UDP Process - Beginning to End

[Oscar]

Response to UDP - PERRON Letter to Chairman Dan Perrins

Geraldine Perron
Box 671, Kelvington, Sask S0A 1W0

July 31, 2009

Mr. Dan Perrins:
"The Future of Uranium in Saskatchewan"
P.O. Box 7, Regina, SK, S4P 2Z5

Dear Sir:

I attended the meeting held in Yorkton, and as I sat there listening to the proceedings, I felt as though it was a total waste of time and money, and it appeared to me that our present government has decided to proceed with uranium development………………I sincerely hope that you will prove me wrong.

I was a youngster when the nuclear testing was done in Nevada and I can remember my folks and neighbours relating how they would find ash on the windowsills that faced south. My parents had purchased a new car in 1949.

Roads back then were basically cow paths with little traffic and yet the windshield that always faced south when parked outside had pockmarks on it. Everyone associated these things with nuclear testing.

The community of Kelvington and surrounding area has been a hotspot for strange cancers. My mom’s brother, who lived on the next farm, and her sister, who spent months at a time with us, developed rare cancers. My mother developed breast cancer that was treated by terrible disfiguring surgery only to have it return in her liver, and my (had) father prostate cancer. Every yard in the neighbourhood lost one or more to this dreadful disease. Was nuclear testing responsible? Who knows but it appears very suspicious.

While these mushroom clouds were being released in the Nevada Desert, Western movies were being filmed nearby. Perhaps you can remember John Wayne and his leading lady, Susan Hayward, as well as Steve McQueen, and the list goes on.

When Key Lake was being developed, one of my best friends was a high-pressure welder and employed there for some time. Twenty-five years later he succumbed to an inoperable brain tumour.

It seems that left alone, uranium is not as lethal, and eventually down the road technology will be developed to tame it. When so many provinces in this fair country have moratoriums against uranium development, we can only hope that our great province will do the same. Uranium is not like the glaciers-- it will not melt, and can be a resource for the future.

The hog industry, a debt that our children will be forced to repay, was the panacea of all ills in rural Saskatchewan for the previous government. Many residents of this province, both rural and urban, are optimistic that uranium development will not be the magic-potion of the present government that our great-great-grand-children will have to repay for this boondoggle, perhaps with their lives.

Judging from your grey hair and mine, we have both had ‘our kick at the can’.

Our future family members deserve to enjoy a safe Saskatchewan.

In closing, may I suggest that you read CANADA’S DEADLY SECRET Saskatchewan uranium and the global nuclear system by Jim Harding. The facts that he states makes this process seem like history repeating itself.

Sincerely,

Geraldine Perron

[Oscar]

My daughter has had thyroid cancer and recently a brain tumor.

Letter sent to Dan Perrins, Chair
"Future of Uranium in Saskatchewan" public consultation process.

(Reprinted unedited with permission from Ms Martin. EH)

My daughter has had thyroid cancer and recently a brain tumor. She is just 23. As a family, we have seen what the radioactive isotope treatment to kill all thyroid activity in the body does. She was given ONE tablet - that was all it took to KILL the thyroid activity in her body. You will never convince me that it is safe to have radioactive materials in large quantities in our province. My daughter could have visitors for a maximum of 20 minutes EACH PER DAY for the first three days after having that one tablet. You were not to go closer than 10 feet for that time period as well. For 2 weeks after having that tablet she was to have no close contact with another being- no pets on her lap, no children giving her hugs, no pregnant woman was to be near her. She was also told that pregnancy for herself was not to even be considered for at least ONE YEAR after that ONE TABLET! All because of ONE TABLET - What is being proposed is far, far larger and more potent than that one single tablet. So, even though having an MRI that requires isotopes for her regular check-ups, the potential for harm from the radiation of a nuclear reactor is so HUGE, that it is definitely something that I strongly oppose having our province even consider.

Sandra Martin
Kelvington, Sask.

[Oscar]

UDP Final Report and Perrins' Consultation Recommendations


LINKS to the following are at:

[b]Coalition for a Clean, Green Saskatchewanhttp://sites.google.com/site/cleangreensaskca/


The Provincial Government's Uranium Development Partnership report was released on April 3, 2009.

The public consultation process, "The Future of Uranium in Saskatchewan" went from May 26 to July 31, chaired by Dan Perrins.

The Final Report on the Public Consultations was submitted to the government on August 31, 2009 and was released to the public on September 15.

Here are Dan Perrins' nine recommendations.

Recommendation 1

I recommend the Government of Saskatchewan develop a consolidated report on all power generation options and make this report available to the public. This report should:
● inform the public about the current and projected power needs of the province;
● outline the power generation options being explored in other jurisdictions including Canada, Europe and the United States;
● outline options for future power generation including:
❍ expanded use of renewables, with particular emphasis on wind and solar, but also hydro, geothermal, bio-mass and any other options;
❍ expansion of natural gas and polygeneration, clean coal and carbon capture and sequestration;
❍ nuclear power generation;
❍ increased energy conservation efforts; and
❍ continued use of coal.
● document the health, safety, environmental and economic considerations for each of the above options;
● outline the costs associated with each of the options including initial capital investment, transmission costs, operating costs, the cost of storage for renewable sources such as solar or wind; costs associated with nuclear waste; and decommissioning costs;
● provide a comparable projection of the estimated costs to the consumer for each of the options;
● include a potential delivery discussion for each of the options including an expanded role for SaskPower and/or publicprivate partnerships; and
● explain the current global discussion regarding carbon taxation, cap and trade, and the implications of both.

Recommendation 2

I recommend SaskPower publicly release any existing analyses it has already undertaken regarding provincial power needs, the current state of its infrastructure, and future options for response. Recognizing that there are limitations to what can be released publicly because of confidentiality and contractual obligations, and knowing that much technical information around power is difficult for nonexperts to understand, this information should be in a format easily accessible to the public.

Recommendation 3

I recommend the Government of Saskatchewan commission a study to review the current research on the health impacts of nuclear power and that this study, and a publicly consumable summary version, be publicly released.

Recommendation 4

I recommend the Government of Saskatchewan initiate a public information campaign regarding the production and use of medical isotopes. Information should answer the following questions:
● What are medical isotopes and what are they used for?
● How are they made?
● Who produces isotopes, what is their production status, what technology are they using and how much do they cost?
● What type of imaging technology is required in medical facilities, what is the availability of such technology and what are the costs?
● What is proven technology and what is emerging?
● What is the proposed Canadian Neutron Source, what will it produce, what technology will it use, what will it cost, and how is it similar or different from proposals submitted by other jurisdictions?

Recommendation 5: First Nations

I recommend that a separate First Nations consultation process be established for consultation and accommodation on any aspect of the uranium value chain, including the Uranium Development Partnership report, in accordance with the unified First Nations Strategy on Consultation, Accommodation and Resource Revenue Sharing.

Recommendation 6: Athabasca Basin

I recommend a First Nations consultation process be established in the Athabasca Basin for consultation and accommodation on any aspect of the uranium value chain, including the Uranium Development Partnership report, in accordance with the Athabasca Regional Government’s An Agreement Respecting: a Protocol Establishing the Framework for the Crown’s Duty to Consult and Accommodate and A Resource Development Project Review and Approval Process.

Recommendation 7: Métis Nation-Saskatchewan

I recommend that a separate Métis consultation process be established for consultation and accommodation on any aspect of the uranium value chain, including the Uranium Development Partnership report.

Recommendation 8

I recommend forums be organized on an ongoing basis to facilitate dialogue, debate, publication and information dissemination through the media. This should include, but not be limited to, the hosting of conferences, by the Government of Saskatchewan and the two universities to:
● discuss nuclear generation, environmental health and community health; and
● explore other options for future power generation including:
❍ expanded use of renewables, with particular emphasis on wind and solar, but also hydro, geothermal, bio-mass and any other options;
❍ expansion of natural gas and polygeneration, clean coal and carbon capture and sequestration;
❍ increased energy conservation efforts; and
❍ continued use of coal.

Recommendation 9

In order to make the best information available, I recommend the Government of Saskatchewan use mechanisms such as surveys, focus groups and polling on an ongoing basis to assess the knowledge, understanding, information needs and views of the public.