Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-046-11~at"lCOll Leading the way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: May 9, 2011 Resolution #: GP1~ <3s~i r~ By-law #: Report #: PSD-046-11 File #: PLN 33.4 Subject: PORT GRANBY PROJECT -LICENSING HEARING BEFORE THE CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-046-11 be received; 2. That the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission be advised that the Municipality of Clarington prefers that a One Day Hearing be held for the licensing of the Port Granby Project; and 3. THAT a copy of Council's decision be forwarded to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, Natural Resources Canada, the Port Hope Area Initiative Management Office, the Municipality of Port Hope, the South East Clarington Residents Association, and all delegations. Submitted by: Dav' J ome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services JAS/FUdf 28 April 2011 Reviewed by: ~ G ~""'"~'-S `'~-~ `ti+ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALn'Y OF CLARINCaTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905239 REPORT NO.: PSD-046-11 PAGE 2 1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 At its meeting of May 2, 2011, Council considered a letter from David McCauley of Natural Resources Canada to Mayor Foster (Attachment 2). In the letter, Mr. McCauley suggests that Council may wish to advise the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) of its views with respect to which form of licensing process the Municipality would prefer for the Port Granby Project. Council directed Staff to prepare a report on this matter. This report has been prepared in response to Council's direction. 2.0 LICENSING PROCESS FOR THE PORT GRANBY PROJECT 2.1 There are four major steps in the licensing process for the Port Granby Project: . Preparation and approval of an Environmental Assessment (EA): The EA process began in 2002 and was completed in 2009 with the acceptance of the EA Screening Report by Council and federal authorities. . Submission of a license application: The federal government submitted the license application for the Port Granby Project in 2004, and has worked on preparing the various documents needed to obtain the license over the past several years. . Technical Assessment of the License Submission: CNSC staff has been reviewing the licensing documents over the past several years as they are provided by the federal government. Almost all of the necessary documents have now been submitted. . Licensing Decision: This is the last step in the licensing process and is expected to occur in late summer/early fall 2011. 2.2 The CNSC has determined that the proposed Port Granby Long Term Waste Management Facility (L TWMF) is subject to the Nuclear Substances and Radiation Devices Regulations, which apply to most nuclear substances in Canada, and that a Waste Nuclear Substance License (WNSL) is the appropriate licence for the Port Granby Project. It should be noted a WNSL was issued by the CNSC for the Port Hope Project in October 2009. 2.3 A decision to issue a WNSL may be made by the CSNC through a public hearing, by a panel of the Commission, by a panel of one (an abridged hearing), or by a Designated Officer. Each of these options is discussed in detail in Mr. McCauley's letter; a summary is provided below: . Public Hearings These are used for major licensing decisions and are generally held in the vicinity of the project. The hearings are open to the public and consider both written and verbal submissions. The CNSC may choose to hold either a two- day or a one-day hearing. REPORT NO.: PSD-046-11 PAGE 3 During a two-day hearing, the applicant and CNSC staff present the project and respond to questions from the Commission on Day 1. Registered interveners, including the Municipality and members of the public, make their submissions to the Commission on Day 2, which usually occurs 60 days after Day 1. The one-day hearing process is similar to the two-day hearing in most aspects, except that all submissions and interventions are heard by the Commission at a single hearing. . Abridged Hearing Generally only written submissions are accepted for an abridged hearing. This type of hearing is more appropriate for licenses which do not deal with high levels of risk or significant levels of concern. . Decision by a Designated Officer: The decision to issue a license is made by an Officer designated by the CNSC, and does generally not involve a public forum. This process may not provide an appropriate level of review and involvement for the Port Granby Project. 2.4 For the Port Granby Project, submissions prepared by the applicant and CNSC staff are publicly available and would contain the same level of information regardless of whether a full public hearing or an abridged hearing is held. 3.0 COMMENTS 3.1 Staff requested Dave Hardy of Hardy Stevenson and Associates to provide a written opinion as to the type of hearing that would be appropriate for the Port Granby Project (Attachment 3). Mr. Hardy has been the lead consultant on the Municipal Peer Review Team for both the Port Granby Project and the Port Hope Project since 2002. 3.2 Mr. Hardy concluded that a One Day Licensing Hearing would be appropriate for the Port Granby Project. In reaching this decision, he noted that a hearing would allow both the Municipality and the public to share their views in an open forum and that a One-Day Hearing was used effectively for the Port Hope Project in August 2009. He also indicated that there is considerable information available on the Project and, as a result of the extensive review undertaken through the EA and Detailed Design processes, a more extensive hearing process is not required. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS 4.1 The review of technical documents undertaken by the Peer Review Team has been thorough. Nevertheless, it is important to provide local residents with the opportunity to express their opinions directly to the CSNC in an open public forum. REPORT NO.: PSD-046-11 PAGE 4 4.2 A date for the licensing hearing for the Port Granby Project has not yet been set. However, it is expected to take place in either August or September 2011. Appropriate public notice will be provided for both the hearing date and procedures for participating in the hearing. Staff will advise Council at such time as public notice is provided. Staff Contact: Janice Szwarz Attachments: Attachment 1 - Glossary of Terms Attachment 2 - Letter from David McCauley, dated April 7, 2011 Attachment 3 - Letter from Dave Hardy, dated April 13, 2011 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Peter Elder, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission David McCauley, Natural Resources Canada Christine Fahey, Port Hope Area Initiative Management Office Carl Cannon, Municipality of Port Hope Dave Hardy, Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited Gerry Mahoney, South East Clarington Ratepayers Association Attachment 1 To Report PSD-046-11 GLOSSARY OF TERMS CNSC EA L TWMF WNSL Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Environmental Assessment Long Term Waste Management Facility Waste Nuclear Substance Licence Attachment 2 To Report PSD-046-11 Natural Resources Ressources naturelles Canada Canada Ottawa, Canada 1<1 A OE4 April 7,2011 Mayor Adrian Foster Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1 C 3A6 Dear Mayor Foster: Thank you for taking the time to meet with me on March 3, 2011 in regards to the Port I-lope Area Initiative (PH AI) for the cleanup and long-term management of low-level radioactive waste in the Municipality of Port Hope and at the Port Granby facility in Clarington. One of the issues we discussed was the upcoming licensing for the Port Granby Project by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). On behalf of the federal government, the Port Hope Area Initiative Management Office (PHAI MO) as the licensee, will seek a Waste Nuclear Substance License for the project from the CNSC. As I indicated during our discussion, there are a number of options by which this licensing may proceed and you may wish to make your view known to the CNSC as to which form of licensing process the Municipality would prefer. Each process has its own benefits. For your information I have described the different options in an attachment. Ultimately, it is the CNSC that will decide on which process it will use. However, I am sure that the Commission would be interested in knowing the views of the Municipality of Clarington in this regard, prior to tlnalizing its decision. Should you have any questions on the various processes or to make your views known, I would suggest that you contact either Mr. Peter Elder or Mr. Don Howard at the CNSC, both of whom I have copied on this letter. Once again, it was a pleasure meeting with you on March 3. I appreciate the ongoing support of the Clarington Council and staff for the PHAI, and look forward to working with you towards successful implementation ofthe Project. Sincerely, Q~)0,t I,LL 10fYl Dave McCauley ) Director, Uranium and Radioactive Waste Division Electricity Resources Branch cc: Peter Elder (CNSC) Don Howard (CNSC) Janice Szwarz (Clarington) Canada Appendix 1 There are four major steps in the CNSC licensing process: submission of a license application; an environmental assessment (if required); a technical assessment of the submission; and a licensing decision. For the Port Granby Project, a license application was submitted in 2004. The environmental assessment was completed in 2009 with a decision that the Project could proceed to licensing. The technical assessment by CNSC staff and their specialists of the documents that will make up the submission by the PHAI Management Office is nea1'ing completion. The next step will be a licensing decision. A Waste Nuclear Substance License (WNSL) is considered by the CNSC as the appropriate license for the Port Granby Project - the proposed Long-Term Waste Management Facility is not a nuclear facility as defined by the Nuclear Safef;)l and Control Act. A decision to issue a WNSL may be made by the Commission through a public hearing, or by a panel of the Commission; or through a panel of one - normally identified as an abridged hearing, or by a Designated Officer. Fmther information on each process is provided below. Two~day public hearing: A Notice of Hearing is published on the CNSC web site following which the applicant and CNSC staff provide their respective submissions to the Commission at least 30 days prior to the DaYMl hearing. These submissions are made publicly available on the CNSC website. On Day-l the applicant and CNSC staff present the project and respond to questions from the Commission. Interested interveners are invited to register their submissions at least 30 days prior to the Day-2 hearing. For the POlt Granby Project, the Municipality of Clarington would be expected to be a positive intervener. On Day-2, usually 60 days after Day-l, registered interveners have an opportunity to make their views known and respond to questions from the Commission. The applicant and CNSC staff also may be asked to respond to further questions from the Commission. Webcasting and transcripts are made available for public hearings and following the deliberation of the Commission, usually within 6 weeks of the Day-2 hearing, the decision and reasons for decision are also made public. One~day public hearing: The onewday hearing process is similar to the two-day hearing in most aspects. The difference is that all submissions and interventions are heard by the Commission at a single hearing. The submissions by the applicant and CNSC staff are to be provided at least 60 days in advance. The interveners have up to 30 days to review these submissions before providing their interventions 30 days in advance of the hearing. As for the two-day hearings, webcasting and transcripts are made available and within six weeks, following the deliberation of the Commission, the decision and reasons for decision are also made public. ~ 2 ~ Abridged Hearing: For an Abridged Hearing, a Notice of Hearing is published on the CNSC website prior to the hearing. Submissions are provided in advance to the Commission by CNSC staff and made publicly available on the CNSC website. Should interventions be considered, typically written interventions, interveners would be invited to register, after having had an opportunity to review the submissions. Decision by Designated Officer: Where applicable, a CNSC Designated Officer may also make a decision to issue a license to an applicant. Licenses related to the use of radioactive sources or handling and storage of radioactive material are generally approved through a Designated Officer. Such procedures are generally not carried out in a public forum but the decision and resulting license are made public. Considerations: Generally public hearings are used for major licensing decisions, They allow for considerable public debate and may require up to 6 months to complete. All written and verbal interventions are considered and while they are expected to relate to the project under review, broader views and opinions may also be expressed. Hearings are open to the public, webcast live, and transcripts are made available 011 the CNSC website. The location of public hearings is at the discretion of the Commission but for major licensing decisions, they are generally in the vicinity ofthe project. An abridged hearing may be more appropriate for licenses which do not deal with high levels of risk or significant public concern. The abridged hearing allows for more flexibility in terms of notification requirements, time to complete the process, and manner and degree ofpal'ticipation. A decision by a Designated Officer, while possible, may not provide the level of review and involvement deemed appropriate for the Port Granby Project. For the Port Granby Project, submissions prepared by the applicant and CNSC staff and made publicly available would contain the same level of information regardless of whether a full public hearing or abridged hearing were followed. Attachment 3 To Report PSD-046-11 HARDY STEVENSON AND ASSOCIATES Ms. Janice Szwarz, Senior Planner - Community Planning Branch Municipality of Clarington 40 Temprance Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3A6 12 April, 2011 CNSC Licensing Option Recommendation - Port Granbv Proiect Dear Janice, Thank you for forwarding the April 7, 2011 letter to Mayor Adrian Foster from Mr. Dave McCauley wherein Mr. McCauley requests input from the Municipality of Clarington on the form of licensing process the Municipality would prefer. We are pleased to respond to your request for our comment on various licensing options and which option might be appropriate for the Municipality of Clarington as it pertains to the Port Granby Project. Mr. McCauley states that a Waste Nuclear Substance License ("WNSL") is considered by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission ("CNSC") as the appropriate license for the Port Granby Project. There are four options for assessing whether the WNSL license should be issued: 1) decision by the Commission through a Public Hearing; 2) decision by a Panel of the Commission (this may take the form of a One-Day or Two Day hearing); 3) decision through a Panel of one - identified as an Abridged Hearing; 4) decision by a Designated Officer. Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited have reviewed the licensing options and we feel that the following factors are important to the determination of which option is preferred. First, the Municipality of Clarington has an opportunity to share its views with the Commission regardless of what option is selected. However, we feel that it will be important for the Municipality to share its views openly. Second, to what extent will the Municipality, local residents and others have to hear the information submitted by the Port Hope Area Initiative ("PHAI") as proponent and CNSC staff? Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited 364 Davenport Road, Toronto, Ontario, M5R 1K6 Telephone: (416) 944-8444 Fax: (416) 944-0900 11\ hsa@hardystevenson.com www.hardystevenson.com W 2 Third, to what extent will local residents have an opportunity to share their views? And, what option will be less demanding on their time and effort in preparing for and attending the Hearing? Fourth, are there uncertainties pertaining to the Port Granby Project that would necessitate a more extensive Hearing? Finally, what form of Hearing was used for the Port Hope Project, was this option effective and would it be an appropriate option for the Municipality of Clarington? Following our examination of the options, Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited has reached the conclusion that the One Day Hearing Option would be appropriate for the following reasons. Through the Environmental Assessment and Detailed Design process completed by the PHAI and its consultants, there is considerable information available on the Port Granby Project. The Municipality's staff and Peer ReviewTeam have asked and received responses to over a thousand questions about the facility. Thus, the level of uncertainty is minimal and a more extensive Hearing process is not required. The One Day Hearing conducted on August 26,2009 was used effectively for the Port Hope Project. All of the evidence from the applicant, CNSC staff and intervenors was heard and there was ample time for the review of submissions. The One Day Hearing would be expected to be held at a local venue and would be convenient for Municipality of Clarington submissions and those of local residents. Further, it would have the benefit of being open and transparent compared to Hearing Options where deliberation would not be carried out in a public forum. Thank you for the opportunity to provide our opinion on the form of licensing process. We would be pleased to elaborate on any point. Sincerely, Mr. Dave Hardy, R.P.P. Director, Peer Review Team President Hardy Stevenson and Associates Limited