Ottawa police called after Eagle Staff seized during Congress meeting, dispute over CAP entanglement with NWMO

APTN National News | The former national chief of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples (CAP) was detained by Ottawa police after he tried to seize the organization’s Eagle Staff during a meeting in Ottawa on Saturday.

Kevin Daniels, who was national chief of CAP in 2009, said he wanted to take the Eagle Staff back and “burn it” because it had been “tainted” by the current leadership of the organization.

Daniels made the move to take the Eagle Staff on Saturday during CAP’s morning annual general assembly session at the Marriott Hotel’s ballroom after he took the microphone to challenge CAP’s current National Chief Robert Bertrand over his claims to Indigenous ancestry and dealings with the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO).

“I began my questioning of national leader Robert Bertrand and I asked him a simple question of how much money the (NWMO) was giving this organization,” said Daniels, who originally brought the Eagle Staff to CAP. “I called for his genealogy, I called for his resignation…. I walked up and said, ‘I’m retrieving it, it’s tainted. I grabbed the Eagle Staff and was walking out and was cornered by about 50 people.”

Daniels managed to grab the staff and ended up in a backroom off the ballroom where he remained until Ottawa Police arrived. After Ottawa Police ran his name they discovered he had an outstanding warrant with police in Gatineau, Que., said Daniels.

Ottawa Police Const. Chuck Benoit confirmed Daniels was detained and handed over to Gatineau police on Saturday. He said the police reports from the incident included mention of an Eagle Staff.

“He was apprehended for that warrant and the rest of the information can only be given by Gatineau Police,” said Benoit.

Gatineau Police confirmed the arrest, but did not provide information on the warrant.

Daniels said the warrant was for an assault charge stemming from an incident near Indigenous Affairs’ Gatineau head-quarters when a woman accused him of knocking off her glasses. He said Gatineau police held him overnight and released him on Sunday on a promise to appear at this next court date in January 2018.

Former CAP national chiefs Sen. Patrick Brazeau and Kevin Daniels walk together in 2009. Photo courtesy of Mark Taylor.
Former CAP national chiefs Sen. Patrick Brazeau (left) and Kevin Daniels walk together in 2009. Photo courtesy of Mark Taylor.
Daniels said his battle with CAP is far from over.

“There has been a lot of lateral violence, a lot of greed and corruption within this organization that has been going on for a long, long time,” he said.

APTN contacted Brad Darch, executive assistant to Bertrand, seeking comment. Darch said Bertrand, a former Liberal MP, was in meetings and wouldn’t be available for an interview until Tuesday.

APTN followed up requesting a statement on the Eagle Staff incident and the organization’s dealings with NWMO, but received no response.

CAP says it represents off-reserve and non-status Indigenous peoples.

According to financial documents released by CAP during their annual general meeting, NWMO gave CAP $119,000 for the 2016-2017 fiscal year.

NWMO also sponsored the meeting, according to a spokesperson for nuclear waste organization.

NWMO is currently trying to find a location to store used nuclear fuel and has whittled down potential sites to seven from an original list of 22.

“As part of our ongoing work to identify a single preferred location with informed and willing hosts, we frequently interact with Aboriginal people, communities, treaty and political organizations, such as the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples,” said NWMO spokesperson Bradly Hammond. “As we have done in previous years, we had the honour of being among the sponsors of the annual general assembly in Ottawa. This was an excellent opportunity to provide an update about our project, the site selection process and our ongoing engagement with Indigenous people.”

CAP also received about $4.5 million from several federal departments in the 2016-2017 fiscal year, including from Indigenous Affairs. Human Resources and Skills Development and Status of Women Canada.

Roger Fleury, a former Green Party federal candidate and chief of the off-reserve Algonquins of Fort-Coulonge, Que., was in attendance at the meeting when Daniels attempted to seize the Eagle Staff.

He said he is concerned with how Bertrand is running CAP and his dealings with NWMO.

“We have a major problem,” he said. “I agree with Kevin Daniels, who had the nerve to go up there and grab the staff. There is something wrong with this.”

Audrey Redman, a residential school survivor, stepped outside the ballroom when the Eagle Staff incident unfolded.

Redman said she was upset with how events were handled and believes Bertrand needs to be clear about his Indigenous ancestry.

“That is the big question. When he asked about genealogy, they just booed, there was a big row over that,” she said. “What was the problem with that? Don’t we, as Native people, have a right to know? Everybody else has a right to that. We want to know who is a First Nations person. We only know by your bloodline and where you come from.”

Bertrand’s biography on the CAP website is silent about his Indigenous ancestry.

Sen. Patrick Brazeau, who was national chief of CAP from 2006 until he left for his Senate appointment in 2009, attended the organization’s meetings last Friday. Brazeau said he heard many delegates questioning Bertrand’s Indigenous roots.

“I did have a lot of delegates approach me and asking me if I knew Bertrand personally and about his ancestry,” said Brazeau. “Delegates were requesting his ancestry and it poses some problems. I have no opinion on it. I am no longer part of the organization.”

Brazeau said he was “sad” to see the current state of CAP.

“I worked hard and I dedicated a lot of time to raise the profile of the organization and now it seems to be a ghost organization,” said Brazeau. “You don’t hear about it very often and I find it unfortunate for the constituency of CAP. Things could be fixed, but we’ll wait and see.”

National News | September 26, 2017 by Jorge Barrera Attributed to: jbarrera, as posted at


Leave a comment

CNSC completes review of CNL’s draft environmental impact statement; La CCSN termine l’examen de l ’ébauche de l’énoncé des incidences environnementales des LNC

News Release

From Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

August 31, 2017 – Ottawa, ON

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) staff recently completed their technical assessment of the draft environmental impact statement (EIS) from Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) for the proposed Near Surface Disposal Facility. The CNSC, as the responsible authority, is carrying out a federal environmental assessment (EA) pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012).

As the responsible authority, the CNSC has identified a number of areas where additional information will need to be included in the final EIS and other technical supporting documentation. CNSC staff’s assessment is reflected in a series of comments that have been consolidated with those of other federal authorities participating in the review, given their expert information or knowledge in relation to the project (Environment and Climate Change Canada, Health Canada and Natural Resources Canada). The consolidated table of federal comments, which lists almost 200 information requests and comments, has been submitted back to the project proponent, CNL, for action.

The French and English version of the federal comments table for the NSDF project have been posted on CEAR. The links are as follows:

· English Documents CEAR Page (Comments Received / Responses) – (Document Link – Doc #151)

Next steps

CNL must now address all federal and public comments received, and submit a final EIS to the CNSC. The CNSC will then make a determination on whether the information provided in CNL’s submissions is complete. Should further information be required, the proponent will be requested to submit the necessary information until CNSC staff are satisfied with a final EIS. CNL is expected to submit its final EIS in January 2018.

Following receipt of a complete licensing submission and final EIS, CNSC staff will document their assessment and conclusions on the project. CNSC staff’s assessment and the EA report will be available to the public and Indigenous groups at least 60 days prior to the Commission’s public hearing, expected to take place in July 2018. The public will be offered the opportunity to submit written and/or oral interventions.

Quick Facts

· The Near Surface Disposal Facility is a proposed engineered disposal facility for radioactive waste planned for the Chalk River Laboratories site.

· The facility is planned to have an operating life of at least 50 years; as proposed, it would be an engineered mound built at near-surface level on the Chalk River Laboratories site.

· The proposed project would also include a wastewater treatment plant and supporting infrastructure.

Associated Links

Nicole Frigault

Environmental Assessment Officer, Technical Support Branch
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission / Government of Canada

Nicole.Frigault / Tel. : 613-995-7948

Agente en évaluation environnementale, Direction générale du soutien technique

Commission canadienne de sûreté nucléaire / Gouvernement du Canada

Nicole.Frigault / Tél. : 613-995-7948

La CCSN termine l’examen de l’ébauche de l’énoncé des incidences environnementales des LNC

Communiqué de presse

De Commission canadienne de sûreté nucléaire

31 août 2017 – Ottawa (Ontario)

Le personnel de la Commission canadienne de sûreté nucléaire (CCSN) a récemment réalisé un examen technique de l’ébauche de l’énoncé des incidences environnementales (EIE) des Laboratoires Nucléaires Canadiens (LNC) concernant le projet d’installation de stockage des déchets près de la surface. La CCSN, autorité responsable dans cette affaire, effectue une évaluation environnementale (EE) fédérale, conformément à la Loi canadienne sur l’évaluation environnementale (2012) (LCEE 2012).

La CCSN a d’ailleurs cerné un certain nombre de secteurs où des renseignements supplémentaires devront être ajoutés à la version finale de l’EIE et à d’autres documents techniques à l’appui. L’évaluation réalisée par le personnel de la CCSN est reflétée dans une série de commentaires qui ont été regroupés avec ceux d’autres autorités fédérales participant à l’examen en raison de leur expertise ou de leur connaissance à l’égard du projet (Environnement et Changement climatique Canada, Santé Canada et Ressources naturelles Canada). Le tableau des commentaires d’autorités fédérales (en anglais seulement pour le moment), qui contient près de 200 demandes d’information et commentaires, a été remis au promoteur du projet, LNC, aux fins de suivi.

Prochaines étapes

Les LNC doivent maintenant donner suite à tous les commentaires reçus des autorités fédérales et du public, puis soumettre à la CCSN la version finale de l’EIE. La CCSN pourra ensuite juger de l’exhaustivité de l’information fournie par les LNC. S’il manque toujours des renseignements, le promoteur sera tenu de soumettre l’information requise jusqu’à ce que le personnel de la CCSN juge le tout suffisant. On s’attend à ce qui les LNC livrent la version finale de l’EIE en janvier 2018.

Lorsqu’il aura reçu une demande de permis complète et une version finale de l’EIE, le personnel de la CCSN consignera par écrit son évaluation et ses conclusions concernant le projet. L’évaluation et le rapport d’EE du personnel de la CCSN seront accessibles au public et aux groupes autochtones au moins 60 jours avant l’audience publique de la Commission sur la question, prévue pour juillet 2018. La participation du public sera rendue possible par la présentation de mémoires ou d’exposés oraux.

Faits en bref

· L’installation de gestion des déchets près de la surface est un projet d’aménagement visant la gestion des déchets radioactifs sur le site des Laboratoires de Chalk River (LCR).

· Il est prévu que l’installation de gestion des déchets près de la surface aura une durée de vie d’au moins 50 ans; selon la proposition, elle serait composée d’un monticule artificiel construit près de la surface sur le site des LCR.

· Le projet proposé comprendrait une usine de traitement des eaux usées et des infrastructures de soutien.

Liens connexes

Nicole Frigault

Environmental Assessment Officer, Technical Support Branch
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission / Government of Canada

Nicole.Frigault / Tel. : 613-995-7948

Agente en évaluation environnementale, Direction générale du soutien technique

Commission canadienne de sûreté nucléaire / Gouvernement du Canada

Nicole.Frigault / Tél. : 613-995-7948

Leave a comment

Flotilla protests nuclear waste site

Leave a comment

Unclear if local govts will host sites for N-waste disposal in Japan

The government on July 28 released a “scientific features map” of areas that could host a final disposal facility for high-level radioactive waste from spent nuclear fuel. The map displays areas’ suitability for a construction site using a four-grade scale, and was published with the aim of encouraging municipalities to host the facility. However, it remains unclear if any local governments will take on the project.

In 2000, the Japanese government established the Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan (NUMO) to oversee final waste disposal. The government has been soliciting hosts for a disposal facility since 2002.

In 2007, the town of Toyo, Kochi Prefecture, applied to host a facility but withdrew its candidacy after residents opposed the move and the mayor was not reelected.

There have been no applications since. To encourage progress, the central government endeavored to chart scientifically appropriate sites for construction of a disposal facility, leading to the release of the map last month.

The government plans on holding explanatory meetings, starting this autumn, mainly in areas deemed suitable for construction. However, few anticipate municipalities to respond positively to government solicitations.


Excerpted from story August 7 2017 story in the Japan News as posted at

Leave a comment

Concerns about CNL nuclear waste mound project aired

The Hotel Pontiac at Fort William was packed Saturday morning with cottagers and residents concerned about Canadian Nuclear Laboratories plans to install a Near Surface Disposal Facility in Chalk River. They felt it would be located too close to the Ottawa River for comfort.

FORT WILLIAM, QC – Cottagers and residents alike packed the Hotel Pontiac Saturday morning to voice their concerns about Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’ proposed Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF).

The meeting was organized by the Old Fort William Cottagers’ Association.

Despite assurances from CNL officials the NSDF design is a safe and proven technology which would be used to mainly store low and intermediate-level waste generated at the Chalk River site, few people seemed convinced it was a good idea in the first place to locate a waste facility anywhere near the Ottawa River.
Property owner Mark Jennings said it just makes sense one would want to avoid being near the water.
“It should be clear that being next to a fast moving river is the last place one would want to locate a nuclear dump,” he said.
Marvin Flood voiced the same question, wondering why, since Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. owned 10,000 acres on its Chalk River site, did CNL pick a handful of acres which were located so close to the river.
Algonquin elder Gilles Dupuis questioned the wisdom of locating the NSDF below the hydroelectric dams on the Ottawa River, which historically had flooded the area. He wasn’t assured by talk the site would be monitored regularly over the long term to ensure any potential problems would be detected quickly and fixed.
“We don’t want to monitor the bad event, we want to prevent it from happening in the first place,” he said.

Others said they were confused by the definitions of “low” and “intermediate” waste, and wanted an accounting of exactly what would be stored there, the amount of radiation it was emitting and how long would it remain that way. Some commented on wanting to know how the NSDF’s contents would impact their health and their family’s health over the long term.
Several brought up the question of liability in case the facility failed, and several times the design itself was criticized.

Kurt Kehler, CNL’s vice-president of decommissioning and waste management, said the design is sound and in use at facilities around the world. It is based on multiple layers of defence including waterproof liners to prevent it from leaking into the ground, plus having a water treatment plant on site to deal with any water which has worked through the engineered containment mound to reach that base liner.
He said what would be allowed into the mound would be strictly controlled and will not contain anything highly radioactive, such as spent fuel.
“That will not be going into the NSDF,” Kehler said, which is being built and operated specifically to protect people and the environment.
He said the project has gone through a risk analysis to ensure it can survive intact from anything – earthquake, tornadoes, floods and the like. The site itself is elevated well above the historic flood plain, and a lot of analysis and study has gone into the decision to locate it at the best possible site.
“This property is probably the most studied tract of land in Canada,” he said. “We believe if you look at all of the aspects of it, you will find this is the best site for the NSDF.”

Kehler said CNL is not making any money off of this disposal site; instead, they are spending money to take care of legacy wastes by cleaning up and disposing of them safely. He said that is in the employees best interest, too, that they do this to the best of their ability, as they also live and play and use the water of the Ottawa River.
As for liability, Kehler said the property and all issues related to it remains in the hands of AECL and the government of Canada. CNL – a consortium of four companies – is contracted to operate it. He said if something went wrong, the Canadian government would go after CNL for redress, but the main liability is owned by Canada.

Kehler said their proposal is so technically sound “there is no Plan B,” as they don’t think any would be necessary. The ultimate ruler on this would be the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), who will need to approve and licence the project. That agency will also monitor and ensure compliance with it.
Pat Quinn, CNL’s director of corporate communications, said a lot of the more detailed technical information people were seeking is spelled out in their Environmental Impact Statement, which details the project. It is submitted to the CNSC as part of the approval process, and is available online.
According to CNL, the NSDF is to be used for the disposal of mostly low-level waste and a small amount of intermediate-level waste, mainly contaminated soil and building debris resulting from the decommissioning and demolition of more than 100 buildings and structures at the Chalk River site – a necessary part of revitalizing the site – and to provide a safe and permanent disposal for waste from 65 years of science and technology and the laboratories’ continuing operations.

The majority of the NSDF’s contents, some 90 per cent, is already stored, or would be produced, out of activities at the Chalk River site. Of the remainder, about five per cent would be waste originating from the Whiteshell Laboratories, in Manitoba and other AECL sites, such as the prototype reactors Douglas Point and Gentilly-1; and less than five per cent would be commercial sourced inventories for example from Canadian hospitals and universities, a service that has been underway for decades.
It will be built to operate for 50 years, after which it will be capped and effectively sealed off. The site will continue to be monitored for at least the next 300 years after it has ceased operations, or longer if government regulators determine that time period needs to be extended.
Those objecting to the NSDF have stated they feel it is too risky, its design not proven to be safe over a long period of time, is located too close to the Ottawa River and is being rushed ahead unnecessarily to meet a 2020 completion deadline.

The public has until August 16 to comment on CNL’s draft environmental impact statement (EIS) regarding the disposal facility. If approved by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, construction would begin in 2018.
To date, no public hearing has been scheduled to deal with the application for approval, which is part of the process, but one is expected to be set up sometime in 2018.

By Stephen Uhler, The Pembroke Daily Observer, Monday, July 17, 2017 8:57:46 EDT AM as posted at

Leave a comment

Plan to bury Whiteshell nuclear reactor faces questions

PINAWA — A single dental X-ray is 100 times more radioactive than the leakage would be from an entombed Whiteshell Reactor No. 1 (WR-1), the company charged with decommissioning the nuclear reactor said Wednesday night.

That’s the radioactive dosage to someone subsistence farming or harvesting fish, wildlife and berries downstream of the entombed reactor for a year, said Brian Wilcox, director of project delivery for Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL).

The dosage amounts to 1/10,000th the legal allowable level. CNL’s modelling “essentially concluded exposure level is extremely small,” Wilcox said.

CNL is proposing burying WR-1 here in a concrete grout. It wraps up its final round of public forums next week before it submits an Environmental Impact Statement to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission on Sept. 1.

That Environmental Impact Statement will then be posted online, and the public will have 75 days to respond. A round of public hearings will be held by the safety commission in 2018, likely in Winnipeg, with a final decision in December of the same year.

About 20 people attended the Pinawa meeting, including a large contingent of retired nuclear energy employees. Questions from the floor were sometimes technical, and there was a high level of familiarity with the scientific terminology.

CNL’s staff are virtually all former scientists from Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., which ran the nuclear research site up until three years ago.

The Whiteshell nuclear reactor is about 500 metres from the Winnipeg River. CNL estimates it will take about 100 years for groundwater to move from the entombed reactor to the river.

However, there will be little radioactivity then as the reactor will be entombed in a concrete grout. It is when modeling ground behaviour over thousands of years, and deterioration of the concrete encasement, that calculations become very advanced.

Canadian Nuclear Laboratories is a conglomerate of international interests charged with disposing of the nuclear reactor by the federal government. Members of the conglomerate have handled the decommissioning of other nuclear reactors around the world but this is the first case in Canada.

WR-1 operated near Pinawa, about from 1965-85 as a research tool to develop the Candu reactor.

The original plan was to dismantle the reactor and store it in a facility at the Chalk River nuclear research facility in Ontario.

However, CNL says moving the nuclear material is far more dangerous than simply burying it. It would be safer to simply fill in the five-story basement that currently houses the nuclear reactor.

Peter Baumgartner, a retired AECL scientist, insisted that encasing nuclear reactors above bedrock runs the risk that sometime in the next 10,000 years continental glaciers will dig up and distribute the nuclear materials.

“Sitting in soils it will be bulldozed (by glaciers). It’s that simple,” he said.

Canada has spent at least half a billion dollars researching embedded nuclear waste in bedrock, and that’s the direction CNL should go, Baumgartner said.

Another former AECL scientist argued the need for an independent assessment in addition to the ones by the applicant and the regulator. However, Canadian law does not require an outside assessment.

Pinawa Mayor Blair Skinner called CNL’s proposal “a safe option,” but stressed he was only giving his opinion. Skinner said the community is comfortable with nuclear energy and wants to lure nuclear industry to the community to fill the void once WR-1 is sealed. WR-1 is supposed to be sealed by 2024, which will cost the community about 300 jobs.

One industry being targeted is the manufacture of small modular reactors for remote off-grid communities and mining sites, Skinner said.

CNL’s next to last public meeting is being held in Lac du Bonnet next Saturday from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. to allow cottagers to attend.

Bill Redekop By: Bill Redekop Posted: 07/13/2017 6:54 AM as posted by the Winnipeg Free press at

Leave a comment

Nuclear disruption for North Coast 500 route

Scotland | A hugely-popular tourist driving route faces disruption while a stretch is used to transport nuclear waste.

With the UK terror threat remaining “severe,” police have been granted the power to close a nine-mile stretch of the lucrative North Coast 500 route for public safety reasons.

The move is to allow shipments to be transported along the A836 from the Dounreay atomic plant in Caithness to the port of Scrabster – then on to Sellafield in Cumbria.

The A836 closure will take effect from 8am next Monday (July 17) until June 22 next year.

Motorists will be diverted onto an unclassified alternative route taking them via Shebster and Westfield, to the south.

The interruption will take trippers away from the coastal route and close to the giant Baillie Windfarm and a string of huge pylons.

David Richardson, regional spokesman for the Federation of Small Businesses which represents many tourism-related operations in the far north, said the impact needed to be carefully considered.

And he questioned whether road was the best method of transporting the convoys, whether they should happen during the summer season and why they had to happen during the day.

He said: “Closing the road might seem simple but if it leads to congestion or delays, that can damage the enjoyment of visitors especially if they’ve got a ferry to catch, for example.

“Tourism is on the up. Nevertheless, the future is uncertain and businesses know they can’t be taken for granted.

No-one was available for comment yesterday at either the NC500 offices or at VisitScotland.

Local councillors say the diversions should not undermine the appeal of the lucrative tourist draw.

Willie Mackay said: “The detour is much closer to the windfarm but it’s a good, open road and scenic – still offering beautiful views.”

His council colleague Matthew Reiss, a former area police commander, said: “The diversion route is safe and adds very little extra mileage. I don’t anticipate any significant problems.”

Until now such loads from Dounreay, which is being decommissioned, have not required such road closures on the NC500 route.

But in a period of unprecedented security, a decision was taken by the security sevices to close the road as deemed necessary.

A spokesman for the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority said: “Dounreay is closing down and nuclear materials are being removed. Our priority at all times is to comply with regulations governing the safety and security of nuclear materials in storage and in transit.”

A spokeswoman for the police said: “We’ve requested a temporary traffic restriction in order to facilitate abnormal road movements. The request has been made as a contingency and if the road does require to be closed, signage will be in place. Officers will be on hand to allow local and emergency access.”

Thurso-based anti windfarm campaigner Brenda Herrick expressed concern about the impression on people who travel long distances to experience wild landscapes.

She said: “I think these convoys will prove quite off-putting.

“And with being diverted via the Baillie Windfarm, many people wanting to enjoy our beautiful countryside won’t want to see these overbearing machines destroying their view. It’s hardly a selling point.”

by IAIN RAMAGE July 10, 2017, 5:51 am, The Press and Journal, as posted at

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: