food) represents the activity concentration that would result in a dose of 0.1 mSv/year, a dose at which no impacts on human health are expected. For more information, please refer to the IEMP technical information sheet.

3 Tritiated water (HTO) is a radioactive form of water where the usual hydrogen atoms (H2O) are replaced with tritium. Elemental tritium (HT) refers to the radioactive form of hydrogen gas. Organically bound tritium (OBT) is tritium that is bound to an organic molecule, such as a carbohydrate, fat or protein.

2023 results

The 2023 IEMP sampling plan for the NPDWF focused on radioactive substances. A site-specific sampling plan was developed based on CNL’s effluent verification and monitoring plan, CSA Group standards and our regulatory experience with the facility.    

In July 2023, we collected soil, water, vegetation and food samples in publicly accessible areas outside the facility perimeter. Our staff collected the samples, which included traditional foods and medicinal plants, with the assistance of Algonquins of Ontario (AOO) and Algonquins of Pikwakanagan First Nation (AOPFN) knowledge keepers. View the detailed sampling data. The levels of radioactivity measured in water, soil, food, vegetation and traditional plant samples were below available guidelines and our own screening levels and were comparable to samples collected at a reference location. For radioactivity, our screening levels are based on conservative assumptions about the exposure that would result in a dose of 0.1 mSv/year. No health impacts are expected at this dose level. Given that many of the foods and plants of interest to the AOO and AOPFN are typically not assessed by the CNSC or other federal or provincial bodies, there are no established guidelines or screening levels for samples. We therefore collected the same species upstream or upwind, as they were not expected to be impacted by the NPDWF’s operations, and used them as reference samples.

2018 results

The 2018 IEMP sampling plan for the NPDWF focused on radioactive and hazardous substances. A site-specific sampling plan was developed based on CNL’s effluent verification and monitoring plan, CSA Group standards and the CNSC’s regulatory experience with the facility. The Algonquins of Ontario (AOO) also collaborated with the CNSC to provide locations and plants of interest for sampling. It is a priority for the CNSC that IEMP sampling reflects Indigenous traditional land use, values and knowledge where possible so that our IEMP results are meaningful for the community.

CNSC staff collected water, soil and vegetation samples, and with the assistance of AOO Knowledge Holders also collected traditional food and medicinal plants such as sumac leaves and berries, balsam, white pine, wintergreen, choke cherries, wild sarsaparilla root, pearly everlasting and lichen samples. View detailed sampling data.

The level of radioactivity and hazardous substances measured in water, soil, vegetation and traditional plant samples were below available guidelines and CNSC screening levels, and were comparable to samples collected at a reference location. As many of the foods and plants of interest to the AOO are typically not assessed by the CNSC or other federal or provincial bodies, there are no established guidelines or screening levels for these samples. In this case, the CNSC collected the same species upstream, upwind and not impacted by the operations of NPDWF to use as reference samples.

For radioactivity, CNSC screening levels are based on conservative assumptions about the exposure that would result in a dose of 0.1 mSv/year. No health impacts are expected at this dose level.

The reference samples are taken in a location where there is likely no potential for exposure from the operations of the nuclear facility. The reference location is chosen based on distance from the operation and on meteorological data such as predominant wind direction or precipitation (for atmospheric releases) and water current (for waterborne releases). This allows us to collect local data that is representative of the region around the facility. This data is then compared with sampling results. This is especially important when background data, guidelines or screening levels do not exist for a certain contaminant or medium in a certain region.

Indigenous Nations and communities’ participation

We have made it a priority to ensure that IEMP sampling reflects Indigenous traditional knowledge, land use and values where possible. In addition to conducting routine IEMP sampling activities, we seek input from local Indigenous Nations and communities on our IEMP sampling plans. In advance of the 2023 IEMP sampling campaign around the CNL NPDWF, notification emails were sent to Indigenous Nations and communities near the facility to notify them of the sampling campaign and to seek input on the sampling plan. We invited suggestions for species of interest, valued components, and potential sampling locations where traditional practices and activities may take place. Vegetation, food, soil and water were sampled. Vegetation species included sumac (berries), white pine, balsam fir, wintergreen, yarrow, chokecherries, lichen, milkweed, wild sarsaparilla leaves, pearly everlasting and pickerel weed.

Algonquins of Pikwakanagan First Nation

In addition to reviewing the sampling plan, AOPFN met with our staff in Rolphton, Ontario, a few weeks before the IEMP sampling campaign to walk the land with knowledge keepers. This enabled AOPFN to identify species and sampling areas of interest and allowed us to provide information about the IEMP process. This collaboration and the feedback received informed which samples were collected and where during the campaign. AOPFN shared that water samples downstream from the NPDWF site were of great interest to their community. We contacted local property owners and CNL site management to get access to key sites on the water at and surrounding the NPDWF site. AOPFN participants assisted in the collection of water, vegetation and soil samples. We explained the program to the participants, as well as the chain of custody procedures for the collected samples. Key samples included water down stream from the NPDWF, sumac berries, chokecherries and soil.

Algonquins of Ontario

In addition to reviewing the sampling plan, AOO sent a representative to join our field team to collect samples. The AOO representative identified vegetation species of medicinal, spiritual and cultural importance to the AOO for collection. The AOO representative shared changes noticed in the landscape and in vegetation populations between IEMP campaigns. Key vegetation samples collected included sumac berries, white pine, balsam fir, wintergreen, yarrow, lichen, milkweed, wild sarsaparilla leaves, pearly everlasting and pickerel weed.

We will continue to engage with interested Indigenous Nations and communities to ensure that IEMP sampling incorporates Indigenous knowledge in future sampling.

Focus on health

We review the results of public health reports and data, examine international publications, and at times conduct our own health studies to provide further independent verification that the health of people living near the NPDWF is protected. The Renfrew County and District (RCD) Health Unit, Public Health Ontario and Cancer Care Ontario monitor the health of populations, including those living near the NPDWF. Disease rates are compared to those of other similar rural populations (or of larger reference populations, such as Ontario) to detect any potential health outcomes that may be of concern.

Most of the recent health data available indicates all-cause mortality rates in the RCD were higher than Ontario’s average in 2021, but equal when compared to Ontario’s average for mainly rural areas (e.g., Haldimand-Norfolk, Huron County, Northwestern). Similar to the rest of Ontario, the most common types of cancer in RCD in 2018 were breast cancer (females), prostate cancer (males), lung cancer and colorectal cancer. Variance in incidence by cancer type was observed when comparing RCD to Ontario averages, such as higher rates of lung cancer, lower rates of breast cancer, and similar rates for colorectal cancer and all cancers combined. The incidence and mortality rates of different cancer types often vary by region and are influenced by many factors, including behavioural and lifestyle (e.g., smoking, alcohol intake, overweight/obesity). Among RCD residents in 2018–20, these factors were significantly higher compared to Ontario averages and were similar to those in other rural health units, which suggests that they are largely responsible for the cancer burden in RCD.

Health status data for Indigenous Peoples is not reported separately by the RCD Health Unit. Although there is no cancer data specific to Indigenous Peoples in RCD, according to Cancer Care Ontario, First Nation peoples living in Ontario had a higher incidence of lung (females), colorectal, kidney, cervical and liver cancers than other people in Ontario over a 20-year period (1991–2010). Cancer mortality was also significantly higher in First Nation peoples than in other people in Ontario.

Many environmental and epidemiological studies have been performed in Ontario given the historical and current presence of the nuclear industry in the province. One such study indicated that cancers in populations near nuclear power plants (e.g., Darlington, Pickering, Bruce) are similar to those in the general population of Ontario. These findings are consistent with research studies conducted around nuclear power plants in other countries.

Based on current levels of radionuclides in the environment; exposures to people living in the area; the current scientific knowledge about the sources, effects and risks of ionizing radiation; and relevant local, provincial and federal health data, we have not observed and do not expect to observe any adverse health outcomes related to the presence of the NPDWF. Access our library of health studies and third-party research.

If you would like more general health information and data for your community, please visit the following websites:

https://www.rcdhu.com/reports/
https://www.cancercareontario.ca/en/statistical-reports
https://www.cancercareontario.ca/en/data-research/view-data/cancer-statistics/ontario-cancer-profiles
https://www.publichealthontario.ca/en/data-and-analysis/commonly-used-products/snapshots

Conclusions

Our IEMP results from 2023 are consistent with the results submitted by CNL, supporting our assessment that the licensee’s environmental protection program is effective. The results add to the body of evidence that people and the environment in the vicinity of the NPDWF are protected and that there are no anticipated health impacts from facility 

Page details

Date modified: