Cameco Corporation

Key Documents
Q&As

Vision 2010
Cameco.com

Display All Hide All

Search:

General

Who regulates Cameco's operations in Port Hope?
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has lead responsibility for regulating activities at both the conversion facility and Cameco Fuel Manufacturing. The CNSC monitors Cameco's activities to ensure the company is in compliance with health and safety as well as certain environmental standards. Both facilities provide a quarterly compliance report to the CNSC staff and appear before the commission for licensing. For more information go to the CNSC's website.

In addition, Transport Canada regulates the transportation of all hazardous materials and the Ontario government's Ministry of Environment plays a role in monitoring environmental impacts through Municipal Industrial Strategy for Abatement audits and Selected Targets for Air Compliance.

Cameco also complies with international standards. The Port Hope conversion facility is registered under the ISO 14001 program, an internationally recognized standard for environmental management systems which requires the development of a strategy to factor environmental considerations into all levels of the decision-making process.
What products do you make at the Port Hope conversion facility?
The facility produces two primary products: uranium dioxide (UO₂) and uranium hexafluoride (UF₆). UO₂ is the primary uranium component used in the fuel for the Canadian-designed Candu reactor. UF₆ is an intermediate product that undergoes further processing outside of Canada before being converted into fuel for light water nuclear reactors around the world. Approximately 80% of our licensed production capacity is for UF₆ and approximately 20% is for UO₂. The facility is also licensed to handle limited quantities of uranium as depleted or natural uranium metal and alloys.
What products do you make at Cameco Fuel Manufacturing?
Cameco Fuel Manufacturing is the largest Canadian-based supplier of reactor components to Candu operators in Canada and around the world. It produces natural uranium dioxide (UO₂₎ fuel bundles that are used to generate electricity at Candu reactors. Uranium dioxide powder from Cameco's Port Hope conversion facility is pressed into small pellets that are placed in zirconium tubing, which is then sealed at each end. A number of these tubes are bound together into the finished fuel bundle. The Cobourg plant processes the zirconium tubing. One fuel bundle can supply an average home with energy for 100 years. A reactor at Darlington contains over 6,000 bundles.
Does Cameco Fuel Manufacturing work with enriched uranium?
Cameco Fuel Manufacturing has been licensed and has safely worked with enriched uranium for more than 40 years. The company has received approval from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) for an increase in the amount of slightly enriched uranium that can be on site at any given time. The material will be used to create a new, more efficient fuel for Bruce Power. The new fuel offers enhanced safety margins as the bundle employs a mixture of dysprosium oxide with uranium oxide in the fuel pellets. The dysprosium enhances the safety of the reactor by serving as a brake to slow the nuclear chain reaction in the unlikely event of a loss of coolant. More (PDF 422 KB)
Does Cameco intend to blend slightly enriched uranium dioxide (SEU) in Port Hope?
Cameco will not be blending SEU in Port Hope. SEU will be blended in the United States at a licensed facility and transported to Cameco Fuel Manufacturing, where it will be used in fuel bundles for Bruce Power.

CommunityHealth, Safety and Security

Are the nuclear fuel bundles produced by Cameco Fuel Manufacturing dangerous? How do you handle them?
Before being used in a nuclear reactor the fuel bundles produced by Cameco Fuel Manufacturing are very safe to handle - in fact, they are handled every day by employees. Although employees wear cotton gloves when handling a bundle, the gloves are not required to protect the employee from the bundle, but instead to protect the bundle from halogen contamination in the natural oils in a person's skin. The fuel bundle contains natural uranium and the radiation it emits is very low. Only when the bundle gets used in a nuclear reactor, does it become very radioactive and pose a potential health risk to people. This, of course, does not happen in Port Hope, but only in the controlled environment of the nuclear reactor site designed for this purpose.
Could a nuclear chain reaction (criticality) occur at Cameco Fuel Manufacturing?
It is extremely difficult to create the conditions required to cause a nuclear chain reaction (criticality). Cameco Fuel Manufacturing has been licensed for many years to handle sufficient amounts of enriched uranium to make a nuclear chain reaction theoretically possible. However, safe engineering and handling procedures ensure that such an event will not occur. Even though Cameco Fuel Manufacturing has received permission from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to work with larger quantities of slightly enriched uranium than it has in the past, the likelihood of an inadvertent criticality occurring remains negligible. It's important to remember that even if what the company's scientists call "the near miracle" of a criticality did happen, there would not be an explosion. An explosion is completely impossible with the enrichments and types of uranium materials used at the facility. When a criticality occurs, the materials heat up and expand, and the conditions allowing the criticality to occur are lost. In other words, the process is self-limiting. Individuals close to the event would be in great danger, but no one elsewhere in the facility or outside the plant would suffer harm.

More on how Cameco protects the health and safety of its employees and the public
Has Cameco Fuel Manufacturing done health studies?
Although Cameco Fuel Manufacturing regularly monitors the health of its employees, it has not conducted a mortality or morbidity study on its employees. The main reason for this is that the number of people involved is too low to produce a statistically reliable result. In addition, there has never been any indication of a concern from our employees (who work with the material every day) that would prompt the company to believe such a study might be required. Instead, consistent with what is known as the "ALARA" principle (As Low As Reasonably Achievable), Cameco Fuel Manufacturing focuses its efforts on continual improvement in the work environment to improve the safety and health of its employees.
Has the presence of the nuclear industry had an adverse impact on Port Hope residents?
During the 1930s to the 1950s, control of contaminated building materials and soils was less stringent than required under the standards applied today. As a result, Port Hope has a legacy of low-level radioactive waste. The federal government has accepted responsibility for this legacy issue and has committed to addressing the situation through the Port Hope Area Initiative (PHAI).

While the PHAI progresses, Cameco has remained committed to working with the community, through the community liaison forum process, to review the health studies that have been conducted to date and to facilitate a process whereby experts can help the community decide whether further health studies are warranted. It is known that over the last 20 years or so, there have been at least 10 health studies done that are either specific to the Port Hope area or included Port Hope as part of a larger research effort. Specifically, because of community interest in the impact of historic and current nuclear operations in Port Hope, the CNSC engaged Health Canada to conduct studies into cancer incidence and cancer mortality rates in the community. The results from Health Canada's study "Cancer Incidence in Port Hope: 1971 - 1996" showed that "compared to cancer incidence in the general population of Ontario, there was no overall evidence for an increased elevation of cancer in Port Hope." A second Health Canada report, "Cancer and General Mortality in Port Hope: 1956 - 1997" found that "overall cancer mortality rates in the town of Port Hope are comparable to rates throughout the Province of Ontario."
Is the truck traffic coming and going to Cameco Fuel Manufacturing's Port Hope facility dangerous to the public?
There is approximately one truck carrying radioactive materials that comes in or out of the site every other day. Members of the public can safely drive behind or beside these trucks. If one person drove all of the company's truck shipments (which is not the case), the radiation dose the person would receive would be less than one third of the annual public dose limit.
Is there any risk of an explosion at Cameco Fuel Manufacturing?
The uranium dioxide materials the company works with in making Candu fuel bundles are not flammable or explosive.
Why are some employees at Cameco Fuel Manufacturing's Cobourg plant being tested for sensitivity to beryllium?
The company has used blood tests to assess employees for sensitivity to beryllium (Be) for a number of years. Some humans have a chemical sensitivity to this material, which is used at our Cobourg plant. Testing helps us to ensure that employees with the sensitivity are not assigned to work closely with Be. We have a comprehensive program in place to ensure that exposures to Be are minimized. Previous testing has indicated that exposure levels for employees are a small fraction of the recommended limit. There has never been an indication of either sensitivity to beryllium or any negative health impact on any Cameco Fuel Manufacturing employee due to working with beryllium.
Your employees work closely with uranium. What kind of measures do you take to ensure their health is protected?
Our employees in Port Hope are tested regularly for uranium intake and the results are reported to both the individuals and responsible regulatory agencies. Test results are consistently below regulatory limits, which are based on the international scientific consensus on what is safe. Cameco is committed to ensuring that our safety practices and health and environmental monitoring programs are effective in protecting our employees.

Environment

Frequently Asked Questions about the Welcome waste pipeline project
What is the Welcome pipeline replacement project?

The project involves the replacement of a pipeline that runs from the water treatment building at the Welcome Waste Management Facility to Lake Ontario. The pipeline was originally installed in the late 1950s. Although the pipeline is not leaking, the age of the existing piping requires that it be replaced.

The project is part of Cameco's ongoing maintenance of the facility. Ownership of the Welcome Waste Management Facility is expected to transfer to the federal government in 2009.

Why are you replacing the pipeline?

Much of the original pipeline is still in place and is nearing the end of its design life. Other sections of the pipeline have been replaced, as required.

Cameco decided that replacement of the entire pipeline was appropriate rather than a patchwork approach. Although the pipeline is not leaking, replacement is responsible preventative maintenance.

Are you replacing the existing pipeline with two pipes?

The existing pipeline will be replaced by two pipes.

Who made this decision?

Cameco made the initial decision to replace the existing pipeline due to its age and because the region has experienced more precipitation in recent years.

Ownership of the Welcome Waste Management Facility will transfer to the federal government as part of the Port Hope Area Initiative. The transfer is expected to occur by the end of 2009.

During ongoing discussions with Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL) about the upcoming ownership transfer, the future owner indicated that installation of second pipe would be beneficial. During the remediation phase of the Port Hope Area Initiative, it is anticipated that there will be an increase in the volume of groundwater that requires treatment.

The decision to install the second pipe prior to the transfer of ownership was made jointly by Cameco and AECL.

What approvals process will Cameco need to follow?

Federal, provincial and local agencies as well as adjoining property owners have all been notified of Cameco's plan to replace the existing pipeline. Cameco will meet all regulatory requirements before beginning installation of the new pipes.

As of May 2009, the only approval received for the project has come from the director of engineering and public works for the Municipality of Port Hope.

Has Cameco sought and received the appropriate approvals from Ontario's Ministry of the Environment?

The Ministry of the Environment has been notified of Cameco's plans. As of May 2009, there has been no request for additional information.

Will there be any opportunity for public input?

Cameco has notified adjoining property owners/residents of its plans to replace the pipeline and has been responsive to any questions from those residents. As replacement of the pipe is considered a maintenance activity, there are no plans for a formal public consultation process.

What is the diameter of the proposed replacement pipes?

The new replacement pipes will each have a diameter of four inches. The current pipe has a diameter of three inches.

Will the new pipes have the capacity to carry a larger volume of water to Lake Ontario?

The new pipes will increase the capacity to carry a larger volume of treated water to Lake Ontario.

Why is an increased capacity required?

There are two reasons why increased capacity is necessary. The first is to deal with the increased precipitation that the region has received in recent years. The second is to handle the expected increase in treated water during the remediation phase of the Port Hope Area Initiative.

Has Cameco assessed the impact on Lake Ontario due to the expected increase in treated water volume?

A preliminary assessment of treated water discharge was completed for Cameco by a third party in 2009. The preliminary assessment has been submitted to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.

Based on this assessment, additional volume is not expected to have any adverse impact on Lake Ontario.

Will the current pipe remain in use until the new pipes are operational?

The existing pipeline will continue to be used until the new pipes are fully commissioned.

AECL will remove the old pipe at some point in the future.

Will the new pipes discharge directly to the lake as does the current pipe or will end-of-pipe technology, such as a filter or pump, be installed?

Treated water will be discharged to Lake Ontario via a sub-aqueous diffuser located such that it is not subject to wave action or ice shear. This technology will ensure that the treated water is discharged over a broader area.

Will the pipes include an access point so that samples can be collected? If so, will this access point be accessible to the public?

Water quality samples will continue to be taken at the Welcome water treatment building. As part of Cameco's commitment to continual improvement, a catch basin will be established south of Lakeshore Road that will contain flow meters to confirm water flow measured at the water treatment building.

When will the project start and be completed?

Removal of the trees occurred in the last week of April. Installation of the pipeline is anticipated in late summer 2009.
Do the uranium and other emissions from your plant meet both national and international standards of safety?
Our emissions meet all regulatory standards set by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and/or Ontario's Ministry of Environment. In most cases, our emissions are a small fraction of the allowable limits. These emission standards are based on the international scientific consensus on what is safe. We are committed to ensuring that our safety practices and health and environmental monitoring programs are effective in protecting our employees and the people of Port Hope.
Is Cameco working to reduce the amount of emissions from its Port Hope facilities?
Cameco is committed to continual improvement in its environmental performance and this includes reducing emissions. Most emissions from the Port Hope conversion facility have been greatly reduced in recent years. Uranium and fluoride emissions from the UF₆ stack have been reduced by over 50% since 1998. Emissions from the UO₂ plant have also been significantly reduced since 1999, with uranium down by over 60%.
Shouldn't there be a buffer zone around the Cameco Fuel Manufacturing plant in Port Hope?
The facility is licensed on the basis of restricting impact on people and the environment to safe levels. The facility's containment systems and shielding ensure that the impact on people is negligible even if they live very close to the plant. The mandate of the nuclear industry's regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, includes consideration of safety of facilities and, as evidenced by its licensing of the facility, the commission is satisfied with the company's policies.
Shouldn't there be a buffer zone around the conversion facility?
The facility has been designed and engineered to keep the public and employees safe through multiple containment systems and other environmental protection technology. It should be noted that the mandate of the nuclear industry's regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, includes consideration of safety of facilities and, as evidenced by its licensing of the conversion facility, the commission is satisfied with Cameco's containment systems and protection measures.
What is being released into the atmosphere by the conversion facility?
Cameco is committed to demonstrating continual improvement in its environmental performance. Both Cameco and government regulators closely monitor emissions from the facility, which at present include uranium, fluorides, nitrates and ammonia. With respect to oversight, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and/or Ontario's Ministry of the Environment regulate all emissions from the Port Hope conversion facility. All emissions are in compliance with regulatory limits and most are consistently well below those limits, with most in the vicinity of 10% of the allowable limit. In addition to its regulators, Cameco presents a summary of emissions to the Port Hope municipal council on a quarterly basis. Copies of the quarterly report are also available in the environment section of this website.
What is Cameco Fuel Manufacturing's impact on the environment?
The company holds a licence from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) that is conditional on the operation of our facility not having a significant impact on the environment. The CNSC implements this licence condition by setting very restrictive limits on emissions. The facility's actual environmental performance is monitored both by the company and by the CNSC. Cameco Fuel Manufacturing's emissions to the air during the year 2005 were 0.16% of the regulatory limit and our emissions to water were 0.0096% of the regulatory limit.

EconomicPort Hope Community Questions

A letter from the CNSC letter states that "the material was originally found in an excavation inside the footprint of the building" and "the source is suspected to be a breach of a concrete floor" and "a concrete pad had been poured in preparation for the installation of a new tank...". Could you please explain how this information fits together - if uranium was found in soil during an excavation, why would a concrete floor be poured?
The initial discovery of uranium was on a freshly-poured concrete slab at the bottom of an excavation pit. Cameco had excavated a pit to install a new tank. As part of that process, a concrete floor was installed at the bottom of the pit. Perched water (water in soil above groundwater) entered the pit and came into contact with the new concrete. The pH of the water was altered when it came into contact with the concrete and this resulted in uranium precipitating or separating from the water. When an employee spotted yellow staining on the concrete pad on Friday, July 13, 2007, Cameco immediately reported it to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and Ontario's Ministry of the Environment and began to investigate.

Uranium was not known to be in the soil under the UF₆ plant until the investigation began after the July 13 discovery of uranium on the concrete slab.
Over what period of time does Cameco estimate this loss of containment has been occurring?
In its initial report, which was provided to the CNSC on August 15, 2007, Golder Associates indicated that some leak points might have been present for many years.
At the public forum on October 1st Cameco spokespersons stated that the UF₆ building is structurally sound but frankly, such a claim lacks credibility when there are cracks in the concrete, the cause(s) of the loss of containment are not yet identified, the building is located on a floodplain and sandy soil, there are fugitive emissions (loss of containment to the air) and now loss of containment through the floor of the building. Please provide the report(s) that substantiates this claim of stability.
One of the statements included in the preamble to this question need to be addressed before it can be answered. The UF₆ plant is not located in the regulatory flood plain. Studies accepted by the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority confirm that Cameco's property largely lies outside the flood plain and the UF₆ plant is completely outside the flood plain. The flood plain map shows that a small section of the property along the inner harbour is within the flood plain and Cameco has committed to addressing this issue as part of the Vision 2010 project.

With that being said, Golder Associates has performed a thorough inspection of all concrete structures in the UF₆ plant as part of the ongoing investigation. All testing to date, including compressive strength testing, has indicated the concrete to be in generally good condition, with some localized surface corrosion. Cracks in trenches and other in-ground structures are typically less than one millimetre wide and probably not full-depth through the concrete. The limited corrosion of separate structures within the building does not affect the stability of the building. There is no evidence that the building has structural problems.
One of the items included in "Benchmarking environmental performance emissions report no.1" relates to the facility's waste management program, specifically the recycling of ammonium nitrate solution to a local fertilizer company. Please advise the following from 2000:

- the actual volume per year that has been recycled to a local firm
- the levels and isotopes of uranium contained in the solution
- a copy of or referral to the provincial or federal government regulations controlling such recycling and the uses
Cameco's ammonium nitrate program was established many years ago with the approval of the Atomic Energy Control Board, now the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. The program continues to operate with concurrence from the CNSC and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Annual results are submitted to CFIA and the CNSC for various elements, and all results are below established regulatory limits.

Cameco is not required to perform uranium isotope determinations, but overall uranium values are well below batch and annual limits, with a multi-year weighted average of less than two parts per million, much lower than the uranium content in typical commercial fertilizers.

The average annual amount of ammonium nitrate solution sold to a local firm since 2000 is 1,760 cubic metres.

The CFIA administers the Fertilizer Act, which ensures the safe use of commercial fertilizers.
How are the other components of the Cameco recycling program (combustibles, glass, concrete, scrap metal, etc.) regulated? Where is this material going?
Although the federal government primarily regulates the conversion facility, Cameco endeavours to follow the 3Rs regulation of Ontario's Ministry of the Environment. Material is segregated onsite. Non-contaminated materials are sent to recycling facilities. The company has a rigorous source-separation program, which ensures that all materials are monitored for contamination before leaving the site. Examples of these materials include recyclable material (paper, cardboard, etc.), fluorescent light bulbs, scrap steel, and computer equipment. This material is sent to facilities locally, and elsewhere within the province of Ontario.

Hazardous materials that are non-contaminated are disposed through licensed receivers in accordance with Ontario's hazardous waste regulations.
I understand that you are now reporting that Cameco's emissions of uranium to air are currently 120 kg of uranium. However, you previously reported that uranium emissions totaled 60 kg. Can you explain why there is a discrepancy? Have emissions doubled in recent years?

The change from the earlier reported figure is the result of modifications to the way that we gather, analyse and report emissions data at the Port Hope conversion facility. These modifications were made as part of an initiative of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment intended to produce a more comprehensive accounting of air emissions from the plant. They also demonstrate our commitment to continual improvement in environmental performance and reporting, which is a requirement of our registration to the ISO 14001 program.

Calculating total uranium emissions is complex as it includes both measured total stack emissions as well as estimates of emissions from other potential sources at the conversion facility. While uranium emissions from the stacks of our production buildings have been measured for many years, emissions from other sources, such as building ventilation systems, are estimated based on source testing and engineering calculations. Since 2002, we have been reviewing the methods we use to estimate emissions from other sources. The review resulted in a broadening of the potential sources considered in our estimates and adoption of more conservative calculations.

In 2006, emissions from 2002 to the present were re-evaluated based on this work resulting in higher estimates. The new results were reported to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and are included in public documents supporting our application for renewal of the operating licence for the conversion facility.

The data provided in 2003 was the best available at the time as the review was not yet complete. In retrospect, we should have advised at that time that we were in the process of improving our methods for estimating uranium emissions to air. We regret the oversight, though should note that our emissions are well within regulatory limits even at the higher estimated levels and that we are committed to reduce them in the future.

Total emissions of uranium to air for the period range from 102.7 kg in 2002 to 117.3 kg in 2005. We consider the levels to have been flat over the past several years as the change in emissions in 2005 and 2006 can be directly linked to elimination of the summer shutdown, which adds approximately eight percent to the annual emissions. The variation in emission levels over the past five years reflects a similar variance in production totals. In considering this data, please keep in mind that the international scientific consensus considers these levels safe, and that they are not large when compared to other sources. A 1,000 MW coal-fired power plant burning 4 million tons of coal per year can release up to 5,000 kg of uranium to the atmosphere.

It’s important to remember that source testing and calculations required to produce accurate estimates of total emissions are complex and time consuming. The new information was made available to the public as soon as we achieved the required level of scientific confidence in the results.
Are residents aware they have no home insurance coverage if there's damage from a nuclear accident? Why does the federal regulator let the companies off so lightly? (The conversion facility is only required to pay for $4 million in insurance, and Cameco Fuel Manufacturing only $2 million. The rest of the liability for any nuclear accidents rests with taxpayers.)
A major influence in setting any insurance rate is the level of risk that an event will occur. There has never been a nuclear accident in Canada. As a consequence, the risk that this insurance will have to be called on is extremely low and sheds some light on what the federally appointed regulator feels may be the exposure of Cameco in such an incident. Natural Resources Canada is looking at revising the Nuclear Liability Act, and although Cameco does not know what the outcome of this process will be, those who have any concerns about the provisions of this statute may contact this federal government department to provide input.
Can you explain how standards for determining levels of exposure are determined? Are they based on current scientific evidence, or by assessing risk by asking members of the industry what standards are reasonably and financially achievable? (The ALARA Principle)
The CNSC sets license limits in Canada on the basis of standards that are developed by international consensus using the latest scientific evidence of the levels of exposure that will not subject people to unreasonable risk. After setting these conservative license limits, the CNSC then asks its licensees to use the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principle work towards further reducing emissions, exposures, etc. even though all regulatory requirements are already being met. ALARA is a continuous improvement principle; even things that are already very good and meet all regulatory requirements can be improved further. The CNSC does not use ALARA to set standards; it uses it to push licensees to go beyond standards that are already acceptably safe.
Did an epidemiologist working for the Municipality of Port Hope's peer review team tell a council meeting that there have been more deaths in Port Hope from exposure to radiation than would normally be expected?
Cameco cannot speak for the individual in question but the lead on the peer review team does not recall that statement being made. Dr. Murray Finkelstein of the peer review team has indicated verbally that there is more evidence now of a link between exposures to radon gas and lung cancer. Cameco does not emit radon gas.
Don't we need a process that measures the cumulative exposure we face from all sources of radiation, not just hearings that look at each company in isolation?
It is important to understand that Cameco closely monitors emissions at all of its operating sites and at present the emissions, when taken in isolation, are well below regulatory limits. In fact, the cumulative emissions from all the facilities in Port Hope are less than the prescribed limits for the facilities individually and substantially less than the exposure the public receives from natural sources.
Has Cameco ever shipped depleted uranium to a US company called Aerojet Ordnance Tennessee? How much depleted uranium is produced by the Port Hope facility and where does it go?
A review of past shipping records indicates that Cameco has not shipped depleted uranium to Aerojet Ordnance Tennessee. We believe that Eldorado Nuclear may have done so. The Port Hope conversion facility is licensed to produce "not more than 2,000 tonnes as depleted or natural uranium metal and alloys from the Specialty Metals Plant". Although we are licensed to produce depleted uranium metal, we have not engaged in this activity for a number of years. We have however shipped depleted uranium metal in raw form to various customers around the world. Depleted UO₂is periodically processed at the facility for use in Candu fuel bundles.
How do you propose to make the conversion facility better?
Cameco has announced its Vision 2010 project, a multimillion-dollar initiative to renew, clean up and modernize the Port Hope conversion facility. It involves the removal of obsolete buildings and contaminated soils that date back to a period when the federal government operated the facility as well as the construction of several new replacement buildings.

The company is also striving to improve the appearance of the conversion facility through its ongoing clean up program, which has seen the removal of several small buildings over the past several years as well as the painting of older buildings.

Although the conversion facility is in compliance with regulatory requirements on emissions to air and water, Cameco is committed to developing and implementing improved processes that further reduce the environmental impact of its operations.
If there is no "buffer zone" around the conversion facility and Cameco Fuel Manufacturing does that increase risk from things such as radiological contamination and other chemicals?
No. Regardless of the location of a nuclear facility, the same radiation limits are in place to ensure that there is not a negative impact on the public. However, numerous safeguards are in place at both the Port Hope conversion facility and Cameco Fuel Manufacturing to ensure that employee and public safety is maintained.

One option for meeting regulatory requirements for impact of emissions on the public is locate the facility some distance away from where people live. Another option, and the one used by the Port Hope conversion facility and Cameco Fuel Manufacturing, is to carefully control and try to reduce the amount of emissions.
In the United States, testing of workers for beryllium exposure has been mandatory for 10 years. Are there Canadian regulations?
The regulations for airborne beryllium exposure are the same in Canada as in the United States. Cameco Fuel Manufacturing's testing program exceeds all regulatory requirements and employee exposure to airborne beryllium is well below the limits prescribed by Labour Canada. The company is not aware of any regulations in either country requiring beryllium sensitivity testing but, when the technical capability became available, it began conducting the tests.
Is Cameco in compliance with the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, which calls for the "virtual elimination" of all substances, like uranium?
Cameco is in compliance with CEPA: Uranium is not listed as a "toxic substance" in this legislation nor, as a naturally occurring element, is it targeted as a substance for "virtual elimination" in the list created pursuant to the relevant section of CEPA. Having said that, Cameco continues its efforts to prevent pollution, control and manage of the risk of any adverse effects of the use and release of substances, pollutants and wastes.
Is Cameco using Cameco Fuel Manufacturing as a "back door" to get a full SEU blending facility into Port Hope with having to undergo public scrutiny?
No. Cameco Fuel Manufacturing applied to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) for a licence amendment. The company has, for more than four decades, had a licence to work with enriched uranium as well as with natural uranium. However, in order to supply Bruce Power with a new product that will enhance reactor safety margins, Cameco Fuel Manufacturing plans to increase the amount of slightly enriched uranium (SEU) on site, while maintaining current licence limits for total uranium. The CNSC makes decisions on the licensing of nuclear facilities through a public hearing process. The public hearing gives members of the public an opportunity to be heard before the commission .

More on CNSC's role
Is Cameco willing to move the conversion facility from its current location?
Cameco has no plans to move from its current location. The company is committed to the community as well as its employees, many of whom live in the Municipality of Port Hope. Our commitment is demonstrated by our multimillion-dollar Vision 2010 project to renew, clean up and modernize the conversion facility. Cameco provides an important service in processing uranium products for electricity generators producing clean electricity both here in Ontario and around the world. Half of the electricity generated in Ontario uses uranium products processed in Port Hope. The facility has operated safely for many years at its current location.
Is it safe to eat vegetables from home gardens in Port Hope? Has the CNSC assured that it is?
It is safe to eat vegetables grown in Port Hope, provided that the ground has not been identified as being contaminated by historic industrial practices. At the Interim Licensing hearing for Cameco Fuel Manufacturing, the CNSC Commission stated: "there is no health risk from consuming vegetables grown in these gardens."
Is the allowable level of radiation exposure from Cameco's facilities in Port Hope the same as they are around a nuclear reactor?
The CNSC is responsible for setting standards for allowable levels of radiation for employees at licensed nuclear facilities as well as for members of the public, which it does taking into account the best available scientific information and international standards. The allowable level of radiation exposure to the public is the same for all licensed facilities in Canada (1 mSv dose to a member of the public in a year), no matter what type of facility they are: refinery, conversion facility, fuel manufacturer, nuclear reactor, etc. In addition, the radiation emitted by Cameco and Cameco Fuel Manufacturing is substantially lower than the licensed limit.
Is there any plan in Vision 2010 to augment the rail spur line so UF₆ can be shipped by rail? Have you ever shipped UF₆ by rail? If not, why?
There is no plan in Vision 2010 to alter or augment the rail spur line in order to ship uranium hexafluoride (UF₆) by rail and, in fact, this idea was not raised during the extensive public consultations on Vision 2010 conducted by Cameco. Cameco has never shipped UF₆ out of the Port Hope conversion facility by rail. Our UF₆ may be transported by rail in other parts of the world, but our facility is not set up to handle initial shipping by rail.
Oshawa plans to expand its harbour. Has Cameco ever shipped UF₆ or any other product from or to Oshawa? Would it be considered if the Oshawa harbour is developed?
Cameco has used the Port of Oshawa to ship our products and expects to do so again in the future. We have worked closely with port officials to ensure that their employees have the knowledge and training necessary to safely handle our products.
There were a lot of questions raised during the SEU debate. The municipality's own peer review team, from Jacques Whitford, identified 63 questions that it wanted answered. Has this happened?
Cameco provided responses to hundreds of questions raised during the environmental assessment for the SEU blending project, which was withdrawn in September 2005. In a letter to Port Hope Council, the consultants who conducted the peer review of the SEU blending project indicated that there are no outstanding questions. The SEU project was withdrawn and Cameco determined that it would put its resources into satisfying some of the concerns expressed in this process and not merely responding to these questions that were provided in the context of a cancelled process.
What is in that mound on the Centre Pier property?
In 2002, the Municipality of Port Hope decided that it needed to construct a new potable water treatment plant to supply water for the municipality. The selected site is just west of the existing water treatment plant and in an area that was slated for remediation under the Port Hope Area Initiative. Prior to construction of the new facility, it was necessary for the federal government's Low Level Radioactive Waste Management Office (LLRWMO) to remove all residual contaminated soil from the site. Because this volume could not be accommodated in the existing LLRWMO temporary storage facilities in the municipality, Cameco offered, and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission accepted, that this material could be temporarily stored on the Centre Pier property, placed on an existing concrete pad previously used in the 1970s for similar purposes, and managed appropriately until the new long-term waste management facility was ready to receive this material. This avoided the creation of another pile of material at another location within the municipality. Over the summer of 2003, approximately 17,500 cubic metres of remaining, marginally contaminated soil from the municipal waterworks project were transferred to the Centre Pier. The material is covered and safely managed by the LLRWMO personnel with some assistance from Cameco as required.
What would it cost to relocate the conversion facility?
There are no plans to relocate the conversion facility and even if it occurred the cost would approach $1 billion. It would also take many years to get through the regulatory approval process as well as to design and construct a new facility.
Why has the federal government been allowed to evade responsibility for health tests to measure the biological effects of long-time exposure to radioactivity in Port Hope, which it has promised to do several times in the last 25 years (starting in 1979)?
Cameco cannot speak for the federal government. Health Canada was commissioned by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to conduct studies of cancer incidence and cancer mortality in Port Hope.
Why is the CNSC allowing SEU at Cameco Fuel Manufacturing, which is even closer to homes and public thoroughfares than the conversion facility?
The company has been licensed to handle SEU at its facility in Port Hope for more than 40 years and has done so without incident in that time frame. In addition to Cameco Fuel Manufacturing's record, the CNSC continues to review the documentation filed in support of the re-licencing application to ensure that this process is conducted safely. Plant location does not change the allowable impact on the public. Regardless of the location of the facility, the same CNSC licence requirements, which are based on limiting impact on the public, must be met.

Page last updated Jun 2, 2009