HomeMy WebLinkAboutADMIN-8-92
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
i # r\ r..~
REPORT
MEETING:
DATE:
REPORT :II:
SUBJBCf:
General Purpose and Administration Committee
June 1, 1992
ADMIN 8 .. 92
Proposed Atomic Energy Control Board Indefinite Licensing of
the Port Granby Waste M81188ement Facility
Re~Qmmendations:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT this Report be received.
2. lHAT Council approve the positions set out in my letter to Dr. Paul Conlon dated
May 8, 1992 (Attachment No.2) as the position of the TiQwn.
3. THAT the Atomic Energy Control Board be requested to defer consideration of the
recommendation in BMD 92-101 that Cameco be issued an indefinite operating
licence until the questions raised by the division of ownership of the Port Granby
Waste Management Facility now vested in 164112 Canada Inc. and the operating
responsibility of the licensee Cameco can be resolved satisfactorily following receipt
by the Board of the additional infonnation requested of Cameco concerning the
numbered company and its relatioILShip with Cameco, and any further submissions
thereon of the Town of Newcastle and other interested persons.
~ 2 "
'I'HA T in the interim the Atomic Energy Control Board be requested to extend
Came co's current operating licence for the Port Granby Waste Management Facility
until September 30. 1992.
5. mAT if the Board decides to issue an indefinite operating licence in respect of the
Port Granby Waste Management Facility, at the same time the Board be requested
to establish the meeting each year at which the Board's staff Information Report on
Cameco's Compliance Report will be considered.
6. THAT a copy of this report be Sent forthwith to the Atomic Energy Control Board.
7. THAT all of the above be approved FORTHWITIi.
1.0 R~ort
1.1 Cameco Corporation's ('tCamero") operating licence for the Port Granby Waste
Management Facility (No. AECB-WFOL-338-1) expires on June 30, 1992. This
licence is structured as one for a specific period of time.
1.2 At its meeting on April 2, 1992 the Atomic Energy Control Board considered its
staffs report BMD 92-52 which recommended a radical change in its licensing policy
with respect to the Port Granby Waste Management Facility. A new licence format
wa!\ proposed with the licence period being indefinite in duration. This change
would mean that Cameco would not have to seek renewal of its licence at the end
of each licence period. As a result, the Town and other interested persons would
no longer have the opportunity of responding to Cameco's application for renewal
and if appropriate submitting to the Board that special conditions dealing with the
Port Granby Waste Management Facility should be included in any renewal.
1.3 I appeared at the Board's meeting in Ottawa on April 2, 1992 to present a document
dated March 27, 1992 entitled "Submissions of the Town of Newcastle to the Atomic
. ,
:, .
3- .
dnergy Control Board At Its Meeting On April 2, 1992 Respecting the
Recommended Indefinite Ucensing Period, New Licence Format and the
Recommended Port Granhy Waste Management FaciUty Operating Licence No.
AECB.WFOL-338-3".
1.4 Subsequently, by letter dated April 9_ 1992 from Mr. J.G. McMannus, Secretary of
the Board (see Attachment No. 1)_ I was advised that Board staff would contact me
to discuss three of the Town's Submissions. The Submissions in question dealt with
(1) the lack of specific recommendations as to alternative opportunities that the
Board might make available to the Town and the public to address the performance
of the licensee, Cameco, j n a public forum and on regular occasions; (2) the deletion
from the recommended indefinite licence of the requirement of the current licence
that Cameco notify the Town if events affecting the stability of the Port Granby site
or its safety occur; and (3) the division of ownership of the Port Granby site (which
is vested in 164112 Canada Inc.) from the operational responsibility of the licensee
of the site recommended to be Cameco, a separate corporation from the numbered
company.
1.5 On April 30, 1992 Dennis Hefferon and I met with Dr. Paul Conlon and Ms. K.
Klassen of the Board's staff. Subsequently by letter dated May 8, 1992, (Attachment
No.2) I wrote to Dr. Conlon confirming the position of the Town which was
advanced by Mr. Hefferon and myself at that meeting.
1.6 Attachment No. 3 to this report is the Atomic Energy Control Board's BMD 92.
101 dated May 26, 1992 dealing with the indefinite licensing of the Port Granby
Waste Management Facility. This document will be considered by the Board at its
meeting in" Ottawa on June 11, 1992. HMD 92.101 recommends, contrary to the
Town's Submissions of March 27, 1992, that Cameco be issued an indefinite licence
to operate the Port Granby Waste Management Facility. Although in essence the
format of the indefinite licence now recommended is the same as that which was
attached to HMO 92..52 and commented on in the Town's Submissions to the Board
~-}
,jjted March 27, 1992, one important change has been made as recommended by the
Town. The new draft licence requires Cameco to notify the Town directly upon the
Occurrence of certain events relating to the stability of the site and its safety (see
Interim Public Information Program, File No. 37~S.1..0 contained in Attachment No.
4).
1.7 In section B.4 of BMD 92..101, the Town's position with respect to the issue of tbe
numbered company is discussed. It would appear that the Board's staff and legal
advisors are cognizant of the risk that in the future Cameco may divest itseH of any
interest in the Port Granby Waste Management Facility by disposing of its shares in
the numbered company and transferring its beneficial interest in the Facility under
the trust document that apparently has been executed by the numbered company.
Nevertheless the Board's staff have recommended that an indefinite licence be
granted immediately to Cameco and that the issue of the numbered company and
the division of ownership of the Facility from operational responsibility under the
licence be pursued with Cameco after the fact of the issuance of an indefinite licence
to Cameco. This approach is unsatisfactory since the numbered company is neither
an applicant fOf a licence, nor does the Board have any assurance that the numbered
company and Cameco will cooperate with the Board in amending the licence if that
appears to be appropriate after Cameco provides information which has been
requested to the Board.
1.8 Given the significance of the issues of public importance that are raised by the
division of ownership of the land and operational responsibility, it would be prudent
for the Board to extend Cameco's present licence from its expiry date of June 30,
1992 until, say, September 30, 1992 in order to ensure that a satisfactory long-term
resolution of the questions raised by the numbered company's ownership of the Port
Granby Facility can by resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned. Council should
make this recommendation to the Board.
I, .'
,.; draft operating licence attached to BMD 92.101 would require Cameco to notify
the Board within 24 hours following the making of a change in the relationship
between the licensee and the owner of the land on which the Facility is located. Ex.
post facto notification would not allow the Board or the TOWn to address the issue
of Cameco's continuing responsibility for the Facility in a manner that could be
effective. This provision in the draft licence is simply not an adequate way of
dealing with the issue of the numbered company.
1.10 BMD 92.101 proposes that in place of the opportunity that the Town and other
persons now have of appearing at the Board to make submissions in respect of
Cameco's application to renew its periodic licence from time to time, that Camero
be required to file annually with the Board a "Compliance Report". The HMO
contemplates that an annual Information Report would be submitted to the Board
in which the Board's staff would comment on the material contained in Camero's
Compliance Report. The Town and other interested persons would have the
opportunity to appear before the Board at a meeting to make submissions in respect
of each Information Report.
1.11 However, BMD 92-101 does not contain any recommendation as to a regular
schedule of meetings that the Board might establish to consider Information Reports
dealing with Came co's Compliance Reports. Council should recommend that if the
Board decides to issue an operating licence with an indefinite duration in respect of
the Port Granby Waste Management Facility, the Board should establish the meeting
each year at which it will consider the Information Report from its staff.
All of the above is respectfully submitted,
5ZtlLU{U,-C (fl;'
Lawrence E. Kotseff, .
Chief Administrative Ofqcer
-
1+1
Atomic Energy
Control Board
ATTACHMENT #1 'ill REPORT
ADMIN 8 - 92
Commission de contra Ie
de I'energie atomique
I
~ Jr ,/ iA 1992
TOWN OF fIjH!vCASTlE
Ofy,1!N~IJ-WaR'S OFFICE
Ottawa, Canada
K1 P 5S9
Telephone:
(613) 992-9206
Our file Notre reference
April 9, 1992 37-5-1-0
Mr. Lawrence E. Kotseff
Chief Administrative Officer
The Corporation of the Town of Newcastle
40 Temperance Street
Bowmanville, Ontario
LlC 3A6
Dear Mr. Kotseff:
RE: Submissions of the Town of Newcastle to the
Atomic Energv Control Board. 2 April 1992
This letter is further to your recent appearance before the Board
at its meeting of April 2nd.
Thank you very much for your presentation and for the written
submissions of the Town of Newcastle regarding the renewal of the
Operating Licence for Cameco's Port Granby Waste Management
Facility. Board staff have examined the information provided and
conclude that three topics require further discussion with the
Town. These are:
1. In paragraph 6 of its submissions, the Town notes "... that
BMD 92-52 does not make any specific recommendations as to
alternative opportunities that the Board might make
available to the Town and the public to address the matters
in question in a public forum and on regular occasions".
Board staff suggest that perhaps the needs of the Town and
the public in this regard could be satisfied if the Board
required of its staff an annual report on the facility, to
be openly discussed at a scheduled meeting of the Board.
2. In paragraph 16 of its submissions, the Town notes that "...
the Board modified condition 15 of Cameco's licence to
include notification of the Town of Newcastle should any of
the events outlined in that condition occur". The Town
further notes that it "... has not been able to identify any
provision in the draft licence recommended to be issued to
Cameco by BMD 92-52 which continues this modification of
condition 15 of the existing licence".
Canada
Telex/Telex: 053-3771
Fax/Telecopieur: (613)995-5086
Envoy: AECBREG
~
...
Mr. L.E. Kotseff
- 2 -
37-5-1-0
Paragraph 1(1)(0) of the proposed licence requires the
licensee to implement a program to inform the neighbouring
public about the facility. Board staff suggest that the
details of this requirement could be arrived at through
discussions involving the licensee, the Town and the AECB,
and that the new requirement could include the essence of
condition 15 of the existing licence.
3. In several places in its submissions, the Town notes its
concerns arising from the fact that although Cameco is the
operator of the Port Granby facility, the facility is owned
by another company (which at the present time is a wholly
owned subsidiary of Cameco). The Town thinks that "... the
provisions of conditions 11 and 12 of the recommended
licence are inadequate to deal with the contingency that
ownership of Cameco and its assets may be separated in the
future from ownership of the numbered company and its
assets" (paragraph 22).
Board staff agree with the Town's position and have referred
the matter to the AECB Legal Services Unit. The staff
intend to report back to the Board with a suitable
recommendation and will keep the Town fully informed as this
matter is resolved.
Board staff will contact the Town to initiate discussions on the
above. I trust this is satisfactory to you.
Yours truly,
/ 1, A)\( ~Jj',
u,~J
J.G. McManus
Secretary
cc: R. Tanaka
J. Jarrell
92-369W/lII1lt
ATTACHMENT #2 'ill REPORT
ADMIN 8 - 92
t!jj;c~~!~
May 8 1992
Dr. Paul Conlon
Atomic Energy Control Board
Ottawa, Canada
KlP 5S9
Dear Dr. Conlon:
Re: Submissions of the Town of Newcastle to the Atomic Energy Control Board
at its Meeting on April 2 1992 Respecting the Licensing of the Port
Granby Low Level Radioactive Waste Facility
As promised at the meeting that you attended in Toronto on April 30 1992 with
Ms K. Klassen and Mr. Dennis Hefferon, I am writing to confirm the Town's
position on the matters that were discussed.
1. The Town sees no reason to change from the current licence that is
issued for a term certain which is renewable to a licence that would be
indefinite in duration.
2. The Town does not believe that the replacement of the right which
interested persons and the Town now have to oppose the renewal of a
licence by the Board at a public meeting at which a BMD wou~d be
available to all parties and the Board, would be adequately replaced by
interested persons being given the opportunity to make submissions to
the Board at a public meeting to consider an annual performance report
prepared by the Board's staff using as input a document prepared by
Cameco.
3. Although the language of Condition 15 of Cameco's current licence no
doubt could be improved, any licence or renewal of the licence in
respect of the above facility should include an express condition
requiring notification of the Town by Cameco in the circumstances
referenced in Condition 15. This is a most important protection now
available to the Town which should not be reduced having regard to the
recent history outlined in the Town's written submissions to the Board
at its meeting of April 2 1992.
4. It is essential that the issue of the numbered company be satisfactorily
resolved in the public interest before a renewal of Cameco's present
licence or a new licence to Cameco is issued by the Board. Accordingly,
it is the Town's position that the licence in respect of the above
facility should be issued jointly to Cameco and the numbered company and
that no change in the present relationship, structure, beneficial
ownership, and share ownership in the numbered company, may be made
without the prior approval of the Board.
CORPORATION OF THE -, C/INN OF NEWCJ,~.
40 T E M PER A NeE 5 r R E E T . 80 W MAN " F. (:, f, '" (, . ' . c: A f ' :" f) C::', " ." 'V(,,;. J 4 C!,' c;
(it;
mC'I'CLfO,,,,,pUI
"
I appreciate very much the opportunity of meeting with you and Ms Klassen and
the full and candid exchange of views that took place at that meeting. I
think that it is very important that the positive, close co-operation of Board
staff and the Town continue. I know that Mayor Diane Hamre and Members of the
Town Council share this view.
LEK:nof
Yours truly,
--'.': ~v~~r/:I-//
Lawrence E. i6fseft",A 0-7
Chief Administrat{ve Officer
cc:
Ms K. Klassen
Mr. Dennis Hefferon
. :.SENT- EY:Wastes & ImPacts Div
05-29-9209:10AM
. 4'
..
1+1
Commission de contrOle
de I'energie atomIque
Atomic Energy
Control Soard
Otlawa, Canada
K1 ~ 559
1992-05-26
TO; Board Members
FROM: Directorate of Fuel Cycle
and Materials Regulation
PURPOSE: Decision
SUBJECTS; PART A: Indefinite
Licensing Period and
New Licence Format
PART B: Port Granby
Waste Management Facility
Operating Licence
No. AECB~WFOL-338.3
PART C: Welcome Waste
Management Facility
Operating Licence
No. AECB-WFOL-339-2
ATTACHMENT #3 'ill REPORT
ADMIN 8 - 92
BMD 92 -101
(Ref: BMD 92-52)
YOur file Vo"" r"."mc(J
Our 11/" NOlr. r"'''fence
37-5-4-0
37-5-1-0
AUX :
Commlssaires
DE U.
Direction de la r~glementa-
tion du cycle du eombu~ti-
hle et des matieres
nucleaires
aUT :
Decision
OBJETS
PARTIE A : Periode indeter-
mlnee et nOUVeau format dB
permis d'exploitation
'PARTIE B : Permis d'exploi-
tation d'installation de
gestion de dechetA de Port
Granby, n" AECB*W'FOL-338-3
PARTIE C : Permis d'explol-
tation d'installation de
gastion de d~chets de
Welcome, n" AECB-WFOL-339-2
SUMMARY
In accordance with a decision taken
by the Board during Its meeting of
January 1991, Board staff has
examined the concept of indefinite
licensing periods for waste
management facilities that are in a
storage-with.surveillance mode.
During this examination a new
licence format was developed to be
used when the current licences for
this type of facility expire. Cameco
Corporation has applied for renewal
r... '...
I '"1rI.....rl,,...,
SOMMAIRE
Conform6ment a la decision prise par'
la Commission a sa reunion du mols
de janvier 1991, le personnel de 1a
Commission a etudie 1e concept de
pArlode indeterminee des permis
d'exploitation pour Ie. installa-
tions de gestion de dechets en mode
de stockage avec surveillance.
L'etude a men~ A 18 creation d'un
nouveau format de permis pour ere
genre d'1nstallatlon lorsque lss
permis ac tu.e] s expireront, Camcc
r !;-iexiT e!ex: 053.3771
r-," -r"'~"'''''''~;l~ (P,1~'~~S;.lf.nQ:F,
SENT BY:Wastes & ImPacts Diu
05-29-9209:11AM
of Waste Management Facility
Operating Licences AECB.WFOL-33B-2
and AECB-WFOL-339-1, Port Granby and
Welcome respectively. Th@se licences
are due to expire June 30, 1992.
Board staff is satisfied with the
operation of the facilities and
recommends that the operating
licences be renewed, using the new
licence format, for an indefinite
licensing period.
~-
~
IlmJt
6139962049~
416 623 5717 ~ 3
- 2 .
BHD 92-101
Corporation a soumis une demande de
renouvellement des permis dtexploi-
tation d'installation de gestion de
d~chets de Port Granby, n. AECB-
WFOL-33B-2 et de Welcome, n. AReB-
WFOL-339-l. Cas permis expirent le
30 juin 1992. Le personnel de la
Commission est satisfalt de
l'exploitation de ces installations
et recommande qua ces permit soient
renouveles en suivant le nouveau
format avec periode indeterminee.
------.J
. SENT BY: Wastes & Impacts Diu
05-29-9209:11AM
6139962049~
416 623 5717 ~ 4
BKD 92-101
PAll.T A:
Indefinite Licensing Period and New Licence Format
PART B:
Port Granby Waste Management Facility Operating Licence
No. AECB-~FOL-338.3
PAllT C:
Ye1co~e Waste Management Facility Operating Licence
No. AECB-WFOL-339-2
INTROt>UCTION
At its meeting in January of 1991, the Board decided to examine the concept of
licensing for indefinite periods ~aste management facilities in a storage-
with-surveillance mode.
During Board staff's review of the concept of an indefinite licensing period
it became apparent that the current licence format had some shortcomings that
were best addressed in a new licence format.
On April 2, 1992 the concept of indefinite licensing periods and a new licence
format was presented for initial consideration. Also presented for initial
con$ideration, using the new licence format, were proposed licences for the
Welcome and Port Granby Waste Management Facilities.
This Decision BMD is in three parts. Part A re-e~amines indefinite licensing
periods and the new licence format. Part B and Part C deal with the Port
Granby and Welcome Waste Management Facilities, respectively.
PAR~ A - INDEFINITE LICENSING PERIODS FOR VASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES IN
STORAGE-WITH-SURVEILLANCE MODE AND THE NEW LICENCE FORHAT
A.l INTRODUCTION. INDEFINITE LICENSING
The concept of indefinite licensing periods and a new licence format was
presented for initial consideration at the Board meeting of April 2,
1992 (BMD 92.52 Part A).
The information, presented in BMD 92-52 part A, pertaining to indefinite
licenSing periods remains valid.
A mechanism for keeping the Board informed about facilities that are
issued licences for indefinite periods was identified at the April Board
Meeting as a matter requiring further consideration.
Based on comments received from Legal Services Unit, Boa~d staff, other
regulatory agencies, licensees and the Town of Newcastle, there have
been some minor modifications to the new licence format.
A.2 BOARD kEVIEW PROCESS
As suggested during the Board Meeting in April, Board staff propose to
review, on a regular basis, the status of each facility that is issued a
licence for an indefinite period and present the results of the review
SENT'EY:Wastes & Impacts Diu
05-29-9209:12AM
6139962049~
416 623 5717 ~ 5
BKD 92-101
- 2 .
~o the Board in an Information BMD. It is anticipated that the contents
of the proposed Information BMD would, as a minimum, 'address the
subjects normally considered by the Board in making a licensing
decision.
The timing of the Information BMD will be determined on a case-by-c&se
basis for each facility that is issued a licence for an indefinite
period.
A.3 MODIFICATIONS TO THE NEW LICENCE FoRMAT
Following the April Board Meeting AEcn staff reviewed the comments that
were received from licensees, the Town of Newcastle, and other regula-
tory agencies on the new licence format. These comments and further
discussion with the Legal Services Unit have precipitated some revisions
to the new licence format. However, these modifications to the licence
were undertaken primarily for the sake of clarity and there has not been
any significant change to the tenor of the licence conditions from the
April meeting,
A.4 COST RECOVER1
Licences issued for indefinite periods can be accommodated by the AECB
Cost Recovery Fees Regulations and the cost recovery system currently in
use by the Finance Section. Billing for facility licences would be made
annually on the anniversary of the issuance of the licence.
A.S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND FEDERAL EARP
Board staff is of the opinion that the use of a new licence format and
an indefinite licensing period are undertakings related to the regula-
tory role of the AECB and therefore are each of a tyPe identified by
item Cl of the AECB Exclusion List established pursuant to section ll(a)
of the Environmental Assessment and Review Process GuiQelines Order
(Order), It would then automatically proceed pursuant to section 12(a)
of the Order.
With respect to section 13 of the Order, Board staff is of the opinion
that the use of a licence with an indefinite lioensing period might be
of some concern to the public for some facilities operating in a
storage-with-surveillance mode. The level of concern can only be
addressed on a case-by-case basis as each facility is considered for a
lioence that is issued for an indefinite period.
A.6 DECISION REQUIRlO
Board staff recommends that the Atomic Energy Control Board accept the
staff conclusions that the use of a new licena1ng format and an
indefinite licensing period are each of a type identified by item Cl of
the AECB Exclusion List, and that public concern with respect to the
concept of using a new licence format and an indefinite licensing ped.p(
for certain facilities is not such that public review by a panel i~
desirable .
~ SENT BY: Was t e s & ImP ac t s Diu
05-29-92 09:12~M
6139962049~
416 623 5717 ~ 6
. .
- 3 -
BMD 92-101
PART B - PORT GRANBY VASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY
5.1 INtRODUCTION - PROPOSAL
The current Port Granby Waste Management Facility Operating Licence
No. AECB-WFOL-33B-2, in effect since January 1, 1991, is due to expire
June 3D, 1992. Cameco Corporation has applied for renewal of the above-
mentioned operating licence.
The request for renewal received initial consideration at the Board
meeting of April 2, 1992 (BMD 92-52 Part B).
The information presented in BMD 92-52 Part B pertaining to the facility
remains valid.
There have been some ~odifications to the operating licence proposed for
initial consideration (Appendix IV of BMD 92-52) based on changes to the
new licence format discussed in seotion A.3 of this HMO.
The Town of Newcastle identified several issues of concern with respect
to the licence renewal in submissions to the Board at the April meeting.
AECB staff has examined these issues and has had further discussions
about these concerns with Newcastle.
8.2 BOAan REVIEV
Board staff propose to present to the Board each year an Information BMD
which constitutes an in-depth review of the Port Granby Waste Management
Facility for the previous year. Board staff will notify the Town of
Newcastle of the Board meeting at which the Information BMD will be
presented and discussed. As is now customary, Board staff will also
provide the Town with a copy of the BMD in advance of the meeting.
B.3 CAHECO AND 164112 CANADA INC.
At the April Board meeting the Town of Newcastle again expressed concern
that title to the lands at Port Granby is held by 164112 Canada Inc. and
not by the licensee, Cameco. It had been determined that 164112 Canada
Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Cameco Corporation, which holds all
of eameco's Ontario assets. However, it was not apparent that every
aspect of this arrangement would remain unchanged indefinitely and this
formed the essence of the Town's concern.
After the April meeting, Board staff asked the licensee for further
clarification. Board staff have confirmed that 164112 Canada Inc. is a
wholly owned subsidiary of C~eco Corporation and that the officers of
164112 Canada Inc. hold the same positions as officers within the Cameco
Corporation. 162112 Canada Inc. is a Bare Trustee and holds title to
the lands on which the Port Granby Waste Management Facility 1s located
under the terms of a Declaration of Trust (dated October S, 1988).
Cameco Corporation is declared the beneficial owner and, under the terms
of the trust, can direct the trustee to execute documents with respect
to the lands.
': SENT 'BY: Wastes & ImPacts Diu
05-29-9209:13AM
6139962049-?
416 623 5717 ~ 7
BMD 92-101
.4-
Board staff has requested further information from Cameco regarding the
-legal basis for Cameco's occupation of the Port Granby lands and what
legal rights it has over the control and use of the lands.
Staff is of the opinion that the renewal of the Port Granby licence
should proceed in the interim. Further licensing action can be taken if
it seems appropriate after a review of the requested information.
B.4 CONCERNS OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
At the April Board meeting, the Town of Newcastle made submissions to
the Board with respect to the licensing of the Port Granby ~aste
Management Facility. AECB staff has had further discussions with the
Town of Newcastle and has received a letter outlining the Town's
position (see Appendix I: Letter from L.E. Kotseff to P. Conlon). In
summary. the salient points are:
(a) There is not sufficient reason to change the term of the licence
and the Town therefore remains opposed to Board staff's
recomwendat1on that the Port Granby Waste Management Facility
Operating Licence be issued for an indefinite period. In the
Town's view, the need for the licensee to justify the continued
licensing of his facility has been removed by the proposed change.
(b) Board staff's proposal to present the Board with an Inform.tion
BMO annually on the facility, thereby up-dating the Board and
providing a for~ for submissions by the public, is not considered
by the Town to adequately replace the right of the public to make
a submission opnosin~ a licence renewal.
(c)
The current licence requires Cameco to
upon the occu~rence of certain events.
this provision be continued in the new
attached to this BMD accommodates this
notify the Town directly
The Town was anxious that
licence. The draft licence
reques t .
(d) The Town is of the opinion that the issue of the numbered company
(164112 Canada Inc.) should be satisfactorily resolved in the
public interest before Cameco's licence is renewed. Further,
Newcastle is of the opinion that joint licensing is needed, and
that changes in the present relationship should require prior
approval of the Board.
Staff is of the opinion that, except for item (c), these points do not
warrant changing the licensing recommendation to the Board.
8.5 MODIFICATIONS TO THE DRAFT LICENCE
Draft Operating Licence No. AECB-WFOL-33S.3 has been modified tD reflect
changes made to the new licence format.
B.6 COST aECOVeay
C8lIleco Corporation is currently in good standing with the Atomic EnerK'
Cont~ol Boaro with respect to the payment of licensir.g f~cs for th~ Pc: '
Granby Waste Management Facility.
,',SENT" BY: Wastes 8. ImPacts Diu
05-29-9209:14AM
6139962049~
416 623 5717 ~ 8
BMD 92-101
- 5 .
B.7 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND FEDERAL EARP
Board staff considers that the proposal for the rene~al of the Port
Granby Wa.ste Management Facility Operating Licence ,'No. AECE.WFOL.338-2,
is of a type identified by item D7 of the AECB Exclusion List . .
established pursuant to section 11(.) of the Environmental Assessment
and Review Process Guidelines Order (Order). Consequently the proposal
may automatically proceed pursuant to section 12(a) of the Order.
Also. with respect to section 13 of the Order, Board staff concludes
that public concern about the proposal is not such that public review by
a panel is desirable.
B.8 DECISION REQUIRED
Board staff recommends that the Atomic Energy Control Board accept the
staff conclusion that the proposal to renew the Port Granby Yaste
Management Facility Operating Licence is of a type identified by 1tem D7
of the AECB Exclusion List. and that public ooncern is not such that
public revie~ by a panel is desirable.
Board staff recommends that the Atomic Energy Control Board approve
Operating Licence, No. AECB-WFOL-338-3, for an inaefin1te period. A
draft copy of this licence 1s ~ttached as Appendix II.
PART C - WELCOME VASTE MANAGEMENT FACILIT1
C.1 INTRODUCTION - PROPOSAL
The current Welcome Waste Management Facility Operating Licence
No. AECB-WFOL-339-l, in effect since January l~ 1991. is due to expire
June 30, 1992. Cameco corporation has applied for renewal of the above.
mentioned operating licence.
The request for renewal received initial eonsiderat1on at the Board
meeting of April 2. 1992 (HMO 92-52 Part C).
The information presented in HMO 92-52 Part C pertaining to the faoility
remains valid.
There have been some modifications to the operating licence proposed for
initial consideration (Appendix IV of BMD 92-52) based on changes to the
new licence format discussed in section A.3 of thi$ !MD.
c.2 BOARD REVIEW
Board staff proposes to present to the Board every two years an
Information BMD which constitutes an 1n-depth review of the Welcome
Waste Management Facility for the two-year period.
C.3 CAMECO AND 164112 CANADA INC.
The relationship between Cameco and 164112 Canada Inc.. discussed i
section B.3 of this BMD, is relevant to the Welcome ~':,',5te Ha.nagemen~
Facility.
~ENT. EY:Wastes & ImPacts Diu
05-29-92 09:22AM
A'ITACHMENT #4 TO REPORT
ADMIN 8 - 92
Title:
INTERIM PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM
Prepared By:
The Atomic Energy Control Eoard
Dated:
May 26, 1992
File No,:
37-5-1-0
Cameco shall notify the Corporation of the Town of Newcastle within 24 hours
of the discovery of the follow~ng:
(a) an adverse impact on health, safety or the environment that
is not identified in the documents or parts thereof referred
to in paragraph 1(1)(1) of the Waste Management Facility
Licence;
(b) an advorsG impact on hoalth, safety or the environment that
is greater in magnitude or probability that those identified
in the documents or parts thereof referred to 1n paragraph
1(1)(1) of the Waste Management Facility Licence;
(c) a situation or event that requires the implementation of a
contingency plan that is identified in the documents or
parts thereof roferred to in paragraph l(l)(m) of the Waste
Management Facility Licence;
(d) a situation or event that is not identified in the documents
or parts thereof referred to in paragraphs 1(1)(1) and
l(l)(m) of the Waste Management Facility Licence but could
result in an adverse impact on health, safety or the
environment; and
(e) a change in site condition, in a component, in a system or
in equipment of the facility that could result in sn
increased hazard to health, safety or the environment.
92- ~77W/lI'IIIt