Port Hope Health Concerns Committee – Nuclear Discussions in Port Hope Coming Events

Pete Fisher
19 hours ago
• Categories: Local, Upcoming Events

Next Tuesday March 17, 2026, Port Hope Municipal Council will hear a presentation titled “Understanding Wesleyville” from Ralph Torrie, energy expert representing Blue Dot Northumberland.

Ralph’s presentation covers a range of important issues related to OPG’s Project Proposal for New Nuclear in Port Hope at Wesleyville. The Council meeting may be viewed live starting at 6:30 PM and later on the Municipality of Port Hope website www.porthope.ca

On April 29, 2026 the Port Hope Community Health Concerns Committee is very pleased to welcome Theresa McClenaghan, Executive Director and Counsel of the Canadian Environmental Law Association as Guest Speaker for the 5th Public Meeting in our series “Nuclear Issues in Port Hope: Past, Present, Future. Theresa’s presentation will focus on the important topic “The Legal Framework for Decision-Making on Wesleyville”,

Date: April 29, 2026 6:30 – 8:30 pm

Location: Port Hope Recreation Centre, Room 3, 62 McCaul Street, Port Hope L1A 1L2

Also, attached for your information are the comments submitted by our Committee on February 10, 2026 to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada Registry detailing our strong opposition to OPG’s Proposal for New Nuclear at Wesleyville in Port Hope.

For frequent updates including our Committee’s recent presentation to Port Hope Council on February 17, 2026 please go to our website www.porthopehealthconcerns.com

 

 

 

February 10, 2026
From: The Port Hope Community Health Concerns Committee
www.porthopehealthconcerns.com
porthopehealhtconcerns@pm.me
Comments Submitted to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada
Re: New Nuclear at Wesleyville in Port Hope Project Ref. 89802
Title: Saying NO to New Nuclear at Port Hope (Wesleyville)
_________________________________________________________________________
Part 1: Key Considerations:

a) “There is no safe level of exposure and there is no dose of radiation so low that the risk of a malignancy is zero”
– Dr. Karl Z. Morgan, founder and the father of Health Physics, Director of Health Physics at Oak Ridge from 1943 to 1972.

b) “No amount of ionizing radiation is safe”
– Dr. John Gofman, M.D. Ph.D Nuclear/Physical Chemistry, Director/Founder of the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory Division Biology and Medicine, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory.

c) “For a given uranium intake, the inhalation pathway gives doses 200 times greater than ingestion”
– Ontario MOE Rationale Document, Draft Uranium in Air Standard, 2010
________________________________________________________________________________
Part 2: Introduction
Based on the painful historical and current contexts of Wards 1 and 2 (previously Hope Township) of the community of Port Hope with the nuclear industry and its emissions/wastes, this Ontario Government / OPG proposal for New Nuclear at Port Hope (Wesleyville), to be the largest nuclear plant in the world, should be unthinkable to those in power with responsibilities to protect us and correct decades of environmental injustice.

Instead this New Nuclear Project has been proposed by the Ontario Government and OPG for Port Hope and promoted from the outset with total disregard for the difficult history and current realities of this area, the experiences of people who have lived for many years with daily cumulative radiological exposures and well documented risks to health, security, air, public and private lands, waters, wildlife, aquatic life, vegetation, financial wellbeing.

All of this has been imposed on the community from the 1940’s to present day by the federal government, the nuclear regulator and industry without the knowledge and informed consent of the people who live with the decisions and consequences on a daily basis. The lack of concern for health effects is demonstrated by the persistent lack of monitoring of human health impacts despite the massive $2.6 billion federal remediation underway and daily insoluble particulate in emissions from two operating nuclear facilities; for example, federal health data showing elevated rates of radio-sensitive diseases in the community and the presence of industrial uranium in people are consistently dismissed with no followup investigations.

We submit that approval of OPG’s Proposal will perpetuate environmental injustice.
___________________________________________________________________________
Part 3: Recommendations:
1. The OPG proposal for New Nuclear at Port Hope (Wesleyville) should be withdrawn as compounding environmental injustice and impacts on a community that has been and continues to be a severely impacted federal nuclear sacrifice zone from the 1940’s to the present day without their knowledge and informed consent and without any federal reparations.

2. Apply the rationale for the federal Environmental Assessment Panel (1978) which refused approval for Eldorado Nuclear Ltd to build a new Uranium Hexafluoride facility at Port Granby, less than 5 km from Wesleyville.

3. If OPG withdraws this New Nuclear Proposal, OPG should consider alternatives including safer, cleaner energy projects for the site subject to thorough public environmental assessments or resume selling the site to the Municipality of Port Hope for local use as was happening until stopped by the Ontario Government in 2023

4. If the Proposal is not withdrawn by OPG a comprehensive independent Environmental Assessment Review with public hearings is essential to fully assess this Project in all terms outlined in the “Impact Assessment Initial Project Description of a Designated Project” and including:

– Environmental Justice legislation 2024: examination of the nuclear history and current context of Port Hope demonstrating ongoing environmental injustice.

– Municipal, First Nations and public roles in decisions

– Honouring the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples for Free, Prior and Informed Consent

– Evidence of need for this energy Project

– Location, Wesleyville Village, protected bio-diversity

– Emissions

– Health data on Port Hope, research studies

– U.S. Dept. of Justice legislation – RECA, EEOICP paid $30 billion

– Biophysical factors

– Socio-economic factors

– Costs one-time, ongoing for taxpayers

– Safer, cleaner energy alternatives such as wind and solar

– Relevant EA reports: Eldorado Nuclear/Port Granby Review Panel 1978, Cameco EAs, AECL/CNL Port Hope EAs

– Two current Cameco operations ongoing

– AECL/CNL $2 billion radioactive wastes remediation ongoing

– Buffer zone size

– Impacts of preparations, construction, operations, decommissioning

– Security

– Reactor type, fuel and source

– High level wastes volume, storage, transportation

– Transportation during all phases

– Transmission of power, land and buffers required

– Monitoring, Reporting, Regulation

– Insurance for site and beyond the fenceline

– Compensation for damages

– Property value protection for area residents, businesses

– Taxpayer subsidies
___________________________________________________________________________
Part 4. Do not Perpetuate Environmental Injustice for Port Hope

On June 20, 2024, the Private Member’s Bill c_226, “National Strategy Respecting Environmental Racism and Environmental Justice Act” became law. There is no single definition of environmental justice that is accepted by everyone or reflects all scenarios.

Instead, environmental justice is considered a concept that can be applied in various practical contexts…it is broadly understood to include

a) Procedural Justice: “means people must have fair access to decisions that affect their environment”

b) Recognitional Justice: “means policies should respect the experiences, values, and histories of affected communities, especially those facing systemic racism”

c) Distributive Justice: “means environmental harms and benefits should be shared fairly across all communities”

The Minister must develop a national strategy (expected by June 2026) to promote efforts across Canada to advance environmental justice and to assess, prevent and address environmental racism. The strategy must include

a) A study that includes i) an examination of the link between race, socio-economic status and environmental risk, and ii) information and statistics relating to the location of environmental hazards and

b) Measures that can be taken to advance environmental justice and assess, prevent and address environmental racism and that may include

i) Possible amendments to federal laws, policies and programs

ii) The involvement of community groups in environmental policy making

iii) Compensation for individuals or communities and

iv) The collection of information and statistics relating to health outcomes in communities located in proximity to environmental hazards.

– Source Canada.ca, Environment and Climate Change Canada

– Port Hope’s long history with the federally licensed nuclear industries in town without buffer zones from the 1940’s forward, a Crown Corporation from 1944 to 1988 when 2 million cubic metres of its radioactive wastes were used as fill, dumped throughout the town, into the rivers and Lake Ontario, is evidence of ongoing environmental injustice to generations of people which must be corrected. The Ontario government/ OPG Proposal to situate the largest nuclear power plant in the world in Port Hope, adding to its disproportionate nuclear load, clearly violates the new federal legislation and should be
withdrawn.
___________________________________________________________________________
Part 5. Include 1978 research, report of the Port Granby Environmental Review Panel

– After two years of study the federal Environmental Assessment Review Panel did not approve Eldorado Nuclear’s proposal to build a new uranium hexafluoride UF6 plant at Port Granby (less than 5 km west of Wesleyville) citing several reasons including:

location should not be used for industrial purposes as it is an area with acres of high value agricultural land with suitable climate which Ontario needs to conserve, has acres of protected species bio-diversity, objections of First Nations and area residents, did not approve Eldorado’s waste storage plans for the site due to geology and unproven technology proposed.

– The research conducted for this Panel, the interventions, analysis and conclusions are all relevant to properly assessing siting the largest nuclear plant in the world at almost the same location with much the same circumstances.
____________________________________________________________________
Part 6. Brief Historical and Current Port Hope Context

• Wesleyville Village is a 19th century village, situated near previous seasonal settlement areas and annual gathering places of the Michi Saagiig Anishinaabeg, as informed by MS-WTFNs. The village is under restoration by the organization Wesleyville Village with the support of the Ontario Trillium Foundation and initial funding provided in the OPG lease agreement towards exterior renovations of the buildings on the leased lands.

Ontario Hydro acquired several properties in the village and surrounding farms in the late 1960s to build the Wesleyville oil-fired power plant that was not commissioned. While several structures were removed, the core of the village remained, including the 1860 church, the 1899 one-room schoolhouse, and the Y-shaped house located on a lot beside the church, known as the Oughtred house. (source Friends of Wesleyville website)

• The urban Port Hope community has two Cameco nuclear facilities operating within the town boundaries with daily insoluble radioactive particulate emissions impacting air, soil, water and vegetation. These industries are applying for and one has been granted a 20 year license thereby reducing public involvement even further. Both transport dangerous materials emitting radiation through the streets, both produce forever dangerous toxic wastes. The presence and cumulative impacts of both must be included in a full EA.

• The federal government has contracted with AECL for a $2.6 billion remediation of Crown Corporation Eldorado Nuclear’s radioactive wastes in more than 1300 public and private random locations in Port Hope where people have been exposed unknowingly for decades. The cumulative impacts must be included in a full EA.

• The $2.6 billion AECL/CNL remediation of Port Hope is now being implemented to allow property owners to refuse CNL access even to determine how much volume of waste is on their properties. As a result unknown content and quantities of radioactive wastes will be left in Port Hope if this is permitted to continue.

A number of residents are experiencing great difficulty with the remediation process for a range of reasons and are in need of support which we are advocating for to authorities.

• The Municipality of Port Hope was engaged in negotiations to purchase the OPG site at
Wesleyville until 2023 for local uses, preserving the rural identity which is highly desirable by many citizens.

• CNSC has consistently dismissed health risks and documented elevated rates of radiation sensitive diseases from 1983 (Queen’s Lees Study), 1997 (Health Canada Great Lakes Health Effects Study) 2000 (Health Canada/CNSC Cancer Incidence Study), 2002 Cancer and General Mortality. In 2007 the Uranium Medical Research Centre released findings on radio-biological urine bi-assays of 4 former Port Hope nuclear workers, 3 residents and 2 controls which showed the presence of industrial uranium isotopes in the residents and ill former workers, additionally 236U in one worker showing recycled uranium had been brought into Port Hope, and depleted uranium in another worker many years after employment. Followup health outcome monitoring was refused. No ongoing health monitoring is occurring of residents despite years of requests even though many are going through additional radiation exposures during property cleanups.

• The findings of these and other studies including two independent epidemiological Peer Reviews of Dr. Eric Mintz should be independently reconsidered in view of the U.S. legislation which compensates nuclear workers and community downwinders under two pieces of legislation – “The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act” and “The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act which recognize in law almost 40 diseases resulting from exposure to radiation for nuclear workers and downwinders such as Port Hope, and together have paid more than $30 billion.

• It is critical to include historical and current research and evidence from independent experts on the harmful effects of radiation and proximity to nuclear facilities and not accept the assurances of federal departments including the CNSC, all with conflicts of interest, that the health of the people in Port Hope is protected when science and medicine say that is false, the limited data says it is false and obviously so.

• There has been no federal recognition of the injustice and harm caused in many respects to this community nor have there been reparations for the people as we are calling for.

• On page 43 of the Initial IAA Summary Report the statistic of 33.9% premature mortality in this Public Health District is given without a comparison and not explained. Also the leading causes of death are given as cancer and ischaemic heart disease both of which are radiologically sensitive diseases. This is consistent with study findings for Port Hope specifically. It buries the data and is not at all helpful to finding the truth of Port Hope impacts to assign these data to the District as a whole which comprises a huge geography and population east and north of Port Hope including the City of Kawartha
Lakes, the County of Haliburton, Northumberland County, and the City and County of Peterborough. A full EA should investigate and report available relevant data accurately.

• The Municipality of Port Hope, First Nations and the people of the area lose power and control over future decisions regarding the nuclear industries and what they actually do.
___________________________________________________________________________
Part 7: Honour Requirement for First Nations Consent

Excerpts from OPG New Nuclear at Wesleyville (Port Hope ) Project – Summary of the Initial Project Description of a Designated Project.

– “Port Hope and the NNW site are within the lands and waters of the shared traditional and treaty territory of the Chippewa and Michi Saagiig Anishinaabeg Nations, collectively known as the Williams Treaty First Nations”.

– “OPG has heard the WTFNs’ perspective on the importance of the concept of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), as a mechanism to enable their meaningful participation in decisions that may impact their treaty and traditional territories. With respect to FPIC, the WTFNs have expressed the view that Articles 29(2) and 32(2) of UNDRIP introduce an Indigenous consent requirement for certain government decisions, particularly for decisions authorizing the storage of hazardous materials in the territories of Indigenous peoples….OPG looks forward to advancing the NNW Project as partners”.
___________________________________________________________________________
Part 8: Final Comments

• This proposed Project should be withdrawn by Ontario and OPG as perpetuating environmental injustice to the people of Port Hope and area.

• Many details unknown, review panel EA needed with public hearings if it proceeds • Largest nuclear plant in the world will present high risks to health, safety and security.

• Enriched uranium from the US is needed for Darlington SMRs, possibly Wesleyville reactors depending on type selected.

• Site plus buffer zone will impact a beautiful rural area with valuable farmland, ecosystems.

• Daily radioactive emissions are inhaled, impact environment, Lake Ontario, watershed,

• Location on the Great Lakes Basin impacting two countries, drinking water for millions

• Produces high level waste adding to a global problem without a solution needing management, transport, safe long-term storage.

• High level terrorist target = high level security, emergency plans needed.

• Truck transportation needs roads, accident risks, disrupts traffic, radioactive, CO2 emissions.

• Transmission wires, towers need more land and buffer zones.

• Disruptive preparations, construction, operations, decommissioning planned over many years at both east and west ends of the property.

• As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) taking social and economic considerations into account is a CNSC Principle that is used to serve industry interests not people.

• CNSC as the federal nuclear regulator has a dismal record protecting the people of Port Hope. We have every reason to believe this failure by the CNSC will continue.

Thank you for considering the recommendations and comments from the volunteer Port Hope Community Health Concerns Committee.

Submitted by Faye More, Chair

On behalf of the PHCHCC

Email: porthopehealthconcerns@pm.me

Website: www.porthopehealthconcerns.com