A bipartisan coalition of Congressional leaders want the U.S. Government to formally oppose a Canadian plan to bury 50,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste hundreds of feet underneath the Great Lakes basin.
Fourteen members of Congress, spread out across four states (Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota and, Wisconsin) signed onto a letter sent by U.S. Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Flint), John James (R-Shelby Charter Township) and U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Lansing).
The letter says a potential accident “would have devastating and long-term consequences for the health of Michiganders and all other people who depend on the Great Lakes for their livelihood.”
U.S. Sen. Gary Peters (D-Bloomfield Township) argued an accident could hurt "the millions of people across Michigan and the United States who depend on the Great Lakes for clean, safe drinking water," in a statement to WCMU.
The coalition hopes to include an amendment in the 2025 Fiscal Year National Defense Authorization Act. The House version of the NDAA includes the amendment, the next budget is still being debated in the Senate.
“The United States government cannot make law for the people of Canada,” Kildee said to WCMU. “In the past, we've had success using the power of persuasion, good arguments, good coalition to dissuade the Canadian government in taking this step.”
The Canadian Nuclear Waste Management Organization are choosing between two potential waste storage sites. One in Ignace, Ontario, about 155 miles north of Lake Superior, and another in South Bruce, Ontario, around 25 miles east of Lake Huron.
“A deep geological repository would remove used nuclear fuel from the shores of our lakes, placing it in a rigorously tested multi-barrier system roughly…2,300 feet underground and much further inland than where it is currently stored,” said NWMO spokesperson Craig MacBride in a statement to WCMU.
Kildee said he understands that nuclear fuel must be disposed of but argued “there’s no logic in putting any storage facility like that in any proximity to the Great Lakes or anywhere within the Great Lakes basin.”
“They [Canada] should be able to easily find a location that doesn't create even the slightest risk to the greatest shared natural water source fresh water source on the planet,” Kildee said.
The Flint Democrat has been vocal in opposing the building of a nuclear waste site under the basin for years. He’s retiring at the end of the term, but opposition to the site has become bipartisan. Michigan Republicans John James, Bill Huizenga, Jack Bergman and John Moolenaar signed onto the letter as well.
I will always fight to protect the Great Lakes.https://t.co/vTzEVukYZU
— Rep. John James (@RepJames) November 14, 2024
Still, Kildee wants the amendment added to the defense bill and not left to be sorted out during the next presidential administration. “I’m not confident there will be a budget deal before December 19,” he said. Kildee believes Republican leadership wants to leave big ticket policy issues to be dealt with by the incoming GOP controlled Congress and White House.
Kildee expressed skepticism that a Donald Trump administration would enforce environmental protections in US-Canadian policy.
“I would much prefer that we pass the Defense Authorization Bill that includes this language now, rather than crossing our fingers and hoping that there's been a change of heart within the Trump administration,” Kildee said.
Scientists have determined that there is no risk to the Great Lakes or it's coastal communities, according to MacBride.
“Canada’s plan is consistent with international scientific consensus and is the culmination of more than 30 years of research, development and demonstration of technologies and techniques,” MacBride said.
The site, once approved, will undergo a rigorous regulatory process, according to MacBride.
“Some U.S. lawmakers have promoted misinformed and inaccurate portrayals of this proposed project," MacBride explained.
MacBride said lawmakers have mostly avoided or refused to engage with NWMO's efforts to have dialogue about the plan.
While assurances can be made, Kildee said mistakes can still happen. He cited an incident in New Mexico in which 21 workers were contaminated by airborne waste after a drum was compromised.
“All the same assurances were given. But things happen and there was a release of nuclear material, that was a threat to public health,” Kildee said.
