HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-035-13 04aington REPORT
PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Meeting: COUNCIL
Date: May 13, 2013 Resolution#: - - By-law#:
Report#: PSD-035-13 File#: PLN 29.8
Subject: INDUSTRIAL WIND TURBINES
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PSD-035-13 be received;
2. THAT Council endorse the letter Mayor Foster (Attachment 3) sent to the Premier,
Minister of Environment; Minister of Energy and Minister of Infrastructure; and
3. THAT any interested parties listed in Report PSD-035-13 be notified of Council's
decision.
Submitted by: Reviewed by: � -e`Q
David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Franklin Wu
Director, Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer
FL:DJC:SN
2 May 2013
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379
� � I
1.1 Council received Report PSD- 078 -10 (Attachment 1) in June, 2010. This Report
outlines the application and study requirements for projects proceeding under the Green
Energy Act.
1.2 Since the passing of the Green Energy Act, 2009, there has been significant opposition
to wind turbines, in particular to the wind facilities over 50kW, also commonly called
commercial wind farms and /or industrial wind turbine installations. The Premier in her
recent throne speech acknowledged that there are issues with implementation of the
Green Energy Act, that changes need to be made and that the lack of involvement by
local municipalities is part of what will be examined. Specifically, the phrase, "but only if
we have willing hosts ", has promoted some municipalities to declare themselves as
"unwilling hosts" to industrial wind turbines.
1.3 Council at their meeting of April 28th, 2013 received and referred the delegation
(Attachment 2) of Ms. Heather Rutherford of Clarington Wind Concerns to staff for a
report.
1.4 , The purpose of this report is to address the implications for Clarington of what an
unwilling host to industrial wind turbines resolution would be.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 The recent throne speech stated: "Your government intends to work with municipalities
on other issues, too. Because communities must be involved and connected to one
another. They must have a voice in their future and a say in their integrated, regional
development. So that local populations are involved from the beginning if there is going
to be a gas plant or a casino or a wind plant or a quarry in their hometown. Because
our economy can benefit from these things, but only if we have willing hosts."
2.2 A representative of the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office (REFO) has indicated that
the provincial government is looking at options to involve municipalities in the process,
and currently there are discussions between ministries such as Municipal Affairs and
Housing, Rural Affairs and Energy.
2.3 In 2012 the Provincial government took steps as a result of the Feed -in -Tariff (F(T)
program 2 -Year Review to be more inclusive. Under FIT 2 (the updated FIT program) a
new priority points system was introduced to priorize projects with demonstrated
municipal support, local community and Aboriginal participation. Staff Report
PSD- 040 -12 provided an overview of the rule changes.
2.4 The two large FIT contracts for wind farms in Clarington were under the original FIT
offerings by Ontario Power Authority to developers /proponents in April 2009. There
have been two additional offerings of large FIT contracts (Feb and July, 2011) but
neither of these offerings included any offers for wind farm developers in Clarington.
I
Maw
2.5 The two Ontario Power Authority offered FIT contracts for industrial wind turbines in
Clarington, are Clarington Wind Farm by Leader Resources and Ganaraska Wind Farm
by ZEP - Sprott Power Corp.
2.6 For the past few years the proponents for these two projects have been proceeding
through the process outlined under the Renewable Energy Approval process (see
Attachment 3). Each of the proponents is now at Step Eleven. They have submitted
their REA applications and all of the accompanying documentation to MOE and are
waiting to hear if the documentation is complete. The status of each is posted on the
MOE website as "REA Application Status: Received and screening for completeness"
2.7 Council has passed ten (10) resolutions regarding wind farms since January 2010.
These resolutions: request the Provincial government to place moratoriums on wind
development until the health concerns of people living in proximity to— industrial wind
turbines and a determination of appropriate setbacks could be fully understood and
addressed; highlight the inconsistency of locating wind farms on the Oak Ridges
Moraine, an environmental sensitive geological landform protected by provincial
legislation; and address the need for compatibility studies with the Port Granby Project.
These resolutions have been provided to the Ministry of Environment along with the
standard Municipal Comment form and a letter from Staff addressing technical concerns
with the projects.
2.8 The Mayor has provided a letter (Attachment 4) to the Premier and Ministers of
Environment, Energy and Infrastructure reinforcing Clarington's position that it is relying
on the Ministry of Environment through its review to address the site specific issues with
the two proposed wind farms in Clarington. The Mayor's letter has also been provided
to the MOE Environmental Approvals Branch, who are responsible for reviewing the
applications.
2.9 The REFO representative has verbally advised Staff that MOE will have to explain their
decision when they make one as to how concerns raised by stakeholders have been.
addressed by the proponents.
2.10 There is no confirmed timeline for a Large FIT application window for future contract
offerings for wind farms. At this time, the REFO representative cannot answer how an
"unwilling host" resolution would apply to future contract offerings.
3.0 COMMENTS
3.1 The Municipality's Strategic Plan 2011 -2014 includes "promoting economic
development" as a strategic priority and specific objectives with regard to business and
industrial park development, one of which is the Energy Park. The Strategic Plan also
identified the "promotion of green initiatives" as a strategic priority including the creation
of a culture of "going green ". In addition, the Plan identified the relationship with the
Clarington Board of Trade as the economic development provider.
3.2 The passing of an all encompassing "unwilling host" resolution for industrial wind turbine
installations would not be in keeping with the strategic priorities and objectives as
outlined in the Strategic Plan. Further it could hinder the economic development work
undertaken by the Clarington Board of Trade on behalf of the Municipality as outlined in
their letter dated May 2, 2013 (Attachment 5).
3.3 Council's current position requesting a moratorium on industrial wind turbines until
health concerns are more fully researched would seem to be consistent with the primary
concern advanced by the Clarington Wind Concerns delegation at the April 28, 2013
Council Meeting.
3.4 Leader Resources and ZEP- Sprott Power Corporation received contract offerings from
Ontario Power Authority under the initial FIT program. Staff are not familiar with the
details of the contract and its conditions. It may be that cancellation of the contract by
either party for reasons outside those stipulated in the contract would be subject to
recourse through the court system.
3.5 The REFO office has already begun to address concerns for municipal involvement,
local community and aboriginal participation during the 2012 review and new FIT 2
program rules. The REFO office did not offer an opinion on what further changes might
result from the inter - Ministry consultation that is currently occurring. Staff note that the
Premier's comments were made in the context of cooperation with municipalities on a
variety of issues.
4. CONCURRENCE
N/A
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 The Mayor's letter to the Premier, with copies to the Ministers of Environment, Energy
and Infrastructure clearly outlines the issues that Clarington has with the two proposed
wind farms. The proponents as part of the MOE review will need to demonstrate that
they have addressed these issues. MOE is also required, in their decisions on the
applications, to include the rationale for their decisions.
5.2 It is recommended that Council endorse the Mayor's letter to Premier Wynne. This
course of action has the benefit of reaffirming Council's concerns with regard to the
potential health effects, set backs and the siting issues identified in relationship to the
two wind farm applications that have been offered FIT contracts while not potentially
hindering economic development initiatives that would be beneficial to the Municipality.
CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN
The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following
priorities of the Strategic Plan:
x Promoting economic development
Maintaining financial stability
Connecting Clarington
x Promoting green initiatives
Investing in infrastructure
Showcasing our community
Not in conformity with Strategic Plan
Staff Contact: Faye Langmaid
Attachments:
Attachment 1 — PSD- 078 -10
Attachment 2 — Heather Rutherford Delegation
Attachment 3 — Renewable Energy Approval Process
Attachment 4 - Mayor's letter to Premier Wynne and
Attachment 5 — Clarington Board of Trade letter
Interested parties
Ms. Heather Rutherford, Clarington Wind Concerns
Ed Morton
C & K Lowerey
Minister Jim Bradley
Attachment 1
To Report PSD- 035 -13
Date: June 21; 2010 Resolution #: By -law #: N/A
Report #: PSD - 078 -10 File #: PLN 29.10
Subject: GREEN ENERGY ACT
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following;
1. THAT Report PSD-078 -10 be received; and
2. THAT any interested parties listed in Report PSD -078 -10 be notified of Council's
decision.
t
Submitted by: .4Pe�_ Reviewed by:
/ y Lan ma' FCSLA, MCIP,
cti g Directo of Planning Services
FL/av
June 10, 2010
ranklin Wu,
Chief Administrative Officer
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO LiC 3A6 T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830
REPORT NO.: PSD-078-10 PAGE 2
1.0 PURPOSE:
11 At the May 31St meeting, Council requested:
"That Municipal Staff provide a detailed report regarding wind turbine installations
in the Municipality of Clarington, including the implications of the Green Energy
Act upon Clarington residents."
1.2 While Council was specific in requesting information on wind turbine installations, the
Green Energy Act involves other forms of green power generation and the information
regarding the background and process are general to all the forms of green energy
covered by the Act. As such the report includes additional information beyond potential
wind turbine installations in Clarington.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 Ontario's Green Energy Act (G EA), and related amendments to other legislation,
received Royal Assent on May 14, 2009. Regulations and other tools to implement the
legislation- were introduced through the month of September, 2009.
2.2 A Renewable Energy Facilitation Office (REFO) has been created within the Ministry of
Energy and Infrastructure. The objectives of the Office are:
a) to facilitate the development of renewable energy projects;
b) to assist proponents with the approval processes and procedures,
including public consultation, and
c) to assist proponents of renewable energy projects with other potential
requirements imposed by the Government of Canada.
2.3 The new Renewable Energy Approval (REA) process will support the Green Energy
initiative and the Ontario Government's Climate Change Action Plan that aims to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, increase renewable energy generation and energy
conservation and create thousands of green jobs in Ontario. Information on
"Frequently Asked Questions" is available from the REFO office or on the website
(Attachment 1).
2.4 The REA integrates provincial review of the environmental issues and concerns that
were previously addressed through the local land use planning process (e.g. zoning or
site planning), the environmental assessment process and the environmental approvals
process (e.g. Certificates of Approval, Permits to Take Water). Municipalities no longer
have an approval role for Green Energy projects, rather they have an information
provision and commenting role.
• r 1 +
PAGE 3
3.1 Regardless of the renewable energy source (wind, solar, biogas and biomass,
waterpower,'geothermal) used.to generate electricity most applications for an REA will
require a core set of reports:
® a project description report;
a construction plan report;
a design and operations report;
o a decommissioning plan report; and
a consultation plan report.
3.2 Additional documents will be required depending on the project location, equipment or
technology being used to generate electricity. Requirements for technical reports are
identified for each type of renewable energy generation facility. Drafts of these
documents, among others, must be made available to the public by the applicant at least
60 days prior to the date of their final public consultation meeting, which must occur prior
to submission of an application for an REA.
3.3 Under the REA Regulation, the different types of renewable energy generation facilities
are categorized by class. Each class of project has unique requirements based on their
nameplate capacity. Nameplate capacity is the maximum rated output of a generator
under specific conditions designated by the manufacturer. Generator nameplate capacity
is usually indicated in units of kilovolt- amperes (M) and in kilowatts (kW) on a
nameplate physically attached to the energy generator.
Win4fACilitie
Generating less than
NO
These turbines can generate enough
or equal to 3 kW of
energy to power your dishwasher and
power.
fridge.
Generating more
YES. However, the
These facilities are sometimes called
than 3 kW but less
requirements are scaled
"small wind" and could support from 2 to
than 50 W.
down to reflect the low
38 households, or supplement a small
impact nature of the
commercial operation.
facility.
Generating 50 kW
YES
These facilities could supplement larger
and over.
scale industrial needs or more
households than "small wind" facilities.
Solar Energy Facilities.
Any size roof -top or
NO. However most
Residential uses such as domestic hot
wall- mounted.
facilities mounted on
water, pools; Commercial use to feed
buildings, may require a
back into the grid.
municipal building permit.
Ground mounted
NO
These are typically found at hardware
generating less than
and outdoor stores,
orequal to 10 W.
REPORT NO,: PSD- 078 -10
PAG E 4
IEWABtrE
REQUIRE RA::
" GEIRAL INFORMA710NINOTIS .
S60 R(7
105 dBA
106-107'
dBA
Ground mounted YES The average power requirement of 5 to
generating over 10 10 mid -sized homes is 10 kW.
kW.
Note: The Regulation does not contain provisions for ground mounted solar energy facilities
based on soil classification (e.g, prime agricultural land). However, a directive issued by the
Minister of Energy and Infrastructure to the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) for the Feed -in
Tariff program instructs the OPA not to enter into contracts for ground - mounted solar
photovoltaic facilities located on certain classes of prime agricultural lands and specialty crop
lands.
Bio-Energy Facilities
Thermal treatment,
YES. The requirements
Other permits may be required for off -site
anaerobic
that must be met vary
inputs (i.e. Restaurant - food waste).
digestion, biofuel
depending on the project
_
combustion (e.g.
location (e,g, on a farm),
biodiesel), and
feedstock material and size
biogas:
(e.g: greater or less than
500 kW).
Water Power Facilities
Wave energy, run
NO. These projects
Hydroelectric dams follow an entirely
of the river.
continue to require relevant
different process.
environmental assessment
and approvals processes
under the Ministries of the
Environment and Natural
Resources.
4.0 REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIC TO WIND TURBINES
4.1 The GEA sets out a number of classes for wind energy depending on the scale.of the
development. Much of the municipal and public concerns have been with respect to
large scale turbines, rather than for small or micro sized turbines. The setbacks under
the GEA for large scale wind turbines are shown in Figure 1 below:
Number of
Wind Turbines
Setback in metres (m) from closest Point of Reception
corresponding to wind turbine Sound Power Levels in decibels
(dBA).
102 dBA
103-104
dBA
105 dBA
106-107'
dBA
>107 dBA
1 - 5 turbines
550 m
600 m
850 m
950 m
Noise study
6 - 10 turbines
650 m
700 m
1000 m
1200 m
required
11 - 25 turbines
750 m
850 m
1250 m
1 1500 m
26 + turbines
Noise study required
r •• � •
PAGE 5
4.2 Ontario Regulation 359/09 sets out the information requirements and processing
requirements surrounding Renewable Energy Approvals for projects such as the large
scale wind developments. Although noise and environmental studies can be required
and mandatory minimum setbacks have been imposed; concern remains that the
standards do not adequately address the human health concerns associated with wind
farms. Separate requirements are also outlined for offshore wind projects, which are
categorized as Class 5 Wind Facilities. An. Off -shore Wind Facility Report is required for
any Class 5 Wind Facility, as per O. Reg. 359/09.
5.0 MANDATORY CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS
5.1 A component of the REA process is consultation with the general public, aboriginal
groups and local municipality(s). A proponent must document what was learned through
public consultation including how the project was changed in light of this information.
5.2 Public Consultation includes contact with landowners within 120 metres, a notice in the
local newspaper and at least two public meetings. All of the studies and reports
required as part of the REA process must be made available for public review prior to
the last public meeting. Some small scale wind projects (generating less than 50 kW)
are not subject to the public meetings or municipal consultation requirements of the
Regulation.
5.3 Consultation with the municipality (or municipalities) is required for most renewable
.energy projects and must begin at least 90 days prior to the date of the final public
consultation meeting. This must also.be before the applicant submits an REA
application. The Ministry of the Environment provides applicants with a form to
document municipal feedback on matters related to municipal services and local
infrastructure. The prescribed consultation form has two pages of questions for the
Municipality to respond to.
5.4 The questions seek information regarding:
• Roads (access, Traffic Management Plans);
• Service Connections (location of service connections other than roads);
• Facility Other (landscape design, emergency procedures, easements); and
• Project Construction (site rehabilitation, locations of buried and above ground
utilities, building code issues, natural and cultural heritage features).
5.5 The Municipality introduced a new fee for 2010 regarding the provision of comments
and information for renewable energy projects.
5.6 Through the REA process, a proponent must consult, not seek approval from the
Municipality. The only exception to this is when a renewable energy project requires the
removal and use of aggregate materials. In this case, municipal approvals are sought
for the aggregate license, not the REA.
REPORT O i PAGE if
6.1 On April 8, 2010 Ontario Power Authority released the listing of contracts they have
offered. The feed -in -tariff (FIT) administered by Ontario Power Authority is a
straightforward way to contract for renewable energy generation. It provides
standardized program rules, prices and contracts. Feed -in tariffs refer to the specific
prices paid to renewable energy suppliers for the. electricity produced by the generating
facility. The pricing structure provides a reasonable return on investment and is
differentiated by project size and technology type. The FIT Program is for projects over
10 kilowatts; and the microFIT Program is for projects 10 kilowatts or less.
6.2 Three contracts were offered FIT contracts, that affect Clarington. ZEP Windfarm
Ganaraska in the Orono area, Clarington Windfarm by Leader Energy and Hybridyne
Solarfarm. The Hybridyne Solarfarm proceeded with a rezoning application in advance
of the Green Energy Act being introduced. As such, the Municipality played a more
significant role and have more knowledge of this project.
7.0 WIND TURBINE PROPOSALS iN CLARINGTON.
7.1 The Windfarms that have been proposed in Clarington have posted to their websites the
area that they are studying (Attachment 2). The two windfarm projects have not to date
consulted with the Municipality although we have been notified of their proposals. The
ZEP Windfarm proponents held a public meeting in July 2009 in Orono.
7.2 The Clarington Wind Farm proposed by Leader Energy is for a 10 MegaWatt FIT
contract which would be between 3 -5 turbines. While the study area identified is large,
the specific location of the turbines has not been provided to the Municipality.
7.3 The Ganaraska Wind Farm proposed by ZEP is for a 20 MegaWatt FIT contract which
is 6 -10 turbines. Again, the study area identified is large and the specific sites have not
been provided to the Municipality, to date.
7.4 It is our understanding, the specific locations will not be made public until the 90 day
REA consultation period is initiated, by the proponents.
8.0 HEALTH ISSUES RELATED TO WIND TURBINES
8.1 , Public and Municipal Concerns with Respect to Renewable Energy Development
Although there are a range of public concerns from aesthetic to environmental, one of
the most prominent local concerns has been the impact of large scale wind turbines on.
human health. In areas of Bruce and Dufferin Counties, where wind farms are already
constructed, there have been a number of cases of `wind turbine syndrome', which has
symptoms including:
Loss of sleep or sleep disturbance,
Headaches /migraines,
REPORT NO.: PSD- 078 -10 PAGE 7
• Inner ear ringing or Tinnitus,
• Dizziness,
• Vertigo,
• Blurred vision;
• Heart palpitations,
• High blood pressure,
• Psychological stress, or
• Gastrointestinal problems.
Although the GEA includes setbacks of a minimum of 550 metres to sensitive receptors,
members of the public concede that this distance is insufficient to combat known and
unknown human health impacts.
8.2 In the past two years there have been three notable studies by medical professionals
which has concluded that there are no known adverse health impacts from wind
turbines, where the turbines have been properly sited:
1. "Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects An Expert Panel Review" prepared for
AWEA and CANWEA.
2. "The Health Impact of Wind Turbines: A Review of the Current White, Grey, and
Published Literature" prepared by Chatham -Kent Public Health Unit.
3. "The' Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines" prepared by the Chief Medical
Officer of Health recently released by the Association of Municipalities of Ontario
(Attachments 3 and 4).
9.0 CONCLUSIONS
91 The Green Energy Act and the related regulations, exclude municipalities (both upper
and lower tier) from the approval process. Council could support or oppose a project by
notifying the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure in writing. Council can also express
to the proponent their support or opposition to a project.
9.2 The municipal role is to provide the information required on the Consultation Form when
requested. The Consultation Form is provided by the proponent as part of the REA
process. The Municipality has set a $5,000 fee to prepare this information. To date,
other than Hybridyne Solarfarm, no requests for information have been submitted to the
Municipality.
9.3 The REA process is administered by the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office. The
Municipality will continue to provide as much information to the public and assist the
REA process as much as possible.
Staff Contact: Faye Langmaid
Attachments;
Attachment 1 Frequently Asked Questions — Renewable Energy Approval:
http: /Iwww.mei,gov.on,ca /en/ energy /renewable /index.php ?page =refo— office
Attachment 2 — Windfarm Study Areas in Clarington
Attachment 3 — AMO Policy Update — Wind Turbines
Attachment 4 — Synopsis:
http: / /wvvw.health.gov.on,ca/en /public /publications/ ministry_ reports /wind- turbinetwind_ turbine.
pdf
Attachment 1
To Report PSD- 078 -10
Frequently Asked Questions -- Renewable Energy Approval
Why does the ministry believe a setback of 550 metres for wind turbines is a safe
distance?
• The minimum setback for wind projects of 550 metres will ensure noise levels do not
exceed 40 decibels at buildings used by people, such as a residence. Forty decibels
is approximately the noise level experienced in a quiet office or library.
• The setbacks rise with the number of turbines and the sound level rating of selected
turbines. For example, a turbine with a sound power level of 106 decibels has to
meet a setback of 950 metres from the nearest receptor.
• We're confident that the science around 550 meters is sound, We used the most
conservative modelling available nationally and internationally, and our experiences
in Ontario and that of other jurisdictions supports this.
• Going forward, the Ministry of the Environment will develop the science to monitor
and measure low frequency noise, as currently there are no established and
accepted protocols, in the future, wind farm operators may be required, through
conditions of the Renewable Energy Approval, to monitor and address perceptible
low frequency noise once acceptable protocols for doing so have been established.
Will renewable energy development be permitted in wetlands and other
ecologically sensitive areas?
• Protecting significant natural features such as wetlands and the hydrologic functions
they support are important to this government.
• The REA establishes clear rules to continue to protect significant natural feature§
and sensitive water bodies so that renewable energy project applicants know they
must protect these important features and the hydrologic functions they support.
• Renewable energy facilities will not be permitted in provincially significant wetlands in
Southern Ontario or coastal wetlands.
• In some instances a renewable energy facility may be permitted within 120 metres of
provincially significant wetlands, but only if an environmental impact study
demonstrates the ability to mitigate negative effects and is confirmed by the MNR.
How will species at risk, birds and bats be protected?
• The ministry is committed to ensuring that renewable energy projects are protective
of the natural environment.
• Existing rules under MNR's Endangered Species Act will remain. Applicants must
obtain a permit under the Endangered Species Act from MNR should their project
have the potential to negatively affect a species or habitat protected under the Act.
• As part of the REA for most project types, a study of the potential impacts on wildlife
habitat must be completed to the satisfaction of the MNR.
• The proposed process integrates existing study requirements with provincial
standards to ensure the natural environment is protected.
How will the environment be protected now that the Environmental Assessment
Act powers have been removed?
• The new process integrates existing previous study requirements with provincial
standards to ensure the natural environment is protected,
• The Renewable Energy Approval process ensures transparent decision making and
provides opportunity for public participation in the process,
• The new process replaces what was largely a proponent driven environmental
assessment framework and replaces it with clear provincial rules and requirements.
How will the new approval process be any faster than the existing process?
The ministry has introduced a streamlined approvals process and a service
guarantee that bring with them greater certainty for developers who follow the rules.
How will I be consulted if there's a project in my community?
• The renewable energy approval process ensures transparent decision making and
provides opportunity for public participation in the process.
• Applicants must provide written notice to all adjacent land owners, as well as public
notice within a 120 metre radius of the proposed renewable energy generation
facility at a preliminary stage of the project planning, and post at least two
consecutive notices in a local newspaper.
• For most projects, applicants must also consult with local municipalities on specific
matters related to municipal land, infrastructure, services and information and will be
required to post a notice in a local newspaper of general circulation within the
municipality where the project is located.
• Once ready to submit the application for Ministry of the Environment review, the
applicant will be required to hold at least two community consultation meeting to
.discuss the project and its potential local impact.
• Any required studies must be made available for public review 60 days prior to the
date of the second or final community consultation meeting,
• Municipal input is an important part of the REA process, and through a transparent
decision making process local concerns can be addressed in a timely manner,
How will Aboriginal communities be consulted and the impacts on their rights
considered as part of the approval?
• Aboriginal consultation will be mandatory for the applicant as part of the regulatory
requirements for a Renewable Energy Approval.
• While the Crown will delegate certain procedural aspects of consultation to an
applicant, the duty to consult rests with the Crown. The Crown will work to ensure
that the duty to consult is fulfilled prior to a project being eligible for approval.
• During this process, aboriginal communities will have an opportunity to raise issues
and concerns with the applicant and the ministry.
• If the applicant has not already appropriately considered impacts on Aboriginal and
treaty rights, the Director can direct them to go back and consult before accepting
their application for review.
• The Director will also consider the impacts of a project on aboriginal and treaty rights
when setting conditions in the renewable energy approval.
What role will municipalities have in siting wind turbine projects?
• The ministry recognizes the importance of local decision making with respect to
specific matters related to municipal land, services and information.
• A proponent of a'renewable energy project will have to consult with local
municipalities prior to applying for a Renewable Energy Approval.
• The ministry has developed a template for this consultation, which the proponent will
use to relay project specific matters raised by the municipality. This document is to
be submitted to the ministry as part of the application.
• The renewable energy approval process would ensure transparency of decision
making and provide opportunity for municipal engagement in the process.
How do I know if my project needs approval?
• Wind power facility projects over three kW will require a Renewable Energy
Approval (REA). The 'requirements that must be met to obtain a REA vary depending
on the project's output (mW). For wind facilities generating between three and 50
M, known as small wind projects, requirements are simplified and there are no
mandatory setbacks. Facilities mounted on buildings may require building permits.
For further information, contact the local building permit department.
• Solar power facility projects that are roof -top or wall - mounted solar facilities are
exempt from a Renewable Energy Approval. Any ground - mounted solar facility
capable of producing over 10 kW will require a REA. Ten kW is the average energy
requirements of five to 10 households and uses a surface area of about 55 square
metres.
• Bio- energy power facility projects must use biogas or biomass source material as
defined under the Electricity Act. 6io- energy projects that are located on a farm and
are already subject to an approved Nutrient Management Strategy under the Nutrient
Management Act are exempt from obtaining a Renewable Energy Approval.
• Water power facility projects do not require a Renewable Energy Approval. The
Water Power Class Environmental Assessment dated October 2008 is the source
document for understanding the rules governing the development of water power
projects. Water power projects must also obtain the existing permits and approvals
from the Ministry of the Environment and Ministry of Natural Resources.
• For more information on renewable energy generation projects, and what is required
for approvals, please contact the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office at
REFO a(7.ontario.ca or 1- 877- 440- REF0(7336) or (416) 212 -6582.
As a developer. do I have to send multiple applications to different ministries to
get my project approved?
• The Ministry of the Environment now has a single approval. The process integrates
existing study requirements with provincial standards to ensure the natural
environment is protected.
• The Ministry of Natural Resources will continue to issue its approvals under its
existing legislation but in a fashion that is coordinated with the Renewable Energy
Approval providing clear guidance to help proponents through the process.
• Though multiple approvals are being issued based on experience and mandates of
various ministries there will still be a one - window approach for renewable energy
project approvals through a facilitator's office.
What happens to wind and other renewable energy projects that are part way
through the current approval process?
• It is proposed that projects currently holding all required approvals for their facility,
such as a Certificate of Approval, will not require a Renewable Energy Approval and
will not be subject to the new rules, unless or until an amendment to the Certificate
of Approval is required.
• The ministry recognizes that there are projects where substantial work has been
done to date but yet all final approvals have not been obtained.
• Projects that have an Ontario Power Authority contract and have issued a notice of
Completion at the time of the regulation's proclamation continue with EA process
and apply for a Certificate of Approval. These projects, however, must comply with
the 550 metre minimum noise setback and the new property and road setbacks will
apply.
• Some projects — such as solar and biogas /biomass — do not require an
environmental approval under the current rules, but will require a REA under the
new rules. If these projects have an OPA contract and would have not been
prohibited under municipal zoning prior to proclamation, they will be able to apply for
a Certificate of Approval instead of a Renewable Energy Approval.
• It is proposed that where projects that have ministry approvals (e.g., a Permit to
Take Water or Certificate of Approval) will not be required to get a Renewable
Energy Approval unless there is a need for a change to the approval or permit.
What if I have a question about the application? Is there someone that I can contact
for more information /assistance?
• For more information, please contact the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office
(REFO) by email: REFO(@ontario,ca, or by telephone: 1 -877-440-REFO(7336) or
(416) 212 -6582
GANA27
&FORO
ZEP Wind Farm Ganaraska
Energy Farming Ontario
Study Area
Attachment 2
To Reuort PSD-078-10
�I
KENDAL
OWNALAND
. . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . .
NIT,
Hybridyne
Solar Farm
LAKEON7'ARIO
Clarington Wind Farm
Leader Energy,ca
-'-Y. Study Area
11
k1i"'A
Ho AMO Policy Update — May 27, 2010
A„iti iatiun of \tunic iFmlititw of On6uia
Wind Turbines
Chief Medical Officer of Health Releases Review of Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines
A technical working group led by the Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOH) has just released a synopsis of
existing scientific evidence on the potential health impact of noise generated by wind turbines. The results are of
interest to the municipal sector because the working group sought to answer questions commonly raised by those
concerned with perceived health effects of wind turbines such as:
• What scientific evidence is available on the potential health impacts of wind turbines?
• What is the relationship between wind turbine noise and health?
• What is the relationship between low frequency sound, infrasound and health?
• How is exposure to wind turbine noise assessed?
• Are Ontario wind turbine setbacks protective from potential wind turbine health and safety hazards?
• What consultation process with the community is required before wind farms are constructed?
• Are there data gaps or research needs?
The review concludes that while some people living near wind turbines report symptoms such as dizziness,
headaches, and sleep disturbance, the scientific evidence available to date does not demonstrate a direct causal
link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects. There was no support for claims that the noise, shadow
flicker, electromagnetic fields, vibration, ice throw, or low frequency sound associated with wind turbines cause
adverse health effects.
In terms of the regulatory environment governing wind turbines (a synopsis of which is available under Policy
Issues on the AMO website), the report found the 550 m setback is adequate but that community engagement
deserves "greater attention in future developments ". Early engagement of the affected community at the outset of
planning for wind turbines is important to not only address perceived health concerns about wind farms but also to
address issues of fairness and equity, which also may influence attitudes about effects on health,
AMO Contact: Scott Vokey, Energy Services Coordinator, email: svokey @amo on.ca, (416) 971 -9856 ext. 357
http J /vvw-w, amo, on.ca/AiN,f/Pri nterTeinplate. cfm? Section= Home &TEMPLATE= /CM(HT?vl... 6/1/2010
Attachment 4
To Report PSD-078-10
i
4--Acad Officcir of Fleall"In �CMOH) Ri�pol-i
Mlay 2010
Summary of Review
This report was prepared by the Chief Medical Officer of Health (CN10H) of Ont-mio in response to
public: health concerns about wind turbines, particularly related to noise.
Assisted by a technical working group comprised of members from the Ontario Agency for Health
Protection and Promotion (OAIIPP), the Ministry of Health and Long -Term Care (MOHLTC) and
several Medical Officers of Health in Ontario with the support of the Council of Ontario Medical
Officers of Health (COMOH), this report presents a synopsis of existing scientific evidence on the
potential health impact of noise generated by wind turbines.
The review concludes that while some people living near wind turbines report symptoms such
as dizziness, headaches, and sleep disturbanee1 the scientific evidence a� °ailable to date does
not demonstrate a direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.
The sound level from wind turbines at common residential setbacks is not sufficient to cause
hearing impairment or other direct health effects, although some people may find it annoying,
Introduction
In response to public health concerns about wind turbines, the CMOH conducted a reviems of existing
scientific evidence on t:he potential health impact of Kind ttu•bincs in collaboration and consultation
with a technical worldng group composed of members from the OAHPP, ,NIOHLTC aiul COMOH.
A literature search -was conducted to identify papers and reports (from 1970 to date) on Mnd turbines
and health from scientific bibliographic databases, grey literature, and from a structured Internet
search. Databases searched include _REDLINE, PubMed, Environmental Engineering Abstracts,
Envi•ownertt Complete, INSPEC, Scholw's Portal tumd Scupus. Information was also gathered through
discussions with relevant government agencies, including the Ministry of the EnAroiunent and the
1lhustry of Energy and Infrastnicture and Mth input protzcled by indi, -iduals and other organizations
such as Wind Concerns Ontario.
Irn general, published papers in peer - reviewed scientific journals, and reviews by recognized health
authorities such as the World Health Organization («'HO) carry more weight in the assessment of
health risks than case studies and anecdotal reports.
The review and constilt ition with the Council of Ontario Medical Officers of Health focused on the
following questions:
• What scientific evidence is available on the potential health impacts of wind turbines?
What is the relationship between wind turbine noise and health?
• What is the relationship between low frequency sound, infrasound and health?
• How is exposure to wind turbine noise assessed?
• Are Ontario Mnd turbine setbacks protective from potential wind turbine health and
safety hazards?
• What consudtation process with the community is required before wind farms are constructed?
• Are there data gaps or research needs?
The following summarizes the findings of the review and consultation.
, Wind Turbines and Health
2,1 Overview
A list of tJte materials reviewed is found in Appendix 1. It includes research studies, review articles,
reports, presentations, and websites.
Technical terms used in this report are defined in a Glossary (Page 11).
The main research data available to date on wind turbines and health include:
• Four cross- sectional studies, published in scientific journals, which investigated the relationships
between exposure to wind turbine noise and annoyance in large samples of people (3:51 to 1,918)
living in Europe near wind turbines (see section 2.2),
Published case studies of ten families with a total of 38 affected people living near wind turbines
in several countries (Canada, UK, Ireland, Italy and USA) (Pierpont 2009). However, these cases
are not found in scientific journals, A range of symptoms including dizziness, headaches, and
sleep disturbance, were reported by these people, The researcher (Pierpont) suggested that the
swnptolns were related to wind turbine noise, particularly low frequency sounds and infrasound,
but did not investigate the relationships between noise and symptoms. It should be noted that
no conclusions on the health impact of wild turbines can be drawn from Pierpont:s work clue to
methodological limitations including small sample size, lack of exposure data, lack of controLs and
selection bias,
• Research on the potential health and safety hazards of %vind turbine shadow flicker,
electromagnetic fields (EMI's), ice tlu•ow and ice shed, and structural hazards (see section 2.3).
A synthesis of the research available on the potential health impacts of exposure to noise and physical
hazards from wind turbines on nearby residents is found in sections 2.2 and 2.3, including research on
low frequency sound and infrasound. This is followed by information on wind turbine regulation in
Ontario (section 3,0), .und our conclusions (section 4.0),
2.2, Sound and Noise
Sound is characterized by its sound pressure level (loudness) and frequency (pitch), which are measured
in standard units known as decibel (dB) and Hertz (I -1z), respectively. The normal human ear perceives
sounds W, frequencies ranging from 20Hz to 20,000 Hz. Frequencies below 200 Hz are commonly referred
to as "low frequency sound" and those below 20Hz as "infrasound," but the boundary between them
is not rigid. There is variation between people in their ability to perceive sound. Although generally
considered inaudible, infrasound at high- enough sound pressure levels can be audible to some people.
Noise is defined as an unwanted sotmd (Rogers et al.. 2006, Leventhall 2003),
Wind turbines generate, sound through mechanical and aerodynamic routes. The sound level depends
on various factors including design and wind speed. Current generation upwind model turbines are
quieter than older downwind models. The dominant sound source from modern wind turbines is
aerodynamic, produced by the rotation of the turbine blades through air, The aerodynamic noise is
present at all frequencies, from infrasound to low frequency to the normal audible range, producing
the characteristic "swishing" sound (Leventhall 2000, Colby ct al. 2009).
Environmental sound pressure levels are most conunordy measured using an A- Nveight.ed scale. This scale
gives less weight to very low and very high frequency components that is similar to the way the human
car perceives sound. Sound levels around wind turbines are usually predicted by modelling, rather than
assessed by actual tile asurerrrents.
The impact of sound on health is directly related to its pressure level. high sound pressure levels ( >75dB)
could result in hearing impairment depending on the duration of exposure and sensitivity of the individual.
Current requirements for wind turbine setbacks in Ontario are intended to limit noise at the nearest
residence to 40 dB (see section 3). This is a sound level comparable to indoor background sound. This
noise limit is constktent with the night -time noise guideline of 40 dB that the 11.7orld Health Organizndon
(WHO) Europe recommends for the protection of public health from community, noise. According to the
WHO, this guideline is below the level at which effects on sleep and health occim However, it is above the
level at which complaints may occur (FVHO2009).
Available scientific data indicate that sound levels associated with wind turbines at common residential
setbacks are not sufficient to damage hearing or to cause other direct adverse health effects, but some
people may still find the sound annoying.
Studies in Sweden and the Netherlands (Pedersen ct al. 2009, Pedersen and Waye 2008, Pedersen and
NVaye 2007, Pedersen and Waye 2004) have found direct relationships between modelled sound pressure
level and self reported perception of sound and annoyance. The association between sound pressure level
and sound perception was stronger than that with annoyance. The sound was annoying only to a small
percentage of the exposed people; approximately 4 to 10 per cent were very annoyed at sound levels
between 35 and 45dBA. Annoyance was strongly correlated with individual perceptions of wind turbines.
Negative attitudes, such as an aversion to the visual impact of wind turbines on the landscape, were
associated with increased annoyance, while positive attitudes, such as direct economic benefit from wind
turbines, were associated with decreased annoyance. Wind turbine noise was perceived as more annoying
than transportation or industrial noise at comparable levels, possibly due to its swishing quality, changes
throughout a 24 hour period, and lack of night -time abatement.
2,21 low Frequency Sound, Infrasound and Vibration
Concerns have been raised about human exposure to "low frequency sound" and Infrasound"
(see section 2.2 for definitions) from wind turbines. There is no scientific evidetce, however, to
indicate that low frequency sound generated from wind turbines causes adverse ltbalth effects.
Low frequency sound and infrasound are everywhere in the environment. They are emitted from natural
sources (e.g., wind, rivers) and from artificial sources including road traffic, aircraft, and ventilation
systems. The most common source of Wrasound is vehicles. tinder many conditions, low frequency sound
below 40Hz from wind turbines cannot be distinguished from environmental background noise from the
Mnd itself (Leventhal) 2006, Colby et al 2009).
Low frequency sound from environmental sources can produce annoyance in sensitive people, and
infrasound at high sound pressure levels, above the threshold for human hearing, can cause severe car
pain. There is no evidence of adverse health effects from infrasound below the sound pressure level of
90dB (Leventhal) 2003 and 2006).
Studies conducted to assess wind turbine noise indicate that infrasound and low frequency sounds from
modern wind turbines are well below the level where known health effects occur, typically at 50 to 700.
A small increase in sound level at low frequency can result in a large increase in perceived loudness, This
may be difficult to ignore, even tit relatively low sound pressures, increasing the potential for annoyance
(Jakobsen 2005, Leventhall 2006).
A Portuguese research group (Alves - Pereira and Castclo Branco 2007) has proposed that excessive long-
term exposure to vibration from high levels of low frequency sound and infrasound can cause whole
body system pathology (vibro- acoustic disease). This finding has not been recognized by the international
medical an(] scientific community. This research group also hypothesized that a family living near wind
turbines will develop vibro-acoustic disease from exposure to low frequency sound, but has riot provided
evidence to support this (Alves - Pereira and Castelo Branco 2007).
2.2.2 Sound Exposure Assessment
little information is available on actual nneasurements of sound levels generated from wind turbines and
other environmental sources. Since there is no widely accepted protocol for the. measurement of noise
from wind turbines, current regulatory requirements are based on modelling (see section 3.0).
2.3 Other Potential Health Hazards of Wind Turbines
The potential health impacts of electromagnetic fields (E'Us), shadow flicker, ice throw and ice shed,
and structural hazards of wind turbines have been reviewed in two reports (Chatham -Kent Public Health
IT 2004; Rideout ct d 2010). The following summarizes the findings from these reviews,
EMFs
Rind turbines are not considered a significant source of EI.1F exposure since emissions levels around
wind farms are low..
• Shadow Flicker
Shadow flicker occurs when the blades of a turbine rotate in sunny conditions, casting moving shadows
on the ground that result in alternating changes in light intensity appearing to flick on and off. About
3 per cent of people with epilepsy are photosensitive, generally to flicker frequencies between 5- 3011z.
Most industrial turbines rotate at a speed below these flicker frequencies.
• Ice Throw and Ice Shed
Depending on weather conditions, ice may form on wind turbines and may be thrown or break loose
and fall to the ground, Ice throw launched far from the turbine may pose a significant hazard. Ice that
sheds from stationary components presents a potential risk to service personnel near the wind farm.
Sizable ice fragments have been reported to be found within 100 metres of the wind turbine. Turbines
can be stopped during icy conditions to minimize the risk.
• Structuralhazards
The maximum reported throw distance in documented turbine blade tailtu•e is 150 metres for ali entire
blade, and 500 metres for a blade fragment. Risks of turbine. blade failure reported in a Dutch handbook
range from one in 2,400 to one in 20,000 turbines per year (Brawn of al 2005). Injuries and fatalities
associated with wind turbines have been reported, mostly during construction and maintenance
related activities.
Wind Turbine Regulation in Ontario
The ministu of the Environment regulates wind turbines in Ontario. A now regulation for renewable
energy projects came into effect on September 24, 2009. The requirements include mitutntnn setbacks
and community consultations.
3.1 Setbacks
Provincial setbacks were established to protect Ontatians from potential health and safety hazards of
Nvind turbines including noise and structural hazards.
The minimum setback for a wind turbine is 550 metres from a receptor. The setbacks rise with the
number of turbines and the sound level rating of the selected turbines. For example, a wind project
with five turbines, each with a sotmd pourer level of 1070, must have its turbines setback at a minimum
950 metres from the nearest receptor.
These setbacks are based on modelling of sound produced by wind turbines and are intended to limit
sound at the nearest residence to no more than 40 dB. This limit is consistent Arith limits used to control
noise from other environmental sources. It is also consistent with the night -time noise guideline of 40 dB
that the World Health Organization (R'HO) Europe recommends for the protection of public health from
cor ununity noise. According to the WHO, this guideline is below the level at which effects on sleep arid
health occurs. However, it is above the level at which complaints may occur (WHO 2009).
Ontario used the most conservative sound modelling available nationally and internationally,
which is supported by experiences in the province and in other jurisdictions (MOE 2009). As yet,
a measurement protocol to verify compliance with the modelled limits in the field has not been
developed. Tlie Kitustry of the Environment has recently hired independent consultants to develop a
procedure for measuring audible sound from wind turbines and also to review low frequency sound
impacts from wind turbines, and to develop recommendations regarding low frequency sound.
Ontario setback distances for wind tw -bine noise control also take into account potential risk of injury
from ice throw and structural failure of wind turbines. The risk of injury is minimized with setbacks of
200 to 500 metres.
3.2 Community Consultation
The Ministry of the Environment requires applicants for wind turbine projects to provide written
notice to all assessed land owners within 120 metres of the project location at a preliminary stage
of the project planning. Applicants must also post a notice on at least two separate days in a local
newspaper. As well, applicants are required to notify locid mtuticipalities and any Aborigutal comniututy
that may have a constitutionally protected right or interest that could be impacted by the project.
Before submitting an application to the Ministry of the Environment, the applicant is also required
to hold a minimum of two community consultation meetings to discuss the project and its potential
local impact. To ensure informed consultation, any required studies'must be made available for public
review 60 days prior to the date of the final community meeting. Following these meetings the applicant
is required to submit as part of their application a Cpnsulwtion Report that describes the.comments
received and how these comments were considered in the proposal.
The applicant mast also consult directly with local municipZlit.ies prior to applying for a Renewable Energy
Approval on specific platters related to municipal lands, infrastructure, and sen-rices. The b ° °linistry of the
Environment has developed a template, which the applicant is required to use to document project- specific
matters raised by the mwiicipality. This must be submitted to the ministry as part of the application. The
focus of this consultation is to ensure important. local service and infrastructure concerns are considered
in the project.
For small kind prgjocts (under 50 kW) the public meeting requirements above are not applicable due to
their limited potential impacts.
Conclusions
The following are the main conclusions of the review and consultation on the health impacts of
wind turbines:
• lfihile some. people living near wind turbines report symptonis such as dizziness, headaches, and
sleep disturbance, the scientific evidence available to date sloes not demonstrate a direct causal
link between Nvind turbine noise and adverse- health effects.
• The sound level from wind turbines at comiuon residential setbacks is not sufficient to cause
hearing impairment or other direct adverse health effects. However, sonic; people might find it
annoying. It has been suggested that annoyance tnay be a reaction to the characteristic "swishing"
or fluctuating nature of wind turbine sound rather than to the intensity of sound.
• Low frequency sound and infrasound from current generation upwind model turbines are well
below the pressure sound levels at which known health effects occur. Further, there is no scientific
evidence to date that vibration from low frequency wind turbine noise causes adverse health effects.
• Conunurdty engagement at the outset of planning for wind turbines is important and may alleviate
health concerns about -wind farms.
Concerns about fairness and equity may also influence attitudes towards Nvind farms and allegations
about effects on health. These factors deserve greater attention in future developments.
The review also identified that sound measurements at residential areas around wind turbines and
comparisons with sound levels around other rural and urban arras, to assess actual ambient noise
levels prevalent in Ontario, is a key data gap that could be addressed. An assessment of noise levels
around wind power developments and other residential environments, including monitoring for
sound level compliance, is an important preregtasite to making an informed decision on whether
epidemiological studies looking at health outcomes will be useful.
10
Glossary
A- weighted decibels (dBA)
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using an A- weighted litter.
The A- woighled filter de- emphasizes the very low avid very high frequencies of the sound in amanter
similar to the frequency response of the human Car.
Decibel (dB)
Unit of measurement of the loudness (intensity) of sound. Loudness of nonnal adult hurnan voice is about.
6040 dB at three feet. The decibel scale is a logarilhtrtic scale and it increases /decreases by a factor of 10 from
one scale increment to the next. adjacent one.
Downwind model turbines
Downwind model turbines have the blades of the rotor located behind the supporting tower structure, facing
away from the wind. The supporting tower stntctuure blocks some of the wind that blows towards the blades.
Electromagnetic fields (EMFs)
Electromagnetic fields are a combination of invisible electric and magnetic fields. They occur boat naturally
(light is a natural form of EMF) and as a result of human activity. 'dearly all electrical and electronic devices
emit sonic type of EME
Grey literature
Iaformation produced by all levels of government, academics, business and industry in electronic and print
formats not controlled by commercial publishing, i.e., where publishing is not the primary activity of ltic
producing body.
Hertz (Hz)
A unit of measurement of frequency; the number of cycles per second of a periodic waveform.
Infrasound
Commonly refers to sound at frequencies below 20IIz. Although generally considered inaudible,
infrasotuld at high- enough sound pressure levels can be audible to some people.
Low frequency sound
Commonly refers to sound at frequencies between 20 and 200 IN.
Noise
Noise is an umwant.ed sound.
Shadow Flicker
Shadow, flicker is a result of the sun casting intermittent• shadows from the rotating blades of a wind turbine
onto a sensitive receptor such as a window hi a building. The flicker is clue to alternating light. intensity
between the direct beam of sunlight and the shadow from the turbine blades.
Sound
Sound is wave -like variations in air pressure that occur at frequencies that can be audible. I1 is characterized
by its Loudness (sound pressure level) and Pilch (frequency), which arc rneasutred in standard units known as
decibel (0) attcl Ilertz (Ilz), respectively. The normal human ear perceives sounds at frequencies ranging from
201Iz to 20,000 llz.
Upwind model turbines
t`pwhid model turbines have the blades of the rotor located in front of'the supporting tower structure, similar
to how a propeller is at the front of an airplane. Upwind turbines are a modern design and are quieter than the
older downwind models.
Wind turbine
Rind turbines are large tossers wil.h rotating blades that uise wind to generate electricity.
M
Appendix 1: ,List of Documents on Wind Turbines
Journal Articles and Books
Brian IIG J, et al. IIandboek risicozonering windhu•bines. Netherlands: SenterNovem; 2005.
.iakobsen J. Iturasound emission from wind turbines. J Lott F7-eq A —'bile Yib Active Conn•. 2005;'.'.1(,3):145.155.
Keith SE, Michau(I DS, Bly SHE A proposal for evaluating the potential health effects of wind turbine noise
for projects under the Canadian Ettvirorunentat Assessment Act../ Loin Treq Xoise Vih Active C onhvt.
2008-)27(4):2.53-265.
Leventhal) G. Infrasound from wind turbines: fact, fiction or deception. Can Acoust. 2006;34(2) :29 -36.
Pedersen E, Hallberg LR --If, 'Waye ICI'. Living in the vicinity of wind turbines: a grounded theory study.
Qual Res Rsychol. 2007;4(1- 2) :49 -63.
Pedersen E, Larsman P. The impact of visual factors on noise annoyance. among people living in the vicinity of
wind turbines, JFvvi.ron Psychot. 2008;28(1):379 -389.
Pedersen E, Persson Waye K Wind turbines: low level noise sources interfering with restoration? En iron Res
Lett, 2008;3:015002. Available from: littp: //ti %i•w. lop. org /EJ /article /17#8- 932 (i /3/l/015002/er18_1_015002.I)df,
Pedersen E, Persson Waye K. Wuid turbine noise, annoyance and self - reported health and well-being in different
living environments. Occup F.nc;iran Alert. 2007;64(7):4804
Pedersen E, vial Glen Berg F, Bakker R, Bouma J. Response to noise from modern wind farms in The ' cthcrlands.'
JAcoust Soc Am, 2009;126(2) :634 -43.
Pedersen E, Waye KP. Perception laid annoyance clue to wind turbine noise —a close- response relationship. .
JAconst ,Snc Ana.2004;116(6):3460 -70.
van den Berg GR Effects of the wind profile at night, on WIWI turbine sound. J Sound Vila. 2004;277(4- 5):955 -970.
Available from: http: /,iwwnv. nowap.co.uWdo&N%-indnodse.pcdf.
Grev Literature
Chatham -Kent Public 11", th Unit. The health impact of wind turbines: a roview of the ccuront while, grey, aril
published literature. Chatham, ON: Chatham -Kent Mtunicipal Cotuicil; 2008 [cited 2010 Mar 5]. Available from:.
http:l /�v� +env. �iind- works, org�irge'dliri>inestF [ ealth° i�, 20and' Y, 20�Z' ind4k, 20by` �20C- KoN?OHealih;'�CC?OUnit.pclf.
Colby NVD, Dobie R, Leventhnll G, I pscomb D11, McCunnoy RJ, Seilo MT, et al. Wind turbine sound and hcalt.h
effects. An expert,panel review: American WLrul Energy Association & Canadian Wind Energy Association;
2009 [cited 2009 Dcc'21]. Available from: htl. p:/,/ Nvwwcanwea. ca/ pdf/ t. tilkwiiiM ll ind_Turbine_Sottnd_anci_Health_
Effects.pdf.
Rideout K, Copes R, Bos C. «md turbines and health. Vancouver: National Collaborating Centre for Environmental
Health; 2010 Jan [cited 2010 Afar 51. Available from: litip: / /wv « r•.neceh,ca/ filesA i' ind_'Mrbiines_Jarutary_2010.pdf.
Wind turbines and Health: a review of evidence. Toronto: Onia rio Agency for Health Protection and Promotion;
2009 [cited 2010 Mar 51. Available from: http: /;'iv.vw.oahpp.ca/ resources/ doc( unernta ipresentatiounsP200Jseptl0/
Wind %201'ubincs%20!i 2OSept %2010° /a2O2OO9.pdf. '
Emironmentaul Protection Agency, Office of Water. Auxiliary and supplemental power fact sheet: vdnd turbines.
Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency; 2007 [cited 2010 Jan "r ]. Available from http:/AN7ww.epa.gov/
owon/nntbhvind_ final. pdf.
12
Leventhall G, PeIinear P, Benton S. 'A review of published research on low frequency noise and its effects. London,
England: Department for Envirorunern, Food and Rural Affairs; 2003 [cited 2010 Afar 5J. Contract No.: EPG 1/2/50.
Available front: http : / /www.defrt.goieukJenvironmen(/quality/ noiseJreseare10ot N,frdgtieney /docwiicii s/
lowfr'egnoise.pdf,
Minnesota Department of health, Environmental Health Division. Public health impacts of wind.turbines.
Saint Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Commerce, Office of Energy Security; 2009 [cited 2010 Mar u1.
Available from: ht.tif: / /energyfac ilities,puc. state. mn. us/ doctmlentsii' ublic% �?UlIealth° 4i ?OInrpacis °�tLOoln�`?0�i'ind %?0
R u, bines ,0/6205.22.090rft20Revised.p df.
National Research Council, Committee on Em iromnen(al Impacts of Wind- Energy Projects. Environmi,ntai
impacts of wind- energy projects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2007.
Ontario. Ministry of the Emdronment. Frequently asked questions: renewable energy approval.
Toronto: Queen's Printer for Ontario; 2009. Available from: hi. tp:/ /Nvww.ene.gov.on.c:a/e.n/busuiess /green- cnetgy/
docs/FAQs9/d20 -I nal.pdf.
Ontario. Ministry of the Fnvironnnenl. '_Noise guidelines for wind farms: interpretation for applying JIOE NPC
publications to wind power generation facilities. Toronto: Queen's Printer for Ontario; 2008 [eft.ed 2010 Mar 5].
Available from: ht.lp: / /wH•ty. ene. gov. on.ca /ptlblicatioits /47090.1)df.
Ontario, IN- fstty of the Environment Development of noise setbacks for wind ferns: requ- [rements for compliance
with MOE noise limits. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer for Ontario; 2009. Available from
k;ene.gotcon.ctt/enlbusine:ss/ green - energy /does/41'irtd?NoiseSetb teks.pdL
Pedersen E. Human response to wind turbine noise: perception, annoyance and moderating factors. Goteborg,
Sweden: Goteborgs Universitet, Sahlgrenska Acedemy, Department of Public Health <and Community \iedicine;
2007 [cited 2010 Mar 5), Available from: http : / /gape Lub.gu.se/dspace/bitstream/2O77 /4431 /I /gupea_2077_4431_I.pdf.
Pierpon( N. Mind turbine syndrome: areport on a natural experiment [pre - publication draft]. Santa Fe, IMM:
K- Se)ected Books; 2009 (cited 2010 Maur 51. Available from: http:// t+• ww .wirldturbinesyri(ironic.com/%cp- content/
uploadst2009 /03 /nis- ready - for - posting on- vrtscom- 3- 7 -09.pcif.
Ramakrishnan R (Aiolos Engineering Corporation). Virnd turbine facilities noise issues.
Toronto; Queen's Printer for Ontario; 2007 [cited 2010 Mar 5J. Report No.: 4071/2180/AR155Rev3.
Available from: https: / /ozoiie.sc-holarsport.il. info/ l)itstreanVl873`/13073/1/383'287.pdf.
Rogers AL, Manwell JF, "right S. Wind ttu•bufe acoustic noise; a white paper. Amherst, AIA; University of
Massachusetts at Arinlnerst, Department Of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Renewable Energy Research
Laboratory; 2006 [cited 2010 Mar 5). Available from: http : /hirwwce ere, or'g/rerl/ publi cations /whitepapers/«rrnd_
Tttrbine_Ac otrstic_N oise_Rev2006.pdf.
van den Berg F, Pedersen E, Bouma J, Bakker R, Project WINDrkRAlpereeption: visual and acoustic impact of
wind turbine farms on residents: final report. Groningen, Netherlands: University of Groningen; 2008 [cited 2010
Mar 51. Published jointly by the University of Groningen and the University of Gothenburg. Available from:
http: / /www, wind - watch. org. /d Oct Linonls /wp-c ontent/up] oads/Irfp- final- l.pdf.
Whit.ford J. Model %0nd turbine by -laws and best practices for Nova Scotia municipalities: final report.
Halifae, 'NS: Union of Nova Scotia Murticipalfties; 2008 [cited 2009 Apr 21). Contract No.: 1031581.
Available from: http: / /www.sust diiabilit y- unsm.ciVotrr- wbrk.litml.
13
Attachment 2
To Report PSD- 035 -13
Good Evening Mayor Foster, and members of Council,
I am here tonight on behalf of Clarington Wind 'Concerns —
a grassroots organization representing the concerns of
hundreds of residents who stand to be directly impacted by
the two industrial wind turbine projects currently under,
development in our community.
Over the past three years, I have made several delegations
regarding these projects, and I would like to begin by
offering my thanks to you, our Council, for your support
and for the work that you have done on our behalf during
this time. Many of you have attended the public meetings
that we have hosted to hear from our knowledgeable guest
speakers, some who are experts in their field and some who
are folks like us who have unfortunately learned first hand
about the negative impacts of wind turbines on rural
communities. You have also attended the meetings hosted
by the proponants, and have heard first hand from the
hundreds of residents who have very real concerns about
these projects. Many of them are here tonight to show their
support. You took the time to learn more about our
concerns and the potential impacts of these projects. You
listened, you took action, and for this we say Thank you.
When I drafted my letter to council, I was unaware of the
letter that Mayor Foster had written to Premier Wynne last
week to point out the specific concerns that the
Municipality has with the two wind turbine projects being
developed. Having now seen a copy of this letter I wish to
congratulate you on your efforts, as the points you made
are definitely a step in the right direction.
However, I have come before you again tonight because we
hope that you will extend your support a little further in
making a formal statement to the province that Clarington
outright opposes the construction of these wind projects.
We encourage you to pass a resolution declaring
Clarington's position regarding wind turbines: that we are
currently "not a willing host ".
Under Premier McGuinty, rural Ontario was scolded for its
opposition to wind turbines, and told that NIMBYism
would not be tolerated. That serious risks to health and the
environment would be the only valid reasons to stop a
project. An astounding amount of evidence has been
presented -to the province to show that without a doubt
building these wind projects only 550m from residential
homes will cause harm to both. Despite many
opportunities to make changes, McGuinty's government
failed to do so, citing the importance of shutting down coal
plants despite any real evidence that building wind turbines
would help them to achieve that goal.
But change in leadership has brought us a new Premier -
Kathleen Wynne. She has expressed interest in working
with local governments, and has demonstrated an
awareness of the problems in rural Ontario by appointing
herself as Minister of Agriculture. In fact, I am here
tonight because during her first throne speech in February,
new Premier "Wynne acknowledged that with the Green
Energy Act "they didn't get it perfect the first time and
changes need to be made. She argued that Ontario can
benefit from things like industrial wind farms, "but onl if
we have willing hosts " -a direct quote from the speech.
Shortly afterwards, the Municipality of Wainfleet passed a
motion to declare their community an unwilling host for
wind turbines. Since that time over a dozen other
communities have followed suit, including Prince Edward
County, Norfolk County, Huron East, North Perth, Saugeen
Shores, and even our neighbours in the City of Kawartha
Lakes under a motion made by councillor Heather Stauble.
These communities have declared themselves unwilling
hosts to send a message to the province that they are NOT
willing to subject their residents to the Province's wind
turbine experiment when there are so many unresolved
problems that continue to exist in Ontario communities
where wind farms are already operating.
For three years we have watched as a growing number of
doctors, from around the world have released findings to
support our position that the minimum setback distance
allowed in the province's Green Energy Act is not
protective of human health, and should be at least several
times larger.
We heard the decision of the Environmental Review
Tribunal which stated that the evidence it had viewed
showed that wind turbines can be harmful to human health
when built too closely, and encouraged that more research
be conducted to determine setbacks.
We- have read the documents obtained through Freedom. of
Information requests which show that the Province has
ignored the pleas for help from hundreds of people in
Ontario who are already living near wind turbines who are
suffering grave health problems since the turbines began -
some who have walked away from their homes as a last
resort.
We have watched as Health Canada announced there was
sufficient evidence to fund a health study to look at the
health impacts of wind turbines, with findings to be
released later next year.
We have been presented with studies from independent
property assessors which indicate that properties near wind
farms have seen reductions in value from 20 -50% or have
become altogether unsellable.
We read with interest the report of the Grey -Bruce medical
officer of health Dr. Hazel Lynn. Her 18 month literature
review at the request of local residents living in and
around wind turbines in the Kincardine area.
Dr. Lynn reviewed all of the most widely cited studies
from around the world involving wind turbines and
Her report directly contradicts Chief Medical of Health
Dr. Arlene King's 2010 findings which recommended
that no further research be undertaken. which the
Ontario government has widely used to justify its wind
turbine policies and regulations.
By declaring Clarington an unwilling host
- you would be reaffirming the support that you have
already shown for our position over the past three
years.
- You would be agreeing that there are some serious
gaps in the science and that you are not ready to
subject your residents to wind turbines until thorough
health studies are conducted to prove a safe setback
distance.
- You would be acknowledging that the residents of
our community stand to lose a great' deal of their
property value and that this may ultimately affect the
Municipality's tax base.
- You would be stating that Municipalities deserve
more power to make decisions about projects that
affect their residents and their lands.
And you would be reminding the Province that they
have yet to take ANY meaningful action on the
requests that you have already made to them.
We ask you to take action now, because to do otherwise,
would mean that we are a "willing host community", and
that we find the terms that the Province has provided us
with are acceptable.
Our reluctance to welcome turbines into our community
under the current regulations has nothing to do about being
opposed to green energy, or being "anti- wind ", or
NIMBY's.
It has everything to do with protecting our health and the,
quality of our lives, as well as the financial security of our
families and community. We are `unwilling" to
compromise when it comes to these principles for we have
too much at stake.
In closing, I urge you one again to send Premier Wynne a
message by passing the following resolution:
WHEREAS there are two (2) proposed industrial wind
projects in the Municipality of Clarington (Ganaraska
Wind Farm, and Clarington Wind Farm)
and WHEREAS the Premier of Ontario has recently
conveyed the
Government's desire to limit Industrial Wind Turbine
(IWT) Projects to communities that are willing hosts;
and WHEREAS council for the Municipality of
Clarington -has received a clear message from its residents
that they are not willing to host industrial wind turbines;
AND WHEREAS Council for the Municipality of
Clarington has taken a consistent position on the
issue of industrial wind turbines;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Municipality
of Clarington declares that it is 'not a willing host';
and THAT this resolution be forwarded to the Premier,
Minister of Energy, Minister of the Environment,
Minister of Agriculture and Food, Minister of Rural
Affairs, Doris Dumais, Director of Environmental
Approval and Service Integration Branch of the
Ministry of the Environment, MPP John O'Toole, MP
Erin O'Toole, and the Association of Municipalities of
Ontario (AMO).
THANK YOU
Heather Rutherford
Attachment 3
to Report PSD-035-13
Developing a Renevtable Energy Project Under the Renewable Energy Approval From
Start to Finish
Step One Pre-REA Planning
a) Developer finds potential project location and creates initial project
,plan. .
b) Developer is encouraged to contact local stakeholders, including
municipalities, and d isCUSS the planned project to. get feedback on
the proposal.
c): Developer finalizes location.
d) Developer applies for FIT contract-
e) if the project meets the necessary requirements, including available
capacity' a FIT contract is offered.
fj Developer accepts FIT contract-
g) Developer finalizes grid connection plans vrith the applicable
distributorilransmi[tter.
step Tvio Developer provides copy of draft Project Description Report to MOE
and obtains list of Aboriginal communities to be consulted throughout
the REA process.
Step Three Developer initiates REA consultation process and provides notification
of the project and of an initial public meeting to municipal
stakeholders, Aboriginal communities and the general public at least
30 days in advance of initial public meeting. Developer begins
aboriginal consultation process- Developer provides murfilcipal
consultation form and draft Project Description Report to the
municipality at [east 30 days before initial public, meeting., and
draft Project Description Report online and in paper copies to the
public and Aboriginal communities.
Step Four Developer initiates any other relevant approval processes (e.g. federal
approvals, MNR Species at Risk avork, etc-)
Step Five Developer holds first public meeting at least 30 days after providing
notice.
Step Six Developer, taking feedback from initial meeting into account, begins
refining project plans and doing studies to ensure that the project
andards.
meets health, environmental and safety sL
Developer contacts the municipality (and others-,) to gather information
about a) natural heritage features and water bodies near the project
location and b) cultural heritage and archaeological records
(!Jevelopers are strongly encouraged to initiate this contact as early as
possible in the development process, ideally at Step Tvtlo).
Excerpt,, from RenewcL-4e Energy Development: A 61.1fde for Munietpalffies
Step Six Consultatfon with all stakerk-4ders continue on an ongoing basis
(C-ontInued) throughout the profect design. process.
-stop Sown Wind project developers- a-u--publish a drat site plzin by providing
notification of the proposed turbine layout to municipal stakeholders,
Aboriginal cornmuniffes and the general public;
Step Eight Developer provides a copy of all draft reports and studies (except
the Consul(at.lori Report) to the municipality at. [eat 9,0 diays in
advance- of the final public meeting_
Step Nine Developer -provides coples of all draft reports., studies and NINR and
MTC confirri-iation letters (except the Consultation Report) online- and
in paper COPWS for PLINIC review at least 60 d,-,4ys in advi-Ince of the
final public meeting.
sto-p Developer holds final public meeting aria will, it ne4c"Cnsafy, revise its
draft reports in preparation for making its application for the REA_
Stop Eleven REA application Is submitted arid, if cornpleter accepted by the MOE.
$tesP TWelve WE C0111111011ces tecrinical review ana. po-sts notice of the application
on the EBR for additional comment for a period of 30 clays- Wiffiin 10
days. of the EEC R notice, the developer must post all application
i ni, I
Verials on Its unfil MOE mak-`s decision. The developer
must also publish notice of Its application in a newspaper.
Step. Thirteen M provides REA decision to developer - if aKiroved, with anV
conditions that may apply.. The applicant. or a third party may appeal
the REA deci-sion to trtc-, Environmental Reviev TrIbonal witmin 15 days
of the issuance of the decision notice.
Step, Fifteen Posqt-REA Approval
a) Developer recefvess- notice to proceed from 0PA_
b) Developer owains z-110 olheir newssary regolatoFy- and oleddeal
approvals.,
C) Developer obtains bullding permit from municipality,
d) Developer constr=ucts project,
e) Project starts commercial operation.
A copy of the full document can be obtained on-line at
http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/docs/en/O.N9126-MEI-Guidance-Brochure9
Attachment 4
to Report PSD- 035 -13
Kyn�.f.ro nu va �4y!
nnRJ
® J
00_Tr�A
,l���RAtlll ViiJF� R3�
Mayor Adrian Foster
April 22, 2013
Premier Kathleen Wynne
Legislative Building
Queen's Park
Toronto, ON M7A 1A1
l L'
APR 2 4 2013
ILITY OF OL NII�( TON
l.lA � . _
Re: Wind Farin Applications within the Municipality of Clarinaton
In 2009, FIT contracts for 2 industrial wind turbine projects were issued for projects in the
Municipality of Clarington, ZEP near Orono and Leader Energy in Port Granby. It was difficult
to determine the ultimate siting of the turbines. because of the vast size of the study areas
involved. In fact, the two study' areas overlapped. The firms involved in the PIT contracts have
followed the process set out by the R.EA office and are now in the final stages of their
submissions,
When the locations of the And turbines were determined, we noted obvious gaps in the siting
criteria as set out in the Green Energy ActAn the case of the Port Granby project,•we have
residents that are now faced with development of industrial wind turbines concurrent with and
adjacent to Port Granby, a part of the Port Hope Area Initiative. This is a $1.3 billion federal
project involving the relocation of low level radio- active waste, The Municipality has a legal
agreement'with the federal government for the relocation of this waste and has been working
with the residents and federal government through the Environmental Assessment and licensing
hearings by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for this project since 2001. The
community has reluctantly accepted this project and are now ready to move forward, despite the
stress and challenges of a 10 year construction project. When the wind farm was considering
this location there was little regard for the Port Hope Area Initiative, the proximity to the waste
site and the cumulative negative impacts on the residents.
The second wind farm in Clarington is near Kirby /Orono on the Oak Ridges Moraine. The siting
of the turbines places 2 on Class 1 Landform Conservation Areas and 7 on Class 2 Landform
Conservation Areas, The Municipality of Clarington was a major supporter of conservation of
the Oak Ridges Moraine in our 1996 Official Plan which pre -dated the passing of the Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan, which we also supported. Both the Municipality and the Ganaraska
Region Conservation Authority question the location of industrial wind turbines on the resources
the Provincial government is protecting through other legislation.
.,...page 2
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L10 3A6 T(905)623-3379F(905)623-2582
email - mayor @ciaringtonmet
Page 2
Clarington Council has passed many resolutions supporting moratoriums until additional
research could be carried out and specifically a re- examination of the siting criteria to address
our concerns for the two wind farms in Clarington, Municipal staff have provided comments on
both of the projects via the municipal consultation form and as professionals their comments
have addressed the facts of the applications.
The Municipality of Clarington is a supporter of green energy and the home of the Darlington.
Nuclear Generation Plant. We have numerous small wind turbines and many solar installations,
in short we suppoxt green energy in principle; however, the two wind farm applications in
Clarington have fundamental issues with their siting which are beyond the criteria addressed in
the Green Energy Act. These are neither minor nor insignificant issues which we would hope
will be addressed,
Trusting you understand the gravity of the specifics of the siting and will intervene in an
appropriate manner,
M
CC; Minister of the Environment, Jinn Bradley.
Minister of Energy, Bob Chiarelli
Minister of Znfastructure, Glen Murray
Faye Langmaid, Manager of Special projects, Planning Services Dept,
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L10 3A6 T(905)623-3379F(905)623-2582
e -mail - mayor @clarington.net
Attachment 5
To Report PSD- 035 -13
Ron Robinson
President
May 2, 2013
Adrienne Windsor
Vice - President
Mayor Foster and Members of Council
Secretary
Municipality of Clarington
Ron Collis
40 Temperance St.
Past President
Bowmanville, ON
Leslie Ray
Re: Discussion on Marketing the Clarington Energy Park
Treasurer
Barb Malone
Mayor Foster and Members of Council
Director at Large
It is my understanding that at the April 28th, 2013 council meeting, there were discussions
Barb Yezik
regarding the marketing of the Clarington Energy Park in response to the communications by
Director at Large
Clarington Wind Concerns in addition to a delegation by Heather Rutherford.
Dale Gibbons
Director at Large
As we are not well versed on the many pieces of this issue, this letter will focus on the marketing
of the Clarington Energy Park and Clarington. The Clarington Board of Trade and Office of ,
Del Dykstra
Economic Development have been involved in the marketing of the Clarington Energy Park since
Director at Large
its designation in 2006. We are sensitive to the concerns regarding wind turbines and their
Jennifer Knox
impact within our community. We do understand that the provincial regulationsmake it difficult
Director at Large
for municipalities to have input into renewable energy projects.
Laura Sciore
Director at Large
Business attraction is very competitive across the Province of Ontario. As the eastern border to
the GTA, Clarington sits just outside the boundaries for the South Eastern Development Fund, we
Lawson Gay
are outside the South Western Development Fund boundaries and too far south for the
Director at Large
Northern Development Fund. As a member of the GTA we are often seen as being the outskirts,
Katie Hennessy
which is a.challenge as well.
Newcastle chamber
Clarington has gained our recognition through our strong energy portfolio and the Clarington
Greg Lewis
Energy Park is a big part of this: Key leaders at the provincial level are very aware of Clarington
Newcastle BIA
and our energy strengths. The investment community has become increasingly aware and
Justin Barry
interested in our energy cluster. The Region of Durham has used our strength in energy and the
Bowmanville BIA
Clarington Energy Park to identify the Region as the Energy Capital of Ontario.
Lisa Roy
Orono 81A
I respectfully ask Mayor Foster and members of Council to carefully consider the impacts that
identifying Clarington as an "unwilling host for Wind" could have. It is very important that we
Lindsay Coolidge
respect the concerns of all of our residents. Clarington needs to find away to do this without
Post Secondary Advisor
alienating the "Energy Sector ". Clearly nuclear is our prime energy sector but in order for us to
Don Rickard
be leaders in energy we need to keep our community open to explore and welcome new
Agriculture Advisor
technologies and the potential for research projects. To isolate one stream of energy will not
foster good will in the Energy Sector and may limit the interest in the broader energy sector to
Curry Clifford
see Clarington as the Energy Hub we know it can be.
Municipal Advisor
54 King St. East, Unit 102, Bowmanville, ON L1C 1N3 • (905) 623 -3106 • info @cbot.ca • www.cbot.ca
i i•
Thank you for your consideration of our position in this matter. We would be happy to discuss in
more detail at your request.
Sheila Hall
Executive Director
Clarington Board of Trade and Office of Economic Development
54 King St. East, Unit 102, Bowmanville, ON L1C 1N3 • (905) 623 -3106 • info@a cbot.ca ® www.cbot.ca