HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-90-83 r -
I
CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT T.T.EDWARDS,M.C.I.P.,Director
HAMPTON,ONTARIO LOB UO TEL.(416)263-2231
REPORT TO THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
MEETING OF JUNE 6, 1983
REPORT NO. : PD-90-83
SUBJECT: ELDORADO NUCLEAR LIMITED - PORT GRANBY WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITY CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and
Administration Committee recommend to Council -the
following:
1 . That Report PO-90-83 be received; and
2. That Council consider adopting the following
resolution:
"WHEREAS the Atomic Energy Control Board has
directed Eldorado Nuclear Limited to develop a
decommissioning plan for the Port Granby Waste
Management Facility to be in place by 1986;
AND WHEREAS the Town of Newcastle has agreed to
participate on a Consultative Committee to
discuss the decommissioning of the existing
Port Granby site;
AND WHEREAS Eldorado Nuclear Limited has
decided that a proposed permanent low-level
radioactive waste disposal facility would
appropriately be located on one of the sites it
owns in the immediate area, including a 658
acre site on Lakeshore Road at Port Granby;
Report No: PO-90-83 .. ./2
AND WHEREAS the search for a permanent disposal
facility for low-level radioactive wastes
involves very serious and complex environmental
and land use issues and should take place on a
Canada-wide or, at the very least, an
Ontario-wide basis ;
BE IT NOW THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT the Council
of the Town of Newcastle fully endorses the
decommissioning and clean-up of the existing
waste management facility at Port Granby and is
willing to participate on the Port Granby Waste
Management Facility Consultative Committee to
help achieve this decommissioning and
clean-up;
AND THAT Eldorado Nuclear Limited be requested
to abide by the decision of the Environmental
Assessment Review Panel in 1978 regarding the
location of a waste management facility at the
Lakeshore Road site at Port Granby at this
time ;
AND THAT the search for a permanent disposal
facility for low-level radioactive wastes as
proposed by Eldorado Nuclear Limited should be
undertaken on a Canada-wide or, at the very
least, a Province-wide basis ;
AND THAT Eldorado Nuclear Limited be strongly
urged to submit its proposal for a waste
disposal facility for low-level radioactive
wastes, either at Port Granby or elsewhere, for
review by an Environmental Assessment Panel at
a Public Hearing ;
AND THAT Mr. R. G. Dakers, Vice-President ,
Eldorado Nuclear Limited ; Mr. Jon Jennekens ,
Chairman, Atomic Energy Control Board; The
Honourable Jean Chretien, Minister, Energy
Mines and Resources ; The Honourable John
Roberts, Minister, Environment Canada; The
Honourable Keith Norton; Minister, Ontario
Ministry of Environment; The Honourable J.
Edward Broadbent, M.P. , Leader, New Democratic
Party; The Honourable Scott Fennell , M.P. ,
Ontario; The Honourable Allan Lawrence, M.P. ,
Northumberland & Durham; The Honourable Sam
Cureatz; M.P.P. , Deputy Speaker of the House;
and the Council of the Region of Durham be
advised of Council 's position and forwarded a
copy of Council 's Resolution and Staff Report
PD-90-83."
i
i
Report No: PD-90-83 .. . ./3
BACKGROUND:
In a press release dated November 24th, 1982, Eldorado
Nuclear Limited (ENL) announced its intention to
de-commission its waste management sites at Port Granby and
at Welcome, Hope Township, beginning in 1986, as directed by
the Atomic Energy Control Board. ENL also stated that they
had concluded that "the only way in which the AECB's
directive to de-commission can be implemented by the 1986
target date is to develop a permanent disposal system, which
meets modern regulatory criteria, at a site in the immediate
area". The Company proposed that committees "be established
so that the design and location of the waste disposal system
can be developed in consultation with representatives of
local government".
In a letter to Mr. Brian Pearson, General Manager of the
Eldorado Port Hope Refinery, dated December 17th, 1982,
Mayor Rickard indicated that, with respect to the
de-commissioning of the Port Granby site, the Town of
Newcastle "is willing to participate in such a committee on
the understanding that such participation does not
constitute or imply any approval of, or any consent to, the
establishment of a new disposal facility in the Municipality
at this time".
The Port Granby Waste Management Facility Consultative
Committee has met three times, to date, most recently on May
11th, 1983. The next meeting of the Committee is scheduled
for Wednesday, June 8th, 1983.
I
I
I
I
1
Report No: PD-90-83 . .. ./4
At the third meeting of the Committee, ENL tabled a Report
documenting the Corporation 's decision to limit the search
for a permanent nuclear waste disposal facility to the
following four properties which they own in the immediate
area:
1 ) the existing 42 acre Port Granby Waste Management
Facility;
2) the existing 90 acre Welcome Waste Management Facility;
3) 658 acres north of the Lakeshore Road at Port Granby;
4) 470 acres at the former refinery site north of
Wesleyville, in Hope Township.
�
ENL 1 s decision to limit the search to the immediate area was
based largely on the costs and the accident risk associated
with transporting hazardous wastes over long distances , and
because of the time constraints imposed by the AECB. The
Company noted, however, that they were concentrating on the
latter two sites, and the two existing sites would only be
considered should all other options fail .
ENL also indicated that they have requested several
consultants to submit proposals to investigate engineered
burial concepts for the Lakeshore Road site and the former
refinery site in Hope Township. ENL is prepared to present
the best proposal to the Committee at its next meeting to
obtain the Committee's input. Once the study is completed,
it will be presented to the Committee, together with other
studies already completed for the Port Granby and Welcome
sites, so that a short-list of possible disposal methods can
be developed.
I
Report No: PD-90-83 . . . ./5
In 1978, an Environmental Assessment Panel conducted a
Hearing on the proposal by ENL to locate a Uranium
i
Hexafluoride Refinery and Waste Management Facility at the
658 acre site on Lakeshore Road in Port Granby. In its
report , the panel concluded that "the Port Granby site would
not be acceptable for the refinery, and, in the absence of
the refinery, should not be used solely for waste storage".
This decision was based partly on the fact that the area has
a "high long-term potential as an agricultural area" and
that the "agricultural character and viability of the area
is confirmed in local and regional plans". As well , the
Panel indicated that "agricultural areas such as Port Granby
should be protected from industrial intrusion".
ENL, as a Federal Crown Corporation, is not required to
submit to an environmental assessment hearing on any of its
proposed projects, including their proposal to develop a
permanent waste disposal facility. Apparently, the minimum
requirement is for a public information meeting, although in
* a letter to ENL dated December 9th, 1982 (attached) , the
Federal Minister of the Environment strongly recommended
that "ENL submit its proposal for a Waste Disposal Facility,
I
either at Port Granby or elsewhere, for review by an j
independent panel under the Environmental Assessment and
Review Process".
I
i
Report No: PD-90-83 . . . ./6
COMMENTS:
Staff feel that there are very serious and complex issues
which require investigation when searching for the best site
for a permanent nuclear waste disposal facility. ENL has
decided that the disposal facility will be located in the
immediate area and on one of the sites that they currently
own. In staff's opinion, ENL should undertake a much
broader site selection process. Staff refer to the long
review process currently being undertaken by the Ontario
Waste Management Corporation in its search for a permanent
hazardous waste disposal facility. A full Environmental
Assessment Hearing on ENL's proposal to develop a permanent
nuclear waste disposal facility would be most desirable.
In addition, it should be pointed out that such a disposal
facility may also receive low-level radio-active waste from
other parts of Ontario and Canada. Thus, the search for and
review of a permanent disposal facility should be conducted
on, at the very least, an Ontario-wide basis, and preferably
on a Canada-wide basis.
Staff feel that the recommendations expressed by the
Environmental Assessment Panel in 1978 are still valid
today, and that ENL should not be considering the Lakeshore
Road site for the permanent waste disposal facility at this
time. It should be noted, however, that ENL makes a
distinction between a waste management facility, which it
had proposed in 1978, and the permanent waste disposal site,
which it is currently proposing. Waste management involves
short-term management of waste until it is relocated to a
permanent disposal facility. ENL points out that the
Environmental Assessment Panel had found fault with the
proposed waste management system and the need to retrieve
the stored material , and that there would be no need for
retrieval with the current proposal since they are proposing
a permanent disposal facility.
I
Report No: PD-90-83 .. . ./7
Staff nevertheless feel that the primary reasons the
refinery and waste management facility were denied, were the
agricultural potential of the land and the intrusion of an
industrial use into an agricultural area.
The Planning Committee of Regional Council , at its meeting
of June 2nd, 1983, considered a Planning Commissioner's
Report on the Port Granby Waste Management Facility
Consultative Committee. The Planning Committee resolved to
adopt the recommendations in the Report. Briefly, the
report recommended that Regional Council fully endorse the
de-commissioning and clean-up of the Port Granby Waste
Management Facility and that the Region is willing to
participate in the Consultative Committee to achieve this
result; that any study regarding a new nuclear waste
management facility should be undertaken through an
Environmental Assessment Hearing; that any study for a new
nuclear waste management facility site should be conducted
on a Canada-wide basis, or at the very least, on a
Provincial basis ; and that ENL, and the appropriate Federal
and Provincial authorities be so advised.
Based on the issues discussed in this Report, staff feel it
would be appropriate for Council to pass a similar
resolution with respect to the de-commissioning of the
existing Port Granby site and the need for a more thorough
review of alternative sites for a permanent nuclear waste
disposal facility.
Staff feel that if, in the future, it can be demonstrated
that the Lakeshore Road site in the Town of Newcastle is the
optimum location for a permanent waste disposal facility,
i
i
I.
Report No: PD-90-83 .. . ./8
that negotiations between the Town, the Region and ENL
should be initiated in respect of the long-term impact
(financial or otherwise) on the community.
Respectfu su ,
T. T. Edwards, M.C. I.P.
Director of Planning
JAS*TTE*mjc
June 3, 1983
I
I
'.inn 'tp A' rnslllr. -
U (:rl,u� ltn(�f11 (�,r�L1r)�f ['1,ir;lrrnLn��r�l 1. 1n•.ItJa � `J
t�l;IWr� C�II�,IUb C"I,�N1 C,trirld
K1A OH3 KIA OH3
DEC 9 1982
• r
Mr. Ronald G. Dakers
Vice President
Eldorado Nuclear Ltd. �
255 Albert Street
Suite 400
Ottawa, Ontario
Kip 6A9
Dear `4r. Dakers:
Thank you for your letter of November 22 in which you indicated the
procedure Eldorado Nuclear Limited plans to follow in developing a
proposal for decommissioning the Port Granby and Welcome »ante
management sites.
The establishment of committees with the Town of Newcastle and Hope
Township to consult with ENL on an ongoing basis during thi, develop-
ment stage is an excellent idea. I would also suggest that ENL consult
with the regulatory agencies prior to submitting its application to t;ie
Atomic Energy Control Board.
My department is looking forward to receiving from Eldorado decails of
the plan and related studies. Our advice to AECB must take 'Lnn account.
the fact that the proposed permanent site for relocation o1 the wash-s
was found unsuitable nor this Ducpose by an EAKP panel in 1978. Thi;
recomnencation, which was accepted by the Honourable Len X'archand,
Minister of the Environment at that time, will be re—examined in light
of the new information on low—level radioactive waste discosaa sysceris
that ENL will be pL„ Laing. bucn •a re—examination sho.:id cr corl,.,r.enc
v•ith the previous review arocegs and therefore I would stron?iy
recuc,:-ond that c`u sub;jit ir.s oroposal for a a; iyte �i : ;,r„al frtcility,
either at Port Granbv or elsewhere . for review by an ini : >u ; ient Panel
under the Environmental Assessment and Review Process .
�iy staff will continue to work closely with ENL, AECB and provincial
regulatory officials to ensure that the rel,)cation of these lo;:-level
radioactive wastes is carried out in an envirr.>nrf. nt<{l.l.y ,ound canner .
Yours sincerely,
i
Jo1ln Roberts
C ada
i