Ethics Advisor, Office of Audit and Ethics
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission / Government of Canada
Nouhad.Hammad@canada.ca / Tel: 613-947-0915

Re: Director Joe Anton, Office of Audit and Ethics Negligent & Extremely Dangerous Response to Dianne Knight's Complaint

Dear Nouhad Hammad,

I first want to apologize to Dianne Knight for what may seem like a delay in responding and for this negligent response from the CNSC Office of Audit and Ethics. There are over 440 nuclear power plants globally and wireless EMF interaction has to be addressed globally because of the disaster it will be. The domino effect and trade offs using wireless smart meters include building failure and nuclear failure with high speed structural vibration billions of times per second. Microwaving the atmosphere for ease of communication changes the weather formula globally causing climate change. That includes more severe weather and fires conflicting with climate change objectives.

As a Registered Intervener in the FortisBC application to the BC Utilities Commission for wireless smart meters, I cross examined FortisBC experts under oath. My submission to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission includes those BC Government transcripts with those experts under oath. FortisBC expert Dr. Yakov Shkolnikov confirmed the high speed oscillations(vibrations) in my cross examination. The BC Government is the provincial authority having jurisdiction for BC.

Buildings and infrastructure are designed and constructed for their loading. Highly penetrating RF EMFs interacting with structural, fire separations and building materials will cause buildings to be non compliant with Building Code.

We are dealing with other jurisdictions specific to nuclear failure within borders. This isn't a debate or to simply be dismissed by the CNSC. It is embarrassing to read a 2 paragraph response and case closed without one document? Please forward the names, credentials and reporting of the professionals the Office of Audit and Ethics used in this investigation including Joe Anton's as well as Nouhad Hammad's technical qualifications?

Please forward the documents and credentials from the City of Toronto's Building Inspection Department where professional engineers would address the Building Code Rule 4.1.3.6. pertaining to vibration for the CNSC. The hearings for Darlington were about code compliance and the CNSC can not be dismissive of my qualified credentials; I have to be technically disqualified. Here is Joe Anton's entire response to a potential nuclear failure within Canadian borders that can be qualified. PDF file of exchange between Dianne Knight and CNSC (attached), Bennett's response to CNSC's response to Dianne Knight in blue font.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Editor's Note

Original letter sent by Dianne Knight via email is below, rather than as an attached PDF.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Ms. Knight,

Thank you for sharing your concerns regarding the potential of electromagnetic fields causing corrosion to Canada’s power plants and your trust in Professor Curtis Bennett's qualifications. Dianne Knight contacted me specific to my nationally recognized electrical credential provided by the Governments of BC, Canada and Industry Canada. That is for the UTILIZATION of ALL electricity across the country. Do people and industries utilize the electricity Darlington produces? I am one of the CNSC's recognized experts and we don't use language like "trust" speaking of electricity or engineering.

My other credential as a Building Construction Engineering Technologist is all aspects of construction from contracts to completion. That includes a common background with Civil Engineers in building design, construction and energy performance.

The RF EMF mechanism of interaction with Darlington and other buildings or infrastructure is the highly penetrating EMFs interacting with the atoms and molecules of the structural/fire/other components. The mechanism of interaction requires a qualified electrical interpretation first. That mechanism substantiates the RF EMFs have compromised buildings, infrastructure, water dams, nuclear power plants, ecosystems and blanket radiation of jurisdictions.

Please find below excerpts from the 2015 Darlington record of decision which shows that the Commission had already addressed this matter and had taken into consideration all the evidence presented, including the concerns raised by Professor Bennett at the public hearing on the 2015 renewal of the Darlington facility.

In addition, we have consulted with CNSC officers who reviewed your concerns and still support the Commission’s decision. Please provide the names and applicable qualifications of the CNSC officers and all the reporting associated with their review. Please have the CNSC officers submit the reporting of the City of Toronto Building Inspection Department and the signed documents of engineers technically substantiating the CNSC decision to ignore Building Code Rule 4.1.3.6. Ontario's smart meter program superseded and undermined municipal jurisdiction when it isn't applicable. Page 13 of the following link shows oscillations and non compliance with Building Code.  That report was completed for the utility, lumber industry and their insurers. It demonstrates extremely low frequencies EMFs of 60 Hz can create catastrophic problems.

http://thermoguy.com/wp-content/uploads/Response-to-FortisBCs-Daily-Courier-Article-Advances-Meters-are-Safe-and-Smart.pdf

81. Mr. C. Bennett, in his intervention, expressed concerns regarding hazards of potential damage caused by “strong penetrating electromagnetic fields.” The Commission asked for submissions on whether there was cause for concern regarding the building code being inadequate or regarding the Darlington NGS’s compliance with such risk. CNSC staff responded that the plant had been built to satisfy building codes with respect to electromagnetic fields. CNSC staff added that a screening of various aspects of electromagnetic interference and associated potential hazards had been completed, and that, if there were disruptions to the electromagnetic environment of the plant, the main safety systems, which are failsafe on loss of any kind of connectivity, would put the plant into a safe state. The OPG representative confirmed that the existing safety systems would safely shut down the plant, and added that mechanical systems would not be affected by such interference. Non compliance with Building Code isn't a "concern"; it is an electrical reality with RF EMF interaction with buildings including nuclear power plants.

The Commission asked for submissions on whether there was a concern regarding the Building Code being inadequate or regarding Darlington's compliance with such risk? Please forward the scope of the submissions asked for by CNSC, the companies and professionals involved with their credentials.

Darlington may have been compliant with Building Codes when originally constructed. What year was Darlington built and what year were smart meters mass installed in Ontario? The illegal mass installation of smart meters in Ontario undermined all jurisdictions with a very dangerous technology as applied. Neither Darlington nor other exposed buildings will be compliant with Building Codes.

87. On the basis of the information presented, the Commission concludes that the systematic evaluation of the potential hazards and the preparedness for reducing the effects of such hazards is adequate for the operation of the facility and the activities under the proposed licence. The Commission is satisfied that OPG, in its development and modification of the PSA, evaluation of potential hazards and management of safety issues is compliant with regulatory requirements. Given the above, we consider this case closed.

Joe Anton 7/9/2018
Director, Office of Audit and Ethics
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding 87, please outline the systematic evaluation used for potential vibration of Darlington and the professionals used with their credentials. The Commission and OPG do NOT have jurisdictional authority regarding Building Code, City of Toronto does and that authority has to investigate the code violations before any case is closed.

Sustainable Development under the Auditor General Act is simple and straight forward and nuclear failure within borders isn't definable as sustainable. This response from the CNSC's Director Joe Anton is dismissive and negligent but will be represented as presented with the additional questions to be answered from this correspondence. I would advise in my qualified capacity to govern yourselves accordingly because of the liability including criminal.

Ontario's new Premier Rob Ford is not aware the previous Liberal Government undermined their own constituents with the mass illegal installation of 4.8 million meters. Ford hasn't been informed of the 100s of billions in real liabilities and no insurance.  

I look forward to an immediate response; the real damage is measurable by the second and the peer reviewed science supporting that is electricity. The RF EMFs will oscillate(vibrate) billions of times per measurable second 86,400 times in 24 hours.

For all the work Joe Anton, CNSC officers and others did, I didn't receive one call from the CNSC, officers or engineers for clarification. This is a provincial and national emergency that can be qualified without margin of error.

Sincerely,
Professor Curtis Bennett

Chief, International Science Advisory Board for IHF(14,000 members)
Adjunct Professor for Accredited Medical Education For CME Credits
Thermal Radiation Consultant for 38 Years
Interprovincial Journeyman Electrician(Red Seal)
Building Engineering Technologist
www.thermoguy.com
curtis@thermoguy.com
Ph: 604-239-2694

Copyright © 2018 Thermoguy. All rights reserved.