HomeMy WebLinkAboutOES 07-06
03,8 c¿ú¡,,~
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: OES 07-06
Date: February 13, 2006
From:
Everett Buntsma
Director, Operations & Emergency Services
Subject:
Nuclear Waste Management
Peer Review of NWMO Final Report
File: A-2130-001
Recommendation:
1. That Council receive Report OES 07-06 concerning the peer review of the
Nuclear Waste Management Organization Final Report; and
2. That Council urge Nuclear Waste Management Organization to address the list
of outstanding issues related to their Final Report as identified in the Acres -
Sargent & Lundy Peer Review Report; and
3. That Council be on record as continuing to support the work that the Nuclear
Waste Organization (NWMO) is conducting and that the Federal Government be
urged to promptly begin addressing the recommendations of NWMO Final
Report; and
4. That a copy of this Resolution be forwarded to the Federal Minister of Natural
Resources, Nuclear Waste Management Organization, Canadian Association of
Nuclear Host Communities, and Ontario Power Generation.
Executive Summary:
The City received the NWMO Final Report on long-term nuclear waste storage in
November 2005. The Final Report recommends a process that NWMO titled "Adaptive
Phased Management" The Canadian Association of Nuclear Host Communities
retained the consulting firm Acres - Sargent & Lundy (ASL) to conduct a peer review of
the Final Report. During the earlier peer review of the draft Final Report, ASL had
concluded that Adaptive Phased Management (APM) is a "reasonable solution."
However, ASL and other nuclear host communities, including the City of Pickering,
identified a collection of matters that needed to be more appropriately addressed in the
completed version of the NWMO Final Report. In the recent peer review, ASL has
again identified matters that require further assistance. ASL also noted that many of
the previously identified issues were addressed in the Final Report or via separate
correspondence to CANHC and some of its member municipalities.
Report OES 07-06
Date: February 13, 2006
039
Subject: Nuclear Waster Management
Page 2
Financial Implications:
Compensation to the City for the continued on-site storage of nuclear waste is an
outstanding issue that has future financial implications. Within the proposal for
Adaptive Phased Management is a recommendation that the waste will remain on-site
until a permanent centralized deep geological facility is opened. That period of time
could range from approximately thirty to ninety years. The issue of financial
compensation during the interim storage period of time has not been fully addressed in
the NWMO Final Report.
Background:
In November 2005, the City received copies of the Nuclear Waste Management
Organization (NWMO) Final Report titled "Choosing a Way Forward." Through financial
support from NWMO, the Canadian Association of Nuclear Host Communities
(CANHC) was able to have Acres - Sargent & Lundy (ASL) conduct a peer review of
the Final Report.
ASL has completed their peer review of the NWMO Final Report and found that many
of the issues that were previously raised were addressed. However, the following
information notes that a number other technical, procedural, and social issues have yet
to be adequately addressed.
ASL has based its conclusions on a detailed assessment of the NWMO Final Report.
They have also taken into account NWMO's responses to the outstanding issues by
examining a series of letters that the CANHC and some member municipalities have
received from NWMO since the release of their Report in November.
The following is an excerpt from the recent ASL peer review report:
"Overall, in performing its mandated work consistent with its objectives,
the NWMO did not specifically address all of the issues raised during the
reviews of the Draft Study report. Regardless of the level of detail or how
thoroughly the issues were addressed, however, it is important to note
that the NWMO clearly committed to qeveloping detailed implementation
plans and to continue working with the current host communities, as well
as other potentially affected communities, once the federal government
selects a long-term management approach."
The ASL report includes a table that lists the outstanding issues and it provides
comments that describe how NWMO has partially addressed the issues, how well they
have done so, and what remains to be addressed. The City and other interested
parties have already heard from NWMO that they plan to respond to all of the matters
that were collectively identified.
OAI t)
, '-t. "Report OES 07-06
Date: February 13, 2006
Page 3
Subject: Nuclear Waster Management
The following are key issues, according to ASL, that need further attention in regard to
the NWMO recommendation for the long term storage process known as Adaptive
Phased Management (APM). It is important to note that ASL and the individual host
communities collectively identified the original list of issues.
OUTSTANDING ISSUES
Partially
Addressed
Compensation
Not
Addressed
Secu rity
Partially Storage
Addressed Capacity at
Reactor Sites
Partially Advantages &
Addressed Limitations of
APM
Not Ordovician
Addressed Sedimentary
Rock
Not Potential
Addressed Opposition
Grou s
Partially Engagement
Addressed Process
NWMO Final Report does not specifically state that
the current host communities will receive
compensation. The Report clearly notes that current
host communities will be involved in Adaptive Phased
Management decisions, and that they will be afforded
the same considerations as "new" host communities
if they are selected as a host for a new long-term
nuclear used fuel facility. However, NWMO is not
recommending that waste remain on-site on a
permanent basis. Therefore in question is whether
existing host communities will be afforded the same
considerations as new host communities while the
used nuclear fuel is in interim storage at existing
sites. The Report strongly implies that current host
communities will be considered for the full range of
socio-economic effects mitigation whether or not they
are selected as a host for the new facility. However,
NWMO has defined mitigation to include a wide
range of optional considerations and actions that may
or ma not include financial com ensation.
Does not specifically appear to quantify the relative
change in risk related to the increased duration of
interim existing storage associated with Adaptive
Phased Mana ement APM .
Does not specifically state that the current reactor
sites have adequate storage capacities. However, an
NWMO back round a er does artiall address this.
Not included in the Final Study report. However, the
benefits, risks and costs of APM are discussed in
detail.
Does not specifically account for potential delays in
the siting process due to locating the deep geological
re osito in Ordovician sedimenta rock.
Does not proactively address potential opposition
groups that have not provided input into its
en a ement rocess to date.
Does not assess whether the level of participation
was more or less than ex ected, if there are an
Report OES 07-06
Date: February 13, 2006
((141
Subject: Nuclear Waster Management
Page 4
Partially
Addressed
Partially
Addressed
Partially
Addressed
Transportation
Implementation
Schedule -
Details
Impact of
Potential
Delays and the
Concept of
Interim
Centralized
Shallow
Underground
Storage
potential stakeholders that have not participated and
whose input should be obtained, or if the process
should be adjusted or improved during
implementation. Does state, "Immediately following a
decision by the Government of Canada on the
selection of a management approach, the NWMO will
assume its mandate as the implementing agency, as
required under the Nuclear Fuel Waste Act...we
intend to develop the details of our multi-year
strategic plans collaboratively with the many
communities of interest affected by our project,
inviting input on the way in which we design and tailor
the many facets of our implementation processes and
ro rams for citizen en a ement."
Not addressed in detail. However, does specifically
address the need for additional transportation
lannin .
Does not specifically address re-structuring APM or
provide more specific details of the expected
implementation plan for APM, nor does it provide firm
timelines for decision-making. However, in follow-up
correspondence, NWMO has provided some details
but not to the extent that ASL believes were intended
within the original identification of this shortcoming in
the Final Re ort.
Does not address potential delays in the process of
selecting a long-term disposal site or the impact of
potential delays. However, in the report the NWMO
identifies the need for, and commits to developing, an
effective implementation plan once the Federal
Government selects a long-term management
approach.
There appears to be an inconsistency in the Final
Study relative to the impact of the potential
centralized shallow underground interim storage
facility on the implementation schedule for APM.
NWMO has partially responded to this matter via
subse uent corres ondence.
(04 ',? Report OES 07-06
Date: February 13, 2006
Subject: Nuclear Waster Management
Page 5
Partially
Addressed
Partially
Addressed
Partially
Addressed
Not
Addressed
Monitoring
(existing
nuclear waste)
Design Life of
Dry Storage
Facilities
Need for an
Expeditious
Decision
Canada's
Nuclear Energy
Policy
Does not specifically address contingencies related to
unacceptable or problematic monitoring results, and
does not address the recommendation for more
stringent monitoring practices beyond what IS
currently required by facility licenses and the CNSC.
However, in follow-up correspondence, NWMO does
partially address the issue and very specifically
recommends ongoing consultation with host
communities to address the matter.
The impact of the current storage facilities' design life
relative to the timing for deciding when to construct
the deep repository as part of APM is not specifically
addressed. However, this issue is generally
addressed by NWMO's description of the APM Phase
1 activities, which include repackaging the used fuel if
required.
Final Report does not specifically urge the Federal
Government to make an expeditious decision.
However, NWMO does acknowledge the need to
keep the process moving and that APM is the
process to accomplish the needed results.
NWMO has noted that "We have not examined nor
do we make a judgment about the appropriate role of
nuclear power generation in Canada."
On February 23, 2006 Mayor Ryan will be attending the Annual Meeting of the
Canadian Association Host Communities where this subject will be a feature topic on
the agenda. ASL is scheduled to attend the meeting to discuss their peer review and
the above issues. NWMO representatives will also be present to participate in the
discussions. At a recent meeting, where CANHC members were present, it was agreed
in principle that the Association should correspond directly with the new Federal
Minister of Natural Resources to ensure that the interests of the nuclear host
communities are appropriately served.
Report OES 07-06
Date: February 13, 2006
(14.1
Subject: Nuclear Waster Management
Page 6
~J
AL. (Joe) Hu' w cks
~ Com m unity Emergency Management
Coordinator
Approved I Endorsed By:
Evere nts
Director, Operations & Emergency Services
EB:alh
Attachments
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering Ci ~o iI
// /
./
~