Written submission from the Mémoire de la …PMD 11-P1.202 File / dossier : 8.01.07 Date: 2011-02-21 Edocs:3682269 Written submission from the Regional Municipality of Durham In the

Darlington New Nuclear Power Plant Project Joint Review Panel ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Projet de nouvelle centrale nucléaire de Darlington Commission d’examen conjoint

PMD 11-P1.202

File / dossier : 8.01.07 Date: 2011-02-21

Edocs:3682269 Written submission from the Regional Municipality of Durham In the Matter of Ontario Power Generation Inc.

Mémoire de la Regional Municipality of Durham À l’égard de Ontario Power Generation Inc.

Environmental Assessment pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act of a proposal by Ontario Power Generation for a Project that includes site preparation, construction, operation, decommissioning and abandonment of up to four new nuclear power reactors at its existing Darlington Nuclear Site located near Oshawa, Ontario, in the Municipality of Clarington and a Licence to Prepare a Site application for the Project under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act.

L’évaluation environnementale, en vertu de la Loi canadienne sur l’évaluation environnementale, du projet d’Ontario Power Generation qui inclut la préparation de l’emplacement, la construction, l’exploitation, le déclassement et l’abandon de jusqu’à quatre nouveaux réacteurs nucléaires sur le site de la centrale nucléaire Darlington près d’Oshawa (Ontario), dans la municipalité de Clarington, et une demande de permis de préparation de l’emplacement, aux termes de la Loi sur la sûreté et la réglementation nucléaires.

Public Hearing March 21, 2011

Audience publique Le 21 mars 2011

The Regional Municipality Of Durham Office of the C.A.O. 605 Rossland Rd. East P.O. Box 623 Whitby, Ontario Canada, L1N 6A3 (905) 668-7711 1-800-372-1102 Fax: (905) 668-5831 Email: garry.cubitt@ durham.ca www.durham.ca Garry H. Cubitt Chief Administrative Officer

February 21, 2011 Mr. Alan R. Graham Chair, Joint Review Panel for Darlington New Nuclear Power Plant Project c/o Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Place Bell Canada 22nd Floor, 160 Elgin Street Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Dear Mr. Graham: Re: Region of Durham Response to Joint Review Panel Request In response to the Joint Review Panel’s letter of December 16, 2010, requesting our participation in the upcoming hearings for the Darlington New Nuclear Project, please find attached the Region’s written submission. We trust the attached information will assist the Panel in understanding how the Darlington project affects the Region’s mandated responsibilities as the upper tier host municipality. If you have further questions, please contact me directly or Christine Drimmie, a policy and research advisor, in my office. Sincerely,

Garry H. Cubitt, MSW Chief Administrative Officer

Attachment c: Mr. R.J. Clapp, Commissiomer of Planning Mr. C. Curtis, Commissioner of Works Dr. H. Drouin, Commissioner of Social Services Mr. A.L. Georgieff, Commissioner of Planning Dr. R. Kyle, Commissioner & Medical Officer of Health

Ms. L. Swami, Director of Licensing, Nuclear Generation Development, Ontario Power Generation

sinclairr

Typewritten Text

<original signed by>

The Regional Municipality of Durham

Submission to Joint Review Panel on The Darlington New Nuclear Project

February 21, 2011

1

1. Reason for submission This submission responds to the request of the Joint Review Panel (the Panel) on December 16, 2010 with respect to the proposed Darlington New Nuclear Project (DNNP). The Regional Municipality of Durham (the Region) made previous submissions to the Joint Review Panel on the DNNP. Please refer to our correspondence dated April 14, 2010 which describes the legislative framework for the Region's mandate and responsibilities and our further submission, dated June 29, 2010, outlining the Region's position with regard to the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and licence application by Ontario Power Generation (OPG). 2. Introduction The Regional Municipality of Durham is the upper tier host community for the proposed DNNP. The Region also hosts the existing Darlington Nuclear Generating Station and the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station. The Region is an informed, experienced and willing host to the proposed project. 3. Durham Region's Structure, Responsibilities and Funding Mechanisms In Ontario, the regional system of municipal government consists of two tiers. The upper tier, the Regional Municipality of Durham, delivers its services within the eight local area municipalities that make up the lower tier (see map in Attachment 1). The eight lower tier or “area municipalities” provide services such as detailed local planning, local roads, fire protection, tax collection, culture and parks and recreation. Some of the area municipalities (alone or jointly) operate local electrical distribution companies. The Region is not involved in that activity. The Region operates at the broader geographic scale and provides planning, infrastructure, financing and integration for services that cannot be supported reasonably on the smaller property tax base of the lower tier municipality. Durham Regional Council consists of:

Eight mayors of the local area municipalities Twenty councillors elected within the area municipalities who serve on both local

and regional councils The Regional Chair elected by the 28 members of Durham Regional Council

The Regional Municipality of Durham Submission to Joint Review Panel February 21, 2011

2

This structure offers a strong linkage between the regional and area municipal levels of government. The Region of Durham delivers a wide variety of infrastructure and human services including:

Community strategic and land use planning Development approvals and land division consent applications Economic development and tourism Property taxation policy Borrowing of money for capital expenditures of upper and lower tier municipalities Emergency management (planning, training and co-ordinating response for

natural and human-caused emergencies) Emergency services including 9-1-1 management, land ambulance services and

police services Regional roads, bridges and traffic signals Water supply, treatment, distribution and billing Sanitary sewage collection, treatment and billing Storm water collection on regional roads Residential waste management including diversion efforts such as recycling,

composting and disposal of residual waste Provincial Offences Court including administration, prosecution and collection of

fines Public health including health inspections, immunization programs, infant and

child health, and infectious disease prevention and control Social services including early learning and child-care programs; Durham

Behaviour Management Services (children); family services and counselling; long-term care and services for seniors; Ontario Works; and social housing

Durham Region Transit including specialized transit services The Region employs approximately 5700 full- and part-time staff to deliver these programs and services. Regional staff includes persons trained in diverse fields such as engineering, earth sciences, land use planning, health care, chemistry, psychology, social work, law, finance, management, information technology, and a wide variety skilled trades and technologies.


3

Operating and capital costs of Regional facilities and services are funded from a variety of sources including property taxes, development charges, user fees and transfers from provincial and federal governments. In 2011, approximately 50% of the average property tax bill for a Durham household will go toward Regional services. Many Regional services and programs are mandated by the province under specific pieces of legislation (e.g. the Safe Drinking Water Act 2002, the Health Protection and Promotion Act). These programs operate according to provincial rules and standards and often have complex funding arrangements (e.g. emergency medical services and long-term care). Some services are actually provincial programs managed and delivered by the Region (e.g. Ontario Works, Provincial Offences Act courts) on a cost-shared or cost-recovery basis. The Region also makes significant financial contributions to the operations of five local conservation authorities and the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation. Attached is a copy of our 2010 Regional Services and Property Tax Update which provides more detail (Attachment 2). This diversity of programs, partners and funding arrangements means that the effects of a mega-project like the DNNP on Regional services are difficult to predict and will vary over the life of the project. While the Regional Municipality of Durham has a number of specifically legislated mandates, under the Municipal Act 2001, the Region also has a general responsibility for the well-being of our residents, for our physical environment and for the Region's economy. The Region has a vested interest in the environmental and economic sustainability of the project, the socio-economic benefits and costs, and fairness in the distribution of those benefits and costs, geographically and across the generations. As noted earlier, the Region of Durham is a strong supporter of the DNNP and recognizes many of the potential benefits of the project, including:

Serving as a catalyst for new apprenticeship, business and employment opportunities

Maintaining the skilled employment base of the energy sector in the short term, and contributing to the expansion of the energy sector skills base over the long term

Stimulating increased enrolment in university and college programs that provide energy or nuclear-related degrees or certificates such as those offered at UOIT and Durham College, support skilled trade certification and other training programs

Improved economic viability and increased investment in local tourism businesses (i.e. hotels, motels) resulting in improved stock of tourist accommodations


4

Contributing to increased total household income, potential increase in property values and overall assessment base, and demand for existing and new housing

This submission outlines areas where the Region believes additional work should be done to ensure that the project is successful, not just as a power generation project, but also from a community sustainability perspective. By working with OPG and other partners in government and in the community, we can ensure that the necessary physical and human infrastructure is in place to support the project, as it commences, and throughout its lifecycle. The Region proposes an adaptive strategy of monitoring and mitigation such that the positive benefits flowing to the community outweigh exposure to negative impacts and risks in every generation affected by the project. In 100 years, it is our hope that nuclear power generation at Darlington will be lauded as a catalyst in the successful development of the Durham community, leaving a valued legacy of innovation, expertise in energy science and technology, and economic progress. Durham Regional Council is on record as a strong supporter of our local nuclear industry. One of the Region’s goals is to be known as the Energy Capital of Ontario and nuclear is a key component of that aspiration. Regional Council has supported the past refurbishments at Pickering, the ITER1 Project, the Darlington new build initiative, and re-licensing applications for the existing plants. The Region and OPG have enjoyed a positive relationship. We have collaborated on a variety of information-sharing bodies and community initiatives including the Durham Nuclear Health Committee (since 1995), the Darlington Planning and Infrastructure Information Sharing Committee, the Pickering Nuclear Community Advisory Committee and the Durham Strategic Energy Alliance. As well, the Region and OPG have had a strong, ongoing working relationship with respect to nuclear emergency planning and preparedness. OPG has been an excellent corporate citizen in our communities with corporate and employee contributions to environmental projects, education, health care and local charities such as the United Way. Three nuclear power projects are currently proposed within our municipality: the Darlington new nuclear project, refurbishment of the existing Darlington reactors, and continued operation and decommissioning of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station. As a regional government, Durham is working to understand, respond to and support these projects in a coordinated, corporate and comprehensive manner.

1 International Thermo-nuclear Energy Reactor Project – in the 1990s, the site now proposed for the DNNP, was the site of Canada’s bid for the ITER project. The ITER bid ultimately was won by France.


5

4. Durham Regional Council’s position on the Darlington New Nuclear Project (DNNP) In spring 2010, Regional staff conducted a comprehensive review of OPG’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Technical Support Documents and Application for a Licence to Develop a Site. The review concluded that, from a Regional perspective, with proper planning, community impacts of the DNNP could be mitigated and that over the life of the project, net benefits will accrue to the Region and its residents. The results of the review were summarized in a report to Regional Council (Report # 2010-J-29). In response to this review, Regional Council endorsed the report and passed a resolution stating their position regarding the DNNP. The report and council resolution were the basis for the Region's June 29, 2010 submission to the Panel. Council's resolution reconfirmed that Durham Region, as an experienced and informed nuclear host community, is a willing and supportive host for the DNNP. It also voiced Council’s strong opposition to any design for the DNNP facility that would include the construction of cooling towers and endorsed the approach of establishing a Regional Impacts and Services Agreement (RISA i.e. a host community agreement) related to the DNNP with OPG, rather than with a third party vendor. The purpose of the RISA is to identify appropriate actions, compensations or mitigations to resolve impacts on Regional services or facilities over the life cycle of the DNNP project. Within the RISA, the Region expects to deal with matters within its mandate such as:

Community well-being and quality of life Provision of water and wastewater services Timing and construction of Regional road improvements Reduced lifespan of Regional roads and bridges due to the additional heavy truck

traffic associated with DNNP haul routes, etc. Fair payment of taxes, user rates or development charges (or equivalent

payments) as they relate to the project Impacts on police, emergency medical (i.e. ambulance), health, social and transit

services and existing or new Regional facilities Revision of Durham Emergency Management Office nuclear emergency,

evacuation and sheltering plans Continuity of the agreement(s) should OPG or the DNNP be restructured, sold or

privatized in the future


6

In the resolution, Regional Council also anticipated negotiating arrangements with OPG with respect to ongoing monitoring and Environmental Assessment (EA) follow-up programs such as:

Development of Traffic, Dust and Noise Management Plans Peer reviews of future OPG studies such as the Traffic, Dust and Noise

Management Plans Establishment and operation of a new air quality monitoring station in Clarington Lake water modelling studies Monitoring of indicators of community well-being and quality of life during all

phases of the DNNP Plans for timely removal of nuclear waste

In addition, Regional Council raised contextual issues, relevant to the Region as a nuclear host community, which go beyond the scope of the DNNP review currently before the Panel. Council's resolution reiterated to OPG, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) and the federal government, the Region’s strong opposition to long-term storage of used nuclear fuel at the nuclear stations in Durham Region. The resolution urged the federal government and NWMO to expedite the development of a centralized deep geological repository to manage all nuclear fuel waste produced in Canada. Further, Regional Council requested the federal government to update the Nuclear Liability Act 1976 as soon as possible to increase the amount of nuclear operator liability and index that amount to the annual rate of inflation. The Region is pleased that Bill C15 which would accomplish this task is before the House is in second reading. We are hopeful that this issue can be brought to a reasonably swift resolution. As OPG progresses through the EA and approval processes for the DNNP, the proposed refurbishment of the existing Darlington nuclear reactors, and the decommissioning of the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station, Regional Council has requested that OPG work with the Region in an ongoing manner to identify, discuss, mitigate and/or address the combined impacts of those projects on Regional services and facilities.


7

5. Additional information received or actions taken since June 2010 Since the Region’s June 2010 submission to the Panel, the following events/actions have occurred:

The Region and OPG commenced a series of meetings to exchange information and begin the negotiation of a Regional Impacts and Services Agreement (host community agreement).

Regional staff has carried out additional research into the impacts and mitigations of energy mega-projects in other communities such as the Alberta oil sands and natural gas developments, and the Kincardine Deep Geological Repository for Low and Intermediate Level Waste.

OPG staff and their EA consultants provided information sessions for Regional staff describing the assumptions and processes used in assessing the potential transportation and socio-economic impacts of the DNNP.

OPG provided updates to Durham Nuclear Health Committee, the Region's Finance and Administration Committee, and Regional Council on the Refurbishment and DNNP projects.

Responses to our June 2010 report were received from the federal ministers of Environment and Natural Resources. (See attachments 3 and 4.)

To help alleviate traffic impacts of OPG operations, OPG, Durham Region and Metrolinx are working toward a legal agreement to offer the Smart Commute program to staff at all of OPG's Durham facilities.

As time permitted, Regional staff tracked questions and submissions to the Panel on issues of interest to the Region including those from federal and provincial ministries and agencies. This was challenging due to the sheer volume and technical nature of the questions and responses.

Some of the issues raised by the Region in our June 2010 submission were explored with greater technical expertise by ministries and agencies (for example, lakefill, cooling systems). For this reason, the Region feels confident that the Panel has requested the information it needs for sound decision-making and does not discuss them further here. In addition, some items raised in our June submission have been satisfied through subsequent actions by or discussions with OPG. 6. Opportunities to enhance Regional outcomes of the DNNP As mentioned, Report 2010-J-29 and Regional Council's resolution were the basis for the Region's June 29, 2010 submission to the Panel. They are also the foundation for this submission. Regional Council is a strong supporter of the DNNP and the Region wants to ensure that all critical factors for the project to be both a corporate and a community success


8

are in place. Our goal is to ensure a safe, secure project, while optimizing the benefits flowing to our municipality. The Region continues to oppose a design that includes cooling towers. During the Region's review of the EIS, staff identified areas of Regional responsibility where new information needs to be incorporated into the next stages of planning for the project. In some cases (e.g. traffic management), updated or additional analysis will be needed once key project decisions are made (e.g. selection of the vendor and technology). The EIS did not examine every Regional service area so some potential impacts over the project lifespan were not specifically assessed (e.g. ambulance services). The Region believes that within the RISA, provision must be made to monitor potential effects on Regional services, infrastructure and the community and to provide for future mitigation if the effects meet or exceed specified thresholds. Where adverse trends occur, we believe these can be mitigated with appropriate actions such as financial compensation, funding partnerships and other measures. Even the broader contextual issues identified in the Region’s June 2010 submission to the Panel have clear solutions. The power generators, the CNSC, NWMO and the federal government have the ability, and should desire, to expedite the long-term used fuel waste disposal solution. While the world is shifting toward conservation and cleaner sources of power, some of these shifts will increase the demand for electricity (e.g. electric cars). Nuclear generation will continue to provide a large and reliable share of the provincial electricity base load requirement. Creating a sound long-term disposal strategy for used nuclear fuel is the essential final step in establishing nuclear as a sustainable power source. Developing the long-term storage solution and technologies could also be a tremendous business opportunity for Canada as a globally marketable set of skills and technologies needed by all nuclear generating nations. We encourage the NWMO, the power generators, and the federal government to shift their view of this activity from that of solving a "nuclear waste disposal problem" to one of putting Canada at the forefront of developing and delivering this technology. The federal government can make immediate passage of Bill C-15 (the Nuclear Liability Act) a high legislative priority. The Region of Durham would welcome the opportunity to work with our MPs and the federal minister to engage all federal parties about the need for this change as a clear matter of due diligence and duty of care. This is not a case of supporting or opposing nuclear power – it is a matter fiduciary responsibility for federally regulated facilities already in existence.


9

7. Elaboration on Matters of Ongoing Regional Interest There are a number of matters where the Region believes that, working with OPG through in-design planning and potential mitigation, we can better support the DNNP to ensure its success and optimize the outcomes for the Durham community. a) Integrated planning for community effects The EA process for the DNNP is intended to look at the anticipated effects of up to four new reactors across a wide range of variables, from groundwater to flora and fauna, to the road network and the workers. To make the task manageable, certain variables were selected for examination and others excluded. The EIS tends to look at each variable in isolation from others and largely focuses on “significant adverse impacts”. However there also will be many small changes that alter the complex human ecosystem in Durham. The Region must plan for these smaller changes as well. The DNNP would provide Ontario with the reliable energy supply needed to ensure a prosperous future for the province. The Region is proud to support this broad benefit. However, the provincial benefit should not be delivered at the expense of Durham residents. Our goal is to ensure the greatest possible social and economic benefit of the DNNP accrues to the people of Durham Region. We expect to work with OPG formally through the RISA to monitor changes and identify where additional mitigation measures may be needed. We also will work informally with partners in the community to capture or create these benefits. For example, to maximize economic development in the Region, OPG could offer incentives or facilitate collaborative opportunities for their supply chain companies to locate field offices, training centres or research and development functions in Durham. They also could support mechanisms or partnerships to stimulate local development of new technologies that OPG and the broader energy sector can use. Finally, the Region prefers to deal directly with OPG rather than the third party vendor for two important reasons: to maintain clear lines of accountability for project and community outcomes, and to ensure that actions related to the DNNP can be integrated with actions related to the other proposed nuclear projects in Durham. We are pleased to note that the Region and OPG are engaged in discussions regarding the necessary elements of a host community agreement. To ensure that the Durham community derives optimal community outcomes during all phases of the DNNP, the Region recommends that, as a condition of approval, OPG enters into a Regional Impacts and Services Agreement (RISA i.e. a host community agreement) with the Regional Municipality of Durham.


10

b) Transportation and traffic outcomes Since the EIS was prepared, circumstances that will have a significant effect on the transportation network available to support the DNNP have changed:

Due to declining revenues during the economic recession, the Region's five-year roads forecast has been revised. Some projects planned for Clarington have been pushed further into the future.

In June 2010, the province revealed an indefinite delay in completing the Highway 407 east extension to Highway 35/115 and the associated east Durham link to Highway 401. According to the province, the interim terminus will be at Simcoe Street in north Oshawa.

The widening of Highway 401 and interchange improvements at Courtice Road, Holt Road and Waverly Road have not progressed.

With no indication of phasing or timing for completion of Highway 407 and the east Durham link, additional, significant changes will be necessary to the Region’s planned five-year roads program to manage traffic flowing off the truncated highway in Oshawa.

As a result, Durham Region believes that substantially more project-related traffic will use Regional and local roads than predicted in the EIS. The need to move traffic efficiently in and out of the DNNP site will be amplified if the Darlington refurbishment proceeds concurrently with the DNNP. Road upgrades must begin immediately to be in place to support the proposed timing of construction activity for the DNNP. Therefore, as a condition of approval, the Region recommends that OPG mitigate traffic related to DNNP site preparation, construction and workers on Regional roads by providing financing for the EA, design and construction of the Regional Road improvements necessary to accommodate the DNNP. This work must begin in 2011 to support site preparation commencing in 2013. c) Traffic, Noise and Dust Management Plans Related to the transportation issues, is the commitment by OPG in the EIS to develop a series of “effects” management plans, once further project decisions have been made (i.e. vendor/technology selection). The Region considers it critical from the traffic management, transit, community health and safety, and policing perspectives to be consulted on these plans and to peer review them, as a condition of approval. In our June submission to the Panel, the anticipated effect on air quality of the DNNP site preparation and construction, combined with the effects of other projects occurring simultaneously in Clarington, was identified as a potential health issue. Other ministries and agencies also raised air quality concerns. The Region was pleased to hear from OPG that their commitments to EA follow-up monitoring include an air quality


11

surveillance program in the local study area. This program will provide valuable data to support mitigation measures during all phases of the DNNP. d) Municipal finance matters The EIS makes broad qualitative assumptions that growth in population and employment associated with the early phases of the project will have only positive consequences for the community. Unfortunately, this is not the experience for most rapidly growing municipalities in the GTA, or for communities elsewhere that have hosted energy mega-projects. The notion that property tax revenues paid by new residents will adequately cover the costs of additional community services reflects an over-simplified understanding of how these services, in particular human services, are funded and delivered. While OPG pays property taxes for buildings, structures and lands located on the site, as valued by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), the assessment (for the portion classified as "generating buildings") is based on statutory rates established in the Assessment Act in 1968, which have never been indexed. Due to the application of a fixed and antiquated assessment rate for OPG's nuclear facilities, the benefit has not grown proportionately. This has resulted in an inequity to other Regional taxpayers who fund the shortfall. To address this fairness issue, the Region continues to strongly encourage Ontario to update and index the statutory assessment rate applied to nuclear facilities by MPAC. As a result of the proposed DNNP, the EIS cites a notable share of forecasted direct and indirect employment growth within Durham, which will bring the benefit of assessment growth to the Region. However, many workers are expected to reside outside the Region and will pay no property taxes in Durham. This transient or commuter workforce will place added demands on Regional services and infrastructure (i.e. road network, transit system) that will not be offset by an increase in property tax revenue. The Region needs to recover the costs of infrastructure and service-related capital required to support the DNNP. Normally, development charges are applied by municipalities as a charge against land development to pay for increased capital costs to provide new servicing required by that development. However, since the DNNP is a federal undertaking (buildings and structures licensed and regulated by the CNSC), it is not subject to the Development Charges Act. Therefore, it is imperative that this shortfall in growth capital funding be resolved through adequate compensation. Regional staff is analyzing the property tax and development charge contributions of the existing nuclear facilities in Durham and estimated future contributions of the DNNP based on the information currently available. As acknowledged in the EIS, a project


12

of this magnitude requires close co-operation with the host municipalities of Clarington and Durham Region to manage the potential effects and ensure that the communities are not financially burdened. e) Human services impacts and EA follow-up As recommended in the EIS, EA follow-up monitoring will be done for a number of socio-economic indicators. The Region would like to work with OPG and other community partners as appropriate to outline a program of monitoring and tracking community effects of the project. This would help us better understand the complex outcomes of such a large project and respond appropriately. Planning ahead will also help ensure that the human services infrastructure is in place to help OPG attract the necessary labour force and support the workers and families once they arrive. At present in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), most human services are over-subscribed by existing populations. Many services – from child-care to social housing, hospitals and mental health services, to long-term care and services for children and adults with special needs – have substantial waiting lists. Per capita funding levels for such services in the suburban areas of the GTA are typically well below the provincial average 2. Many of these services fall within, or are related to, the Region’s mandated responsibilities for social services and public health. Adding several thousand additional workers and their families in a focused geographical area over a short time period will further strain these services. Current residents, OPG workers and potential new staff will definitely feel the effects. The availability of these services may well affect OPG’s ability to attract workers, and therefore, the success of the project. In the early phases of the project, the influx of new population and workers associated with the DNNP (and the refurbishment project if it proceeds) will tend to exacerbate human service capacity issues existing in the Region. In the final phase of the DNNP, the Region may face a variety of socio-economic impacts associated with the eventual closure of the facility. The Region recognizes that, in accordance with the regulatory process, OPG will assess and mitigate impacts of the closure phase in the future. Therefore, further to the recommendations in the EIS with respect to EA follow-up, the Region proposes that program for community impacts and human services monitoring be developed by OPG and the Region and that provision for monetary compensation and/or other measures to mitigate impacts be included in the RISA.

2 See Growing Pains: Strong Communities Coalition report, October 2006


13

f) Emergency services impacts and EA follow-up Further to the points above regarding financing and pressures on community services, many of the same issues apply to the emergency services the Region provides, including policing and ambulance. As additional information about workforce and construction timing becomes available, the Region can use this data as a basis for effective service and emergency response planning. Departments could then identify indicators for detecting strain on the systems and work with OPG to develop possible mitigations through service, program or facility expansions or other measures. We note that OPG is contributing toward a new emergency operations centre for Clarington. The Region therefore recommends that, as conditions of project approval: OPG commit to providing the Region with detailed information about the

projected timing of planned activity, numbers of workers expected each year, and the trends in build-up and ramping down of the workforce anticipated during each phase of the project as soon as the data becomes available.

A program for emergency services monitoring be developed by OPG and the Region and that provision for monetary compensation or other measures to mitigate impacts, be included in the RISA.

8. Recommendations to the Joint Review Panel For most major development projects that occur within Durham, the Region normally has a planning approval role that includes an ability to set conditions of approval that will benefit or protect our community. Due the federal jurisdiction for nuclear facilities, the Region must count on the Joint Review Panel to carry out this role instead. Consequently, the Regional Municipality of Durham recommends to the Joint Review Panel that the Darlington New Nuclear Project should proceed, subject to the following conditions of approval: OPG enters into a Regional Impacts and Services Agreement (RISA i.e. a host

community agreement) with the Regional Municipality of Durham to ensure that the community is not financially burdened by the DNNP and derives optimal community outcomes during all phases of the project.

OPG mitigate traffic related to DNNP site preparation, construction and workers on Regional roads by providing financing for the EA, design and construction of the Regional Road improvements necessary to accommodate the DNNP. This work must begin in 2011 to support site preparation commencing in 2013.

The traffic, noise and dust management plans be developed in consultation with the Region, to the Region’s satisfaction including the opportunity to peer review the plans at OPG’s expense.


14

OPG commit to providing the Region detailed information about the projected timing of planned activity, numbers of workers expected in each year, and the trends in building up and ramping down of the workforce anticipated during each phase of the project as soon as the data becomes available.

A program for human services monitoring be developed by OPG and the Region and that provision for monetary compensation and/or other measures to mitigate impacts be included in the RISA.

A program for emergency services monitoring be developed by OPG and the Region and that provision for monetary compensation and/or other measures to mitigate impacts be included in the RISA.

Further, to ensure that the project does not place an unfair property tax burden on the Durham community, the Region asks the Panel to recommend to the Province of Ontario that it update and index the antiquated statutory property tax assessment rate applied to nuclear facilities by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation. 9. Conclusion Due to the nature of the business and the rules governing this project approval process, OPG is understandably focused on the task of physically building the DNNP. The Region appreciates this steady focus and we have great confidence in OPG's technical ability to deliver a safe and effective new generating station. As a regional municipality, it is our job to identify the human aspects and community impacts of the project and ensure that they are not overlooked in the process. We appreciate the opportunity to bring this perspective to the Joint Review Panel. The Regional Municipality of Durham strongly supports the DNNP as a project that can bring great benefits to the Region over many decades. Given our positive relationship with OPG and our constructive discussions to date regarding the Regional Impacts and Services Agreement, we believe that optimal outcomes for the community can be realized from the DNNP. Through this agreement, the Region and OPG can address some immediate requirements and, by monitoring community impacts over time, use an adaptive management strategy to address additional mitigations required during the lifespan of the project. We look forward to working with OPG to not only support a successful nuclear power project, but a project that also empowers our community.


15

Attachments: 1- Map of Durham Region (Map may be viewed at

http://www.durham.ca/departments/planning/maps/Transportation_Map.pdf ) 2- 2010 Regional Services and Property Tax Update (Brochure may be viewed at

http://www.durham.ca/departments/finance/propertytax/propertytax2010.pdf ) 3- Letter from the federal Minister of Natural Resources, dated July 28, 2010 4- Letter from the federal Minister of the Environment dated Aug. 20, 2010

Lake Simcoe

Lake

Scugog

Lake Ontario

12

48

12

7

7

7A

7

401

401

11535

2401

2

Beaverton

Cannington

Port Perry

Newcastle

Bowmanville

Courtice

Uxbridge

Alton

a Rd.

Broc

k Rd.

Lake

Ridg

e Rd.

Thick

son R

d.

White

s Rd.

Taunton Rd.

Westn

ey R

d.

9

4

3

34 57

42

18

33

55

3

34

23

5

31

1

21

8

192

8

47

11

39

1

30

2

13 23

13

6

10

12

23

15

48

48

12

2

Orono

20

57747

Sunderland

57

14 35 115

TOWNSHIP OF SCUGOG

TOWNSHIP OF BROCK

MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON

TOWNSHIP OF UXBRIDGE

CITY OF

PICKERING

TOWN OF

AJAX

TOWN OF

WHITBY

CITY OF OSHAWA

This map has been produced from a variety of sources. The Region of Durham does not make any representations concerning the accuracy, likely results, or reliability of the use of the materials. The Region hereby disclaims all representations and warranties.

Citation:Digital cartography by The Regional Municipality of Durham, Planning Department, December, 2010.

DURHAM

0 4 8 12 16Kilometres

The RegionalMunicipalityof Durham

Police 21

Social Services & Housing 10

Public Health & EMS 8

Transit* 4

Roads & Winter Maintenance 2

Solid Waste Management* 1

Other 1Average Residential Tax Impact $47

2010 Budget Highlights MaintainServiceswithTargetedInvestmentsThe 2010 Regional Business Plans and Budgets focus on maintaining the delivery of essential Regional Services such as Policing, Roads, Emergency Medical Services, Public Health, Long Term Care, Transit, Solid Waste Management and Social Services, while making targeted investments in priority infrastructure and support services, including:

Continued road rehabilitation, investment in bridges, traffic signal • systems and road expansion ($28.4 million);Increased winter control and maintenance costs ($0.7 million);• New Police Forensic Investigation Facility in Clarington ($10.6 million);• New ambulance station in north Oshawa ($3.8 million);• New waste initiatives ($2.0 million) to reach 70% landfill diversion • target, partially funded by increased industry subsidy ($0.9 million);New staff (13) to administer anticipated increases in the mandatory • Provincial Ontario Works (OW) program and to accommodate an estimated 9.5% increase in OW caseloads ($1.7 million);Additional staffing (five) for Long-Term Care facilities funded by new • Provincial subsidies; and,Continued support for our university, hospitals and Conservation • Authorities, including a new commitment to provide $5 million in capital funding to Durham College over seven years.

Average Residential Tax Impact of 2010 Regional Business Plans and Budgets

Based on an average residential household with a 2010 Current Value Assessment (CVA) of $299,100, the 2010 Property Tax Budget (not including water and sewer services) will result in a property tax increase of approximately 2.15% or $47 as follows:

*Transit and Solid Waste impacts vary by Local Area Municipality.

Financial Stability

Durham is one of only seven Canadian Municipalities awarded a Triple “A” credit rating by Moody’s Investors Service, and one of only 13 Municipalities outside of the USA.

Budgetary Impact $

Regional Services & Property Tax 2010 Update

The Regional Municipality of Durham encompasses eight Local Area Municipalities covering 2,535 square kilometres and provides services and infrastructure to more than 617,000 residents. Regional Council includes the Regional Chair and 28 locally elected municipal officials, including the Mayors of each of the Local Area Municipalities.

In addition to a Regional Headquarters located on Rossland Road in Whitby, there are more than 300 other facilities located throughout the Region, which provide front-line services to residents.

Police Services871 officers and 357 civilian staff in • five division stations. 220 patrol cruisers, 122 other vehicles • and a helicopter.

Emergency Medical Services198 full-time and 70 part-time paramedics.• 10 paramedic response stations.• 35 ambulances and 10 rapid • response vehicles.

Social Services & Public HealthFour long-term care facilities • providing 847 beds.Three adult day program delivery sites.• Four social assistance offices.• One Ontario Works resource centre.• Nine family services counselling offices.• Six child care centres & three nursery schools.• 23 social housing facilities.• Four health clinics and four other health • service locations.

Solid WasteOne active and six inactive landfill sites.• Three waste management facilities.• Material recovery facility and call centre.• Four hazardous waste depots.•

Public WorksFive depots.• 280 vehicles for waste, water/sewer and road • responsibilities, including 68 snow plows and sanders.

Roads & Bridges2,158 lane kilometres of paved roads.• 211 bridges and culverts.• 545 traffic control signals.•

Water Supply & Sanitary SewerageServices provided to approximately 153,000 • residential and 4,500 commercial water and sewer customers on a user pay basis (not funded through property taxes).

Water Supply14 water supply plants,18 pumping stations • and 23 storage facilities.2,382 kilometres of mains with 14,623 • hydrants and approximately 158,000 meters.

Sanitary Sewerage 12 water pollution control plants and 52 • pumping stations.1,985 kilometres of gravity mains with 28,573 • maintenance holes and approximately 152,000 service connections.

Durham Region Transit164 conventional and community buses.• 30 specialized services buses and 10 • non-revenue vehicles.8.5 million riders in 2009 • and 395,827 service hours.

"

""

" "

"" " "

""

" ""

"" " "

"

"

"

Ontario

Simcoe

Municipality of ClaringtonCity of Oshawa

Town of Ajax

Township of Brock

Township of Uxbridge

Township of Scugog

Town ofWhitby

City of Pickering

Lake

Lake Simcoe

LakeScugog

Durham Region Services

2010 Budgeted Gross ExpendituresApproximately$1.15billion

General Purposes$724m(63%)

SolidWaste$55m(5%)

Transit$74m(7%)

SanitarySewerage*$199m(17%)

WaterSupply*$94m(8%)

*Water Supply and Sanitary Sewerage services are user pay and are not funded from property taxes.

Financing of 2010 Property Tax Supported Services*Approximately$853million

Reserves/ReserveFunds$42m(5%)

UserFeesandOther$124m(14%)

ProvincialSubsidy$195m(23%)

PropertyTaxes$492m(58%)

*Includes general purposes, solid waste and transit. Excludes water supply and sanitary sewerage.

Average Residential Property Taxes The average residential home in Durham has a CVA of approximately $299,100 and will pay an average of $2,230 in 2010 Regional property taxes as follows:

Social,Senior,Health&EMSServices(31%)

Other(11%)

Roads(12%)

PoliceServices(30%)

$254$271

$699

$661

2010 Reassessment Phase-In ImpactsAs mandated by the Province, all properties in Ontario were reassessed with a 2008 valuation date. This new assessment is being phased in during the 2009 to 2012 taxation years. Assessment is the responsibility of the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), which administers the Provincial Assessment Act.

*Transit and Solid Waste Management impacts vary by Local Area Municipality.

$345SolidWaste&TransitServices*(16%)

CentsPoliceServices 30SocialServices 18PublicWorksRoads&Bridges 12Regional&GOTransit* 8SolidWaste* 8ServicesforSeniors 7GeneralGovernment 7PublicHealth&EmergencyMedicalServices 6MunicipalPropertyAssessmentCorp. 2SpecialContributions&Reserves 1ConservationAuthorities 1

*Transit and Solid Waste Management impacts vary by Local Area Municipality.

Average Regional Tax Dollar $1.00

Your 2010 Regional Tax Dollar at Work

Budget Overview

Protection ServicesDurham Region Police Service (DRPS)2010GrossExpenditures:$153.0million(13.3%)2010PropertyTaxes:$145.9million(29.7%)

The primary goal of the DRPS is to provide police services to ensure citizens and visitors have a safe community.

Durhamcrimestatisticscontinuedtodeclinein2009:Offences against people decreased 3.6%;• Property crimes decreased 7.5%; • Traffic fatalities on Durham roads decreased 20.8%; and, • Motor vehicle collisions decreased 17.7%.•

The 2008-2010 DRPS Strategic Business Plan is a blueprint that sets strategic priorities. At the heart of the Business Plan is a new corporate philosophy: empowering frontline officers to solve problems by addressing the root causes of crime, fear of crime and anti-social behaviour, through partnerships with existing or emerging community resources.

This Problem-Oriented Policing philosophy will be integrated into all operational and administrative activities across the organization, and form the cornerstone for a sustainable service.

Therearefourstrategiccommunitysafetypriorities:Youth Safety, Roadway Safety, Violence Against/Exploitation of • Persons and Property Crime.

ThePlanalsoidentifiesfourstrategicorganizationalpriorities:Diversity, Service-Wide Transition, Information Management and • Technology, and Emergency Preparedness.

Programs and services will be evaluated to ensure continuous improvement and learning to secure the most potential to positively impact identified community safety needs.

The 2008-2010 Strategic Business Plan supports the service transition to a sustainable service delivery model that meets the community safety needs of citizens and DRPS members in a complex, evolving environment.

Public Health2010GrossExpenditures:$41.7million(3.6%)2010PropertyTaxes:$11.3million(2.3%)

The Health Department addresses growing and changing health needs within our community. Major program areas include: Chronic Diseases and Injuries; Family Health; Infectious Diseases; and Environmental Health Emergency Preparedness. In 2010, the Health Department will:

Provide health assessment, education services and environmental • information to an estimated 30,000 callers; Administer 15,000 influenza and 26,000 Meningococcal C, Hepatitis B • and HPV vaccinations;Provide health assessments, education and counselling for 13,000 • sexual health clinic clients;Provide support to 6,400 new mothers;• Assist over 7,000 vulnerable residents requiring dental care;• Conduct 6,200 inspections to ensure safe food handling practices;• Test 14 public bathing beaches and conduct inspections of 340 small • drinking water systems;Monitor 1,500 stagnant water locations for the presence of West Nile • virus and mosquito breeding sites; and,Prepare and test emergency management plans.•

Emergency Medical Services (EMS)2010GrossExpenditures:$38.0million(3.3%)2010PropertyTaxes:$21.6million(4.4%)

The primary goal of EMS is to deliver a high-quality ambulance system throughout the Region that is focused on clinical and customer service excellence that is both responsive to client needs and effective at reducing mortality in emergency situations.

In 2010, a study on the environmental, economic and operational benefits of migrating to a new generation gasoline ambulance will be conducted.

74,086 80,404 81,653 86,00084,564

37,943

10Years

1996

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

est.

EMS Call VolumeSource:2010RegionalBusinessPlansandBudgets

Police Staffing per 100,000 PopulationSource:2008OMBI

Durh

am

York

Halto

n

Peel

Water

loo

Niag

ara

194 184 175216

182215

Social Assistance2010GrossExpenditures:$117.5million(10.2%)2010PropertyTaxes:$44.3million(9.0%)

Durham Region administers the Ontario Works (OW) program for more than 20,000 persons monthly on behalf of the Province and provides approximately 20% of the funding. Employment programs for participants also prepare and assist them in (re)entering the workforce.

The Region also funds 50% of the Provincially mandated and administered Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP). Current economic conditions have resulted in a significant increase in caseloads in Durham Region. It is anticipated that this trend will continue through 2011.

Long Term Care and Services for Seniors2010GrossExpenditures:$86.9million(7.6%)2010PropertyTaxes:$34.4million(7.0%)

Durham Region operates four long-term care facilities for residents with multiple and complex care needs. Adult Day programs and Meals on Wheels programs are also provided.

Hillsdale Estates located in Oshawa has 300 beds.• Hillsdale Terraces located in Oshawa has 200 beds.• Fairview Lodge located in Whitby has 198 beds.• Lakeview Manor located in Beaverton has 149 beds. •

Social Housing2010GrossExpenditures:$59.0million(5.1%)2010PropertyTaxes:$35.9million(7.3%)

The Region administers funding for 6,700 social housing units operated by 45 housing agencies and is overseeing the development of 160 new affordable housing units. Property management services are provided at 23 sites owned by the Durham Regional Local Housing Corporation.

Emergency hostel services are provided to 1,400 homeless individuals and families, in addition to funding 10 social agencies that assist more than 3,000 homeless people in finding and retaining accommodation.

Family & Children’s Services2010GrossExpenditures:$45.2million(3.9%)2010PropertyTaxes:$10.5million(2.1%)

Durham Region provides 20,600 counselling sessions to residents in a caring compassionate environment where people can recognize and develop their own capacity for change. Such programs include: Passport To Community Living Initiative; Partner Assault Response; and Adult Community Support Services.

Durham Region directly operates six child care centres and three nursery schools while providing support to 183 child care sites (10,000 spaces).

Durh

am

York

Halto

n

Peel

Water

loo

Niag

ara

50,654

8,399

43,027

16,257 18,026

Ontario Works Average Monthly CaseloadSource:2010RegionalBusinessPlansandBudgets

Bed Days Available Per100,000PopulationSource:2008OMBI

2000

2001

20

0220

0320

0420

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

10 es

t.

7,6296,010

9,840 79,245

32

2126

3644 40

Durh

am

York

Halto

n

Peel

Water

loo

Niag

ara

Durh

am

York

Halto

n

Peel

Water

loo

Niag

ara

Housing Units Available Per1,000HouseholdsSource:2008OMBI

105

187 176

106 112138

Regulated Child Care Spaces Available Per1,000ChildrenSource:2008OMBI

Services to People

Regional Road System2010GrossExpenditures:$69.5million(6.1%)2010PropertyTaxes:$59.7million(12.1%)

The Works Department is responsible for the safety, design, construction and maintenance of the Regional road network, and the maintenance of 300 Regionally owned properties and buildings.

Major road expansion and reconstruction projects, along with bridge rehabilitations and replacements are planned for 2010 totaling $28.4 million. Activities include $12.9 million for the rehabilitation and reconstruction of portions of the existing Regional road network.

TheWorksDepartmentcontinuesinitiativestosupportmoreefficientoperationsincluding:

Maintenance Operations expanded its use of GPS to monitor vehicle • idling, and winter maintenance product discharge, which resulted in less waste and a reduction in environmental impact; The Traffic Division completed retrofits of light emitting diodes (LED) • traffic signals for better visibility and reduced energy consumption, in addition to continued analysis and optimization of traffic signal timings to mitigate congestion and improve traffic flows; The Facilities Division continued its state-of-good-repair program • including upgrades and retrofits to maximize energy efficiency; and Up to 20% recycled asphalt is used as a component of new hot mix • paving operations.

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,000

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

est.

Winter Control Cost Per Lane KmSource:2010BusinessPlansandBudgets

Transportation Infrastructure Asset ConditionSource:2009RegionalAssetManagementReport

VeryGood38%

Fair27%

Good22%

Poor&Critical13%

Other Funding and Services2010GrossExpenditures:$113.9million(10.0%)2010PropertyTaxes:$52.1million(10.0%)

Othermajorpropertytaxfundingandservicesinclude:Assessment services (MPAC) $7.4 million• Conservation Authorities $6.2 million• Planning $4.6 million• Economic Development $2.0 million• Emergency 9-1-1 Phone System $1.3 million• Durham Emergency Management Office $0.5 million•

SpecialContributionsinclude:University of Ontario Institute of Technology $1.5 million• Land Acquisition Reserve Fund $1.0 million• Durham College $0.5 million• Hospital Reserve $0.1 million•

Ontario Municipal CAO’s Benchmarking Initiative (OMBI)2010GrossExpenditures:$0.1million2010PropertyTaxes:$0.1million

The Region of Durham is an active participant in the OMBI. This initiative involves the collaboration of the Region with other municipal partners. Through this initiative, Durham has been able to share information with other municipalities supporting Durham’s commitment to continuous improvements in service delivery. The initiative enhances municipal accountability, which strengthens both support for and trust in municipal governance.

The OMBI results are influenced by a number of specific factors that should be considered when reviewing the results. A detailed listing of program specific influencing factors and results can be found in the 2008 OMBI Performance Benchmarking Report located on the OMBI website at www.ombi.ca.

Transportation & Other Services

Durham Region Transit (DRT)2010GrossExpenditures:$73.8million(6.4%)2010PropertyTaxes:$38.6million(7.9%)

DRT focuses on providing residents with an effective and efficient public transit service, with customers enjoying the benefit of travelling anywhere within Durham Region for a single “One Fare Anywhere”. Customers may transfer quickly and easily between DRT and GO Transit without additional cost. GO Transit services along the Hwy. 2 and Hwy. 12 corridors serve as essential supporting connections.

Specialized Services is an accessible door-to-door transportation service for persons with disabilities. The 30 fully accessible buses in the Specialized Services fleet provide assistance for approximately 2,800 clients in overcoming mobility challenges.

Transit costs are recovered through property taxes based on a combination of assessment and service levels within each Local Area Municipality. Transit is currently in the fifth year of a seven year phase-in to a common Region-wide property taxation rate.

Solid Waste 2010GrossExpenditures:$54.8million(4.8%)2010PropertyTaxes:$37.5million(7.6%)

The Region is responsible for all waste processing and disposal including Blue Box and Green Bin materials, as well as marketing and educational services. The Region is also responsible for all waste collection in Pickering, Ajax, Clarington, Brock, Scugog and Uxbridge and partners with Oshawa and Whitby to ensure uniform collection programs.

In 2009, Integrated Solid Waste diversion programs were implemented Region-wide, including enhanced diversion collection. Total waste volume was 229,248 tonnes with 52% diversion from landfill being achieved, including credits associated with grass cycling and composters.

In 2010, new diversion initiatives in support of the new 70% waste diversion target include additional blue box container availability and distribution; new special waste events for hazardous and electronic waste; and, pilot studies to assess the potential for the collection and recycling of polystyrene, mattresses and upholstery.

Solid Waste Management costs are recovered through property taxes based on a combination of assessment and service levels within each Local Area Municipality. Waste is currently in the second year of a three year phase-in to a common Region-wide property taxation rate.

Solid Waste Diversion RatesSource:2009WasteManagementServicesAnnualReport

2009 Waste StreamSource:2009WasteManagementServicesAnnualReport

Landfill48%

Recycled25%

Compost27%

2009 DRT Ridership (millions)Source:2010DRTServicingandFinancingStudy

6.85 6.94 7.628.50 8.51 8.66

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

est.

Ridership BreakdownSource:2010DRTServicingandFinancingStudy

Students47%

GOTransitBus8%

Adults,GOTrainCommuters

andOther35%

Seniors,Children&ODSPRecipients10%

29

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Targ

et

29 31 33 3644

Perce

ntage

%

50 51 52

70

Environmental Services

Promote and strengthen a vibrant economy that will support prosperity for Durham residents, businesses and organizations.Durham is assisting businesses to source capital, develop new opportunities and partnerships. We are working with stakeholders to identify industry needs and address the interdependent aspects of economic sustainability, environmental stewardship and social well-being.

Protect and enhance our environment for today and tomorrow through stewardship of our natural resources.Durham is recognized for its significant natural heritage lands and greenland system, and we are working to maintain our agricultural land and enhance food security. We are developing a strategy to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

Promote a safe, healthy, caring inclusive community.Durham is responding to the changing needs of our increasingly diverse community. We are strengthening accessibility to appropriate services, which responds to the needs of all our residents, including children, youth and the aging population.

Enhance partnerships while providing continued service excellence.Durham strives to seek opportunities to increase intergovernmental co-operation, efficiency and to avoid duplication of services. We are informing our residents of Durham-wide services and opportunities.

Printed On Recycled Stock

Town of Ajax Township of Brock

Municipality of Clarington City of Oshawa

City of Pickering Township of Scugog

Township of Uxbridge Town of Whitby

Contact InformationThe Municipal Property

Assessment Corporation (MPAC) 1-866-296-6722 or www.mpac.ca

The Regional Municipality of Durham 905-668-7711 (1-800-372-1102) or www.durham.ca

605 Rossland Road East, Whitby, ON L1N 6A3

Encouraging development of an •integrated transportation system and alternative modes of transportation;

Replacingtrafficsignalbulbstoreduce•relatedenergyconsumptionby80%andincreasebulblifeexpectancy;

ReplacingtheRegionalTransitfleetwith•air conditioned, environmentally friendly andaccessiblebusesthatoptimizefuelconsumption,generateloweremissionsandprovideaccessibilityfeaturesincludinglowfloorrampanddedicatedareasformobilityaiddevices;

PartneringwithLakeridgeHealthfor•constructionofDurham’sfirstAcuteCareGeriatricAssessmentUnitinLakeviewManorLongTermCarefacility;

Increasinglandfilldiversionratesfrom•29%(2001)to52%(2009),whileworkingtowardstheRegion’sapprovednewdiversiontargetof70%;and,

Workingwithschoolboardstocreate•an implementation plan to develop ChildandFamilyCentres(hubservices)basedonthe“WithourBestFutureinMind” report recommendations.

Ourstrategicplanisthedocumentthatguidesourprioritysettinganddecisionmakingforthenextfiveyears.Itiscloselylinkedwithourbusinessplanningcycleandbudget

process,andtheoverarchingprincipleoftheplanissustainability.

FormoreinformationorcopiesoftheRegionofDurham’sStrategicPlan2009-2014“GrowingTogether”,pleasevisittheRegion’swebsiteat

www.durham.ca or call 905-668-7711 ext. 2089.

Balance growth, enabling sustainable communities.Durham is creating complete communities within livable urban environments and encouraging the development of an integrated transportation system, which includes transit, cycling and walking. We are reinforcing the distinct character of our rural and urban areas and assisting in the revitalization of our downtowns.

Advancing the Strategic Plan by:

Strategic Plan Overview

Durham Region Strategic Themes 2009 to 2014

905-683-4550705-432-2355905-623-3379905-725-3356905-420-4614 905-985-7346905-852-9181905-668-5803

: : i : : _ ' l -- ' - . - . ' - .Fnv i ron men i

The Honourab le Lhono rab le

J i i : l F i ; ; : i c :

O t tawa . Canada K1A 0H3

-> !.

I ' "1 ,n is i re de | [nv i ro r r r c i : tC i t l

i ' : 1

, a / ^ . : a - -

l " i i n is ie r o f ihe

' 1 r : . l^; -..-

. l .Uil i . u" l[X!

Mr . Roger AndersonRegional Chair and Chief Execut ive Off icerThe Reg iona l Mun ic ipa l i t y o f Durham605 Rossland Road EP.O Box 623Whi tby ON L ' lN 643

Dear Mr A.nderson,

Etir

Thank you for your let ter of June 29, expressing the Regional Municipal i ty ofDurhanr 's concefns regarding nuclear pc\r /er gener.at ion and new nucleardevelopment in Durham region.

I would note that the majority of the issues raised in your letter are regulatedpursuant to the Nuclear FuelWaste Act and the Nuclear Liabil ity Acf. Since youhave appropr iately addressed your let ter to the Minister of Natural Resources,who is responsible for those acts, I wil l leave it to officials from his office torespond in detai l to your concerns.

Should Ihe Canadian EnvironmentalAssessment Act apply to any future nuclearpro.1ect, the federal government wi l l seek a! l opportuni t ies to work in cooperat ionwith the Province of Ontar io.

Pren t i ce , P .C Q.C , M P .

c c : The Honourab le Chr i s t i an Parad is , P .C . M p

- ; r . -

- - ! v r , - -. - - _ r r . . . - !

. . , ] r . , ! : i : , r fi

r l r , I

Sincere ly ,

nou rab le

Canada

sinclairr

Typewritten Text


f / i n r s te r M in i s t reof Natura l Resources des Ressources natu le l les. : : : . : , ,= i ,=r i1 . . . : ; , ,11ry

O11ar , , , , a , Canada K1A 0E4

j,Y,t 2 e ?0FJ i l i l r ' , . r r , ' i rr i i l L

: ; - r r - - r i i - - - 1

: - , , - i . : i ' , ' il ' . . . - . - : . r : . ( i i . . lq i^ -I F r . . : ' - :

Mr. Roger - fu rde lsor .

Regional Clrair and Chief Execut ive Olf icer-

The Regional Municipality of Durharl

P .O. Box 623

Whitby, Ontar io LlN 64.3

Dear Mr. Anclersolr:

Thank you for your let ter of June 29,2010, conveying the concenis of The Regional

MLrnicipal i ty of Durhanr wit l i respect to r-r i rc lear power generat ion and new nuclear

developnrent in Durhanr, as wel l as enclosing a copy of Joint Report No.2010-J-29,

whicl-r the Regional Counci l endorsed on June 23,2010.

Canada rel ies on a'diversi f ied mix of hydroelectr ic i ty, natural gas, nuclear power and

renewable energy to sat isfy i ts electr jcrty lequireurents. Nuclear energy is cun-ent ly

providing 15 pet 'cent of Canada's electr-rci ty needs-more than 50 pet-cent of Ontat io 's

needs-in a safe, rel iable and sustainable way. This teclmolcgy has been deployed for

sever-al decades in Canada and irr rrany ot l rer countr ies. Whi le the federal goverlr lent has

in rpor ta r r t r -espons ib i l i t i es r -e la t ing to r r r rc lear ene l -gy , the dec is io r r to inves l in r rew ger te r -a t io r r ,

whet l- ier f i -om nuclear or other sol l rces, r 'ests with the provinces, which r-egulate electr ic i ty.

and w i th the Lr t i l i t res , wh ich opera te t l ie ge ner -a t ing lac r l i t ies .

As yor"r I'nany htow, pursuant to the Nucleur l;uel li luste Act,whicll was passed by

Parl ianrent tn 2002, the Nucleal Waste Managenrent Olganizat ion (NWMO) is responsible

lbr the long-ter l t utauagemelrt of al l the nuclear f i rel waste in Canada, both now and in the

fulure. Three years ago, in June, the Governr-nent of Canada nrade a decisior-r to select the

NWMO's recorlutended approach- Adapt ive Phased Managernent-as a safe and secure

long-ten-n plan for managing nuclear fr ie l waste. A key tenet of t l - r is plan is that i t has

beerr desiglred to be f lexible to acconrn-rodate nerv inforr lat ion, to adapt to cl tanging

c i rc t rn ts tances . :u rd to be ab le to r -ead i l y ac lop l s ta te -o f - t l re -a l t techno logres as they nray a i l se .

i i - ' r il l r li l , 'ri .

Canad?{

- t -

1 fu l l y suppof t the NWMO tak ing t l te necessary t in re and e f fo r - t ro in tp len ten t a s i t ingprocess tha t rs open, t r -anspat 'en t and inc lnsrve , aud tha t rs bL t i l t on a so l id fo iu rda t jou o f tn rs t . .in teg i ty and respec t fo l Canadrans and the env j romrent . The iuvo lver . l ten t o f con tn tun i tyleaders , dec is ion nrakers aud c i t i zens js cnrc ia l to the success o f th is p ro jec t . ThLrs . Iencor -uage the nreurbers o f the Reg iona l CoLurc i l to cont inue 1o rvork rv i th the NWMOa s i t i r r r p l e r r r e r r t s t l r j s p r o j e c t

With regard to updat ing the Nuclear Liabi l i ry Act, i l te Goverrunent recognizes the i t lpor lanceof br inging forward nodemized nuclear civ i l l iabi l i ty legislat ion, and we cun'ent ly havea bill before Parliament to do this. Bill C-15, "An Act Respecting Civil Liability andCourpensat ion l -or Dan-lage in Case of a Nuclear Incidel ' : t , " is c l :n-ent l1, at seconC readingdebate stage in t l . re House of Commons. Consideratron of the bi l lwi l l cont inue in fal l 2010when Parliament reconvenes.

Bi l l C-15 would increase the amount of nucleal opelator l iabi l i ty f ronr the cun'ent

$75 rni l l ion to $650 mil l ion, and requite that this amount be reviewed on a regularbasis,at least once every 5 years. Tire first review would be completed v,uithin 15 months afterthe Act would come into force. Bi l l C- l5 would also expand the categories of compensabledanrage to addr-ess envirorurental dar-nage, economic loss, and costs related to preventive

I ICASUTCS.

Again, tharrk you for writing on this imporlant rratter.

Yours sincerelv.

sinclairr

Typewritten Text
