bruce power project-description

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extensionand Continued Operations Project

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

December 2004

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Bruce A and Bruce B nuclear generating stations are located on the eastern shore of Lake Huron north of Kincardine, Ontario. These stations each consist of four CANDU

® pressurized heavy water

nuclear reactors. The Bruce A reactors were brought into service in 1977 (Units 1 and 2), 1978 (Unit 3) and 1979 (Unit 4). The Bruce B reactors entered service between 1984 and 1987.

In the late 1990’s Ontario Hydro, the owners of the stations, made a business decision to temporarily lay-up the Bruce A units in order to concentrate resources on other reactors in Ontario Hydro’s fleet. Unit 2 was taken out of service in October 1995; Unit 1 was taken out of service in December 1997; Unit 4 was taken out of service in January 1998; and Unit 3 was taken out of service in April 1998. Bruce B continued in service.

In 2001, Bruce Power Limited (Bruce Power) took over operations of Bruce A and Bruce B from Ontario Power Generation (OPG), which is Ontario Hydro’s successor, through a long-term lease. At that time, all four units of Bruce A were laid-up. Bruce Power subsequently returned Bruce A Units 3&4 to service in January 2004 and October 2003, respectively.

Since its inception in 2001, Bruce Power has focused efforts on improving safety, environmental performance and increasing reliable electricity output at the Bruce Power site (Bruce A and Bruce B). For example, Bruce Power has continued to meet ISO 14001 certification requirements, has continually applied a proactive and systematic approach to environmental management and has progressed significantly in its loss control program, which is called following the International Safety Rating System. In 2003, Bruce Power increased electricity output to 24.5 terawatt hours (TWh) compared to 20.5 TWh in 2001. After investing $720 million in restarting Units 3&4, Bruce Power plans to generate approximately 34 TWh in 2004.

Bruce Power is now proposing to return Bruce A Units 1&2 to service from their temporary lay-up. This will require implementing a series of refurbishments, upgrades and enhancements at Bruce A, improving safety while increasing electricity generation capacity and reliability for the extended life of these units. The work to be undertaken prior to the return to service of Units 1&2 will include:

• Pressure tube and calandria tube replacement;

• Steam generator replacement;

• Electrical systems upgrades;

• Main condenser refurbishment;

• Feed water heater refurbishment;

• Shutdown System 2 (SDS2) enhancement; and

December 2004 i


• Significant other maintenance on nuclear and balance of plant equipment.

Bruce Power’s proposal, which is known as the “Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project” for environmental assessment (EA) purposes, has three main goals:

1. Enhance the safety of the Bruce A station;

2. Increase Bruce A’s capacity to generate electricity; and

3. Ensure the station remains safe and fit-for-service through the end of a potential Bruce Power lease extension, i.e., through 2043.

The Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project comprises several activities including:

• Required maintenance of Units 1&2 during lay-up;

• Fuel Channel Replacement in Units 1-4;

• Nuclear Systems Upgrade in Units 1-4 (including steam generators);

• Balance of Plant Upgrade in Units 1-4 (conventional systems);

• Refuelling Units 1&2 with initial load of fuel;

• Restarting Units 1&2 and operating through their extended lives including maintenance; and

• Potentially loading Low Void Reactivity Fuel and subsequently operating at an uprated maximum reactor power1.

It is Bruce Power’s understanding that some of these project activities (highlighted in bold) will require amendments to the licence by the CNSC, including an EA under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). Bruce Power understands that the CNSC will determine the scope of the EA which would at a minimum encompass all project activities including those that will require licence amendments and those that are permitted or required by the existing licence. The EA will assess the direct effects of all project activities on the environment over a time frame that extends from 2004 to 2043. The EA will also assess the cumulative effect of this Project and other projects, including OPG’s Western Waste Management Facility (WWMF).

The Project Description Report (this report) is a key document in the EA process as it helps the CNSC, which is the responsible authority (RA), to determine the type and scope of the EA. It also helps federal authorities (FAs) to determine the need for an EA under CEAA and facilitates the coordination of any EA among FAs. This project description includes the following:

• Overview of Bruce A current status;

1 Currently expected to be 95.5 % of maximum continuous rating.

December 2004 ii


• Overview of the Project and conceptual schedule;

• Proposed schedule for the EA;

• Description of each project activity;

• Characterization of the components of the environment, which could be affected by the Project; and

• Draft Communications and Consultation Plan.

Anticipated maintenance, refurbishment and upgrade activities at Bruce A, such as fuel channel and steam generator replacement, are expected to generate intermediate- and low-level radioactive wastes, respectively. These wastes will be managed by the OPG WWMF (Waste Facility Operating Licence WFOL-W4-314.00/2007). Wastes requiring management at the WWMF are similar to those currently managed at the site. Bruce Power will handle and transport wastes to the WWMF. Once accepted by OPG the wastes become their responsibility.

To accommodate future wastes from Bruce Power’s and OPG’s nuclear power stations in Ontario, it is expected that OPG will apply for licence amendments or other approvals necessary to expand their facility. It is also Bruce Power’s understanding that OPG will address all EA requirements related to their facility.

In addition, at the end of Bruce Power’s lease, OPG, the station owner, may propose to decommission Units 1 to 4. This would be a separate proposal with separate EA requirements.

December 2004 iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ i 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1

1.1 Background ............................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose of Document................................................................................ 2 1.3 Introduction to the Project ......................................................................... 3

1.3.1 Name of the Project ....................................................................... 3 1.3.2 Nature of the Project...................................................................... 3 1.3.3 Location of the Project ................................................................... 3 1.3.4 Project Description Distribution List ............................................... 4 1.3.5 Consultation on the Project Description......................................... 4 1.3.6 Previous Assessments .................................................................. 4

1.4 Contacts .................................................................................................... 5 1.4.1 Proponent and Co-proponent Names............................................ 5 1.4.2 Contact Persons for Additional Information ................................... 5

1.5 Government Involvement .......................................................................... 6 1.5.1 Federal Funding............................................................................. 6 1.5.2 Ownership of Land......................................................................... 6

1.6 Authorizations Required ............................................................................ 6 1.6.1 Federal Authorizations................................................................... 6 1.6.2 Provincial Authorizations ............................................................... 6 1.6.3 Municipal Authorizations................................................................ 7

2.0 BRUCE A CURRENT STATUS.................................................................................8 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION......................................................................................10

3.1 Overview of the Project ........................................................................... 10 3.2 EA Schedule............................................................................................ 11 3.3 Description of Project Activities ............................................................... 11

3.3.1 Units 1&2 ..................................................................................... 12 3.3.2 Units 3&4 ..................................................................................... 18

4.0 WASTE GENERATION AND MANAGEMENT.......................................................20 5.0 TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS................................................................23 6.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS........................................................24

6.1 Bio-physical Environment ........................................................................ 24 6.1.1 Geology ....................................................................................... 24 6.1.2 Hydrology..................................................................................... 25 6.1.3 Aquatic Biology............................................................................ 27 6.1.4 Atmospheric Environment............................................................ 30 6.1.5 Terrestrial Biology........................................................................ 31

December 2004 iv


6.1.6 Radiation and Radioactivity ......................................................... 32 6.1.7 Land Use ..................................................................................... 32 6.1.8 First Nations................................................................................. 33 6.1.9 Socio-economics ......................................................................... 34

7.0 POTENTIALLY AFFECTED COMPONENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT..............36 8.0 REFERENCES.........................................................................................................40

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.2-1 Proposed EA Schedule for Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project

Table 3.3-1 Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project Activities Table 4-1 Typical Wastes Expected from Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and

Continued Operations Project Table 7-1 Potentially Affected Components of the Environment LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 Bruce Power Site Location Figure 2-1 Aerial Photograph of Bruce A Figure 2-2 Bruce A CANDU

® Schematic

Figure 3-1 Conceptual Schedule for Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operation Project

Figure 6.1.2-1 Estimated Maximum Areal Extent of All Thermal Plumes Resulting from Combined Operations of Bruce A and Bruce B (Existing Conditions)

Figure 6.1.5-1 Terrestrial Environment Features, Bruce Power Site and Vicinity Figure 6.1.5-2 Existing Wildlife Habitat, Bruce A and Vicinity LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A List of Acronyms Appendix B Proposed Communications and Consultation Plan

December 2004 v

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The Bruce A and Bruce B nuclear generating stations are located on the eastern shore of Lake Huron north of Kincardine, Ontario (see Figure 1-1). The Bruce A and Bruce B stations each consist of four CANDU

® pressurized heavy water nuclear reactors. The Bruce A reactors were brought into service

in 1977 (Units 1 and 2), 1978 (Unit 3) and 1979 (Unit 4). The Bruce B reactors entered service between 1984 and 1987.

In the late 1990’s Ontario Hydro, the owners of the stations, made a business decision to temporarily lay-up the Bruce A units in order to concentrate resources on other reactors in Ontario Hydro’s fleet. Unit 2 was taken out of service in October 1995; Unit 1 was taken out of service in December 1997; Unit 4 was taken out of service in January 1998; and Unit 3 was taken out of service in April 1998. Bruce B continued in service.

In 2001, Bruce Power Limited (Bruce Power) took over operations of Bruce A and Bruce B from Ontario Power Generation (OPG), which is Ontario Hydro’s successor, through a long-term lease. At that time, all four units of Bruce A were laid-up. Bruce Power subsequently returned Bruce A Units 3&4 to service in January 2004 and October 2003, respectively.

Since its inception in 2001, Bruce Power's has focused efforts on improving safety and environmental performance and increasing reliable electricity output at the Bruce Power site (Bruce A and Bruce B). For example, Bruce Power has continued to meet ISO 14001 certification requirements, has continually applied a proactive and systematic approach to environmental management and has progressed significantly in its loss control program, which is called following the International Safety Rating System. In 2003, Bruce Power increased electricity output to 24.5 terawatt hours (TWh) compared to 20.5 TWh in 2001. After investing $720 million in restarting Units 3&4, Bruce Power plans to generate approximately 34 TWh in 2004.

Bruce Power is now proposing to return Bruce A Units 1&2 to service from their temporary lay-up. This will require implementing a series of refurbishments, upgrades and enhancements at Bruce A, improving safety while increasing electricity generation capacity and reliability for the extended life of these units. Bruce Power’s proposal has three main goals:

1. Enhance the safety of the Bruce A station;

2. Increase Bruce A’s capacity to generate electricity; and

3. Ensure the station remains safe and fit-for-service through the end of a potential Bruce Power lease extension, i.e., through 2043.

December 2004 1

Date:

Project:

BRUCE POWER SITE LOCATION FIGURE 1-1

SEPTEMBER 2004

04-1112-043

REFERENCE:THIS FIGURE WAS CREATED FROM RAND McNALLYMAP TITLE “ONTARIO” DATED 1999, WITH THESCALE OF 1 : 800 000.

BRUCE POWERSITE

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Implementing this proposal will require licensing decisions and amendments to the Bruce A Operating Licence (PROL 15.01/2009) by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). These amendments will necessitate an environmental assessment (EA) under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). For the purpose of the EA, Bruce Power’s proposal is referred to herein as the “Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project”. The Project comprises several activities at Bruce A, some of which will require licence amendments and some of which are permitted or required by the existing licence.

1.2 Purpose of Document

This document is the Project Description Report for the Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project. Under the CEAA, a project description has four main functions:

1. Allowing the CNSC, as the responsible authority (RA), to determine the need for, and its role in, an EA of the Project under CEAA;

2. Permitting federal authorities (FAs) to determine their role in an EA of the Project under CEAA;

3. Providing the basis for the CNSC to consult with provincial EA authorities to determine the need for harmonization of the EA process with other jurisdictions; and

4. Assisting in the early identification of potential environmental issues that should be considered in preparing the scope of the assessment document (i.e., EA Guidelines).

This Project Description Report provides:

• General introduction to the Project, contact information, government involvement and an overview of the authorizations required by the Project (Section 1);

• Overview of Bruce A and its current status (Sections 2);

• Description of the Project including the context for the Project, a proposed schedule for the EA and a detailed description of the activities that comprise the Project (Section 3);

• Wastes expected to be generated and their management (Section 4);

• Toxic and hazardous materials (Section 5);

• Overview of existing environmental conditions (Section 6);

• Identification of potential ways that the Project could affect the environment (Section7);

• A list of documents referenced in the report (Section 8);

• A glossary and list of acronyms used in the report (Appendix A); and

• Bruce Power’s proposed communications and consultation plan (Appendix B).

December 2004 2


1.3 Introduction to the Project

1.3.1 Name of the Project

As noted previously, the name of the Project for purposes of the EA is the “Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project”1.

1.3.2 Nature of the Project

The Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project comprises several activities at Bruce A, some of which will require licence amendments and some of which are permitted or required by the existing licence. Project activities include required maintenance, refurbishment, upgrade and enhancement of existing nuclear generating units (1-4) to enable each unit up to 30 additional years of safe, economical power generation, refuelling Units 1&2, restarting Units 1&2, and the option of using low void reactivity fuel (LVRF) in Units 1-4 in the future and their subsequent operation at an uprated maximum reactor power2.

OPG’s Western Waste Management Facility (WWMF) (Waste Facility Operating Licence WFOL-W4-314.00/2007) is currently accepting wastes from Bruce A. Handling and transportation of wastes to the WWMF is the responsibility of Bruce Power. Once accepted at the WWMF by OPG, the wastes become the responsibility of OPG.

Future project activities are expected to produce both non-radioactive and radioactive wastes, which will be similar to the current operations at Bruce A. For example, it is anticipated that Bruce A will produce wastes as a result of required maintenance activities during lay-up and during reactor operations. It is also anticipated that refurbishing, upgrading and enhancing activities, such as fuel channel and steam generator replacement, will generate intermediate- and low-level radioactive wastes, respectively. It is expected that all Bruce A wastes will continue to be sent to OPG’s WWMF. To ensure adequate capacity to accommodate future wastes from Bruce Power’s and OPG’s nuclear facilities in Ontario, it is expected that OPG will apply for licence amendments or other approvals necessary to expand their facility, including all EA requirements.

1.3.3 Location of the Project

The Project is located at the existing Bruce A station, which is within the Bruce Power site. The Bruce Power site is located on the eastern shore of Lake Huron, at a longitude of 81°30’30” west and latitude 44°20’00” north within the Municipality of Kincardine, Bruce County, Ontario.

1 For convenience, also referred to in this document as the “Project”. 2 Currently expected to be 95.5 % of maximum continuous rating.

December 2004 3

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description The Bruce Power site may be accessed by Provincial Highway 21, and two concession roads Nos. 2 and 4. The nearest towns are Kincardine, located approximately 16 km to the south, and Port Elgin, located approximately 18 km to the north of the site (Figure 1-1).

1.3.4 Project Description Distribution List

The following list indicates government agencies that may want to receive copies of this document:

• Environment Canada (EC);

• Natural Resources Canada (NRCan);

• Health Canada (HC);

• Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO);

• Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND);

• Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE);

• Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR);

• Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General, specifically Emergency Management Ontario;

• Local, Regional and Municipal Governments; and

• Grey Bruce/Owen Sound Health Unit.

The Project also includes submission of pressure vessel registration to the Technical Standards and Safety Authority (TSSA). Based on the EA conducted for the Bruce A Units 3&4 Restart, however, TSSA interest in the project description is expected to be minimal.

1.3.5 Consultation on the Project Description

Bruce Power developed this project description with reference to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency’s Operational Policy Statement OPS - EPO/5 – 2000, “Preparing Project Descriptions under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act”. As the licensing authority for Bruce A, CNSC input was solicited throughout the development of the document. This solicitation of input included meetings and telephone discussions with CNSC staff between July and October 2004, inclusive.

1.3.6 Previous Assessments

Bruce A has been the subject of over thirty years of pre-construction, construction, post-construction and operational studies, including the Bruce Nuclear Power Development Ecological Effects Review (2000). The CEAA came into effect on January 19, 1995. Bruce A, therefore, has not been assessed as a complete facility under CEAA. An EA under CEAA was completed in 2002 for the restart of

December 2004 4

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Units 3&4 after temporary lay-up (Federal Environmental Assessment Index (FEAI) number 29271). This EA concluded that the restart of Units 3&4 would not likely result in significant residual adverse effects on the environment.

An EA under CEAA is currently in progress for the use of “New Fuel”, (i.e., LVRF) at Bruce B (Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry number 04-01-591), the sister plant to Bruce A, also located on the Bruce Power site. The preliminary conclusions of this assessment indicate that the use of New Fuel in a CANDU

® plant such as Bruce B would not likely result in significant residual

adverse effects.

Previously Pickering A, another CANDU®

facility, was subject to an EA completed in 2001, which concluded that its restart would not likely result in significant residual adverse effects on the environment (FEAI number 18822).

Environmental assessments of upgrading and enhancing activities, which generate radioactive wastes, have also been conducted at a station in New Brunswick (Lepreau, FEAI number 27931). The EAs concluded that the activities would not likely result in significant residual adverse effects on the environment. An EA is currently in progress for a station in Quebec (Gentilly-2, FEAI number 35287).

1.4 Contacts

1.4.1 Proponent and Co-proponent Names

Bruce Power is the sole proponent for the Project. There are no co-proponents for this Project.

1.4.2 Contact Persons for Additional Information

The contact information for the EA Project Manager for the Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project is as follows:

Mr. Jim Hilbig, P. Eng. Nuclear Safety and Licensing Manager Bruce Power P.O. Box 3000 Tiverton, Ontario N0G 2T0 Telephone #: 519-361-3320 Facsimile #: 519-361-1834 Email: [email protected]

December 2004 5

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 1.5 Government Involvement

1.5.1 Federal Funding

No federal funding is involved in the Project.

1.5.2 Ownership of Land

The Project does not take place on Crown lands. The Bruce Power site, including Bruce A and Bruce B is owned by OPG. Bruce Power signed an initial lease agreement with OPG in 2001 to operate Bruce A and Bruce B for 18 years, with an option to renew the lease for up to a further 25 years.

1.6 Authorizations Required

1.6.1 Federal Authorizations

The current facility licence (PROL 15.01/2009) requires Bruce Power to operate and maintain the nuclear facility (Bruce A Units 1, 2, 3 & 4) according to methods, procedures and for the purposes described in the Operating Policy and Procedures (OP&P). For example, Bruce Power must ensure that the designed degree of system efficiency is maintained. Modifications to station systems and procedures must be controlled to ensure that the changes do not invalidate the licensing basis.

The Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project will involve several activities that lead to refuelling, restarting and operating Units 1&2 to generate electricity (see Section 3.3 for a description of Project activities). Refuelling is the initial loading of the reactor fuel in Units 1&2 after removing the reactor from a defuelled, guaranteed shutdown state (DFGSS) to an overpoisoned guaranteed shutdown state (OPGSS). This activity requires an amendment to the licence. Restarting is removing the reactor from an OPGSS, achieving criticality and operating the reactor to generate electricity. This activity is anticipated to require an amendment to the above-mentioned licence.

As noted in Section 5(1) of the CEAA, an EA under CEAA is required when a federal authority issues a permit or licence, amends a licence or grants an approval or takes any other action for the purpose of enabling a project to be carried out in whole or in part.

1.6.2 Provincial Authorizations

Bruce Power is not aware of any provincial EA requirement under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act, which is applicable to the Project. However, the MOE and Emergency Management Ontario may have an interest in participating in the technical review of any potential EA.

December 2004 6

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Compliance with provincial acts regarding air and water discharges is regulated through the requirements of Ontario’s Environmental Protection Act and the Ontario Water Resources Act. The MOE regulates the discharge of non-radioactive substances through Certificates of Approval under these Acts and, in the case of liquid effluent releases, through regulations promulgated under the Municipal Industrial Strategy for Abatement (MISA). Lake Huron water use is regulated through a Permit to Take Water.

1.6.3 Municipal Authorizations

Bruce Power does not maintain municipal permits with respect to operation of Bruce A. Municipal codes and standards are observed as they are applicable. The municipality levies taxes related to Bruce A on OPG.

December 2004 7

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 2.0 BRUCE A CURRENT STATUS

The four Bruce A CANDU®

pressurized heavy water nuclear reactors (see Figure 2-1) were brought into service individually in 1977 (Units 1 and 2), 1978 (Unit 3) and 1979 (Unit 4). In the late 1990’s, Bruce Power’s predecessor at the facility, Ontario Hydro, made business decisions to temporarily lay-up the Bruce A Units in order to concentrate resources. Unit 2 was taken out of service in October 1995; Unit 1 was taken out of service in December 1997; Unit 4 was taken out of service in January 1998; and Unit 3 was taken out of service in April 1998. Bruce Power restarted Unit 4 in October 2003 and Unit 3 in January 2004 after conducting an EA of facility operations through 2016. Units 1&2 remain in a DFGSS.

Operations at Bruce A are governed by the Nuclear Power Reactor Operating Licence PROL 15.01/2009, granted by the CNSC to Bruce Power. The licence is valid from April 1, 2004, to March 31, 2009. The licence limits unit output to 92.5% of maximum reactor power and requires that Units 1&2 be maintained in a DFGSS.

Bruce A comprises several systems as listed below. Figure 2-2 shows these systems schematically.

1. Nuclear Steam Supply System, comprising the reactor units (Units 1-4);

• Each reactor unit is currently rated at a gross electrical maximum continuous rating of 825 megawatt electricity (MW(e)), and a net electrical maximum continuous rating of 769 MW(e);

• Each reactor unit is within a reinforced concrete reactor containment structure;

• Each reactor unit has a heat transport system, steam generators and heavy water moderator system; and

• The reactors, which can be fuelled on-line, share fuelling machines which travel in a duct traversing the entire station;

2. Turbine Generator System, including the turbine generator units (one per reactor unit) and associated feedwater systems and condenser cooling water (CCW) (cooling water forebay, pumphouses and discharge channel);

3. Special Safety Systems, including the containment systems, shutdown systems and the emergency coolant injection system;

4. Electric Power Systems, including switching areas, standby generators and qualified power supplies;

5. Ancillary Systems, including service water systems, water treatment plant, plastics, laundry, amenities and fuel oil systems; and

6. Waste Management Systems, including used fuel storage, solid low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste, liquid and solid non-radioactive waste and radioactive liquid waste.

December 2004 8

Date:

Project:

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF BRUCE A FIGURE 2-1

SEPTEMBER 2004

04-1112-043

VacuumBuilding

Reactor Building and NegativePressure Containment (NPC)

PressureRelief

Nuclear Steam SupplySystem (NSSS) Balance of Plant (BOP)

Steam Supply

(LP)(SG'S)

(HT)

SDS #1, #2ShutdownSystems

LightWater(H O)2

(HP)

(CD)

CondenserCoolingWater(CCW)

(CEP)

Pump House

PumpsCCW

BoilerFeedPump(BFP)

Pressure Tube - Contains Uranium Fuel Bundles

(FM)

FuellingMachines

(PRV)

Feed Heaters

(Recovery)

2(D O)Heavy Water

(N )2

(H O)2

Headers

High Pressure EmergencyCore Injection (HPECI)

Duct

®BRU CE A C AND U SCHEMATIC 2-2

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description The above-mentioned facilities and systems are housed in several buildings and structures: reactor buildings, reactor auxiliary bays, a powerhouse which includes the turbine hall and turbine auxiliary bay running the entire length of the station, a central service area (Unit 0), a vacuum building, an ancillary services building, pumphouses, water treatment building, a steam transformer plant, standby generator enclosures, emergency filtered air discharge system building, and emergency coolant injection structures which include an accumulator building, recovery pump room, and a storage tank.

In addition, a number of new structures have been added since the original construction of the station, including an amenities building, access tunnel, technical building, construction retube building and a new water treatment building.

December 2004 9

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

3.1 Overview of the Project

The conceptual schedule for key Project activities is illustrated in Figure 3-1. As described previously, the Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project comprises several activities at Bruce A, some of which will require licence amendments and some of which are permitted or required by the existing licence (see Section 3.3).

Prior to returning Units 1&2 to service, required maintenance, refurbishment, upgrades and enhancements of existing nuclear generating units (1 to 4) and balance of plant will be undertaken to enable up to 30 additional years per unit of safe, economical power generation. The work will include:

• Pressure tube and calandria tube replacement;

• Steam generator replacement;

• Electrical systems upgrades;

• Main condenser refurbishment;

• Feed water heater refurbishment;

• Shutdown System 2 (SDS2) enhancement; and

• Significant other maintenance on nuclear and balance of plant equipment.

The removal of the DFGSS to an OPGSS and the subsequent removal of the OPGSS and operation of the Unit 1&2 reactors to generate electricity require amendments to the licence and consequently require EA studies and an EA decision by the CNSC. Similarly, the potential use of LVRF and subsequent operation of Units 1 to 4 at maximum reactor capacity would require a licence amendment.

Maintenance, refurbishments, upgrades and enhancement work will also be undertaken for Units 3&4 after Units 1&2 are returned to service.

The EA would be conducted pursuant to the requirements of CEAA. The scope of the EA, which would be determined by the CNSC, would at a minimum:

• Encompass all project activities including those which will require licence amendments and those which are permitted or required by the existing licence;

• Assess the direct effects of all project activities on the environment over a time frame that extends from 2004 to 2043; and

• Assess the cumulative effects of the Project and other projects, including the WWMF.

December 2004 10

CONCEPTUAL SCHEDULE FOR BRUCE A REFURBISHMENT FOR LIFE EXTENSIONAND CONTINUED OPERATIONS PROJECT FIGURE 3-1

Date: ……………………….

Project: …………………….04-1112-043

NOVEMBER 2004

Units 1&2Activities WithinCurrent Licence

2005 20062004 2007

Units 3&4Activities

EnvironmentalAssessmentStudies

EA Decision

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Units 1&2 ActivitiesRequiring LicenceAmendment

Required maintenance during layupRefurbishments, upgrades and enhancements

Required maintenance during operations

Removal of DFGSS and Refuelling

Removal of OPGSS

Decision to use LVRF

Decision to use LVRF*

Refurbishments, upgrades and enhancements

* Requires Licence Amendment

Required maintenance during operations

2043

2043

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 3.2 EA Schedule

Table 3.2-1 provides a proposed timeline for the EA of the Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project. Bruce Power recognizes that the CNSC is responsible for determining the type, scope and schedule for the EA.

Table 3.2-1: Proposed EA Schedule for Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project

Milestones Date

Letter of Intent and Project Description Submitted October 2004

Draft EA Guidelines Issued for Public Review January 2005

Hearing on Guidelines for CNSC April 2005

Final EA Guidelines Issued by CNSC May 2005

Draft EA Study Report Submitted to CNSC August 2005

Final EA Study Report Submitted CNSC October 2005

Draft Screening Report Issued for Public Review October 2005

Hearing on Screening Report January 2006

CNSC Decision by Commission February 2006

Licence Amendment to Remove DFGSS (Unit 2) ~ March 2008

Licence Amendment to Remove OPGSS (Unit 2) ~ May 2008

Decision to Use LVRF and subsequent Operation of Units 1-4 at Maximum Reactor Power ~ 2010-2012

Continued Operation of Bruce A Until Expiration of Lease 2043

3.3 Description of Project Activities

As shown in Table 3.3-1, the Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project comprises seven principal activities at Units 1&2, which culminate in the operation of the reactors to generate electricity. Five principal activities are associated with Units 3&4. Activities highlighted in bold are expected to require amendments to the licence. The remaining activities are permitted or required by the existing licence.

December 2004 11


Table 3.3-1: Activities for Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project

Units 1 & 2 Units 3 & 4

• Required maintenance during lay-up • Fuel channel replacement • Nuclear systems upgrade (including steam

generators) • Balance-of-plant upgrade (conventional systems) • Refuelling with initial load of fuel • Restarting the reactors and operating through

their extended life including required maintenance

• Potentially loading LVRF and subsequently operating at maximum reactor power

• Required maintenance during operations • Fuel channel replacement • Nuclear systems upgrade (including steam

generators) • Balance-of-plant (conventional systems) • Potentially loading LVRF and subsequently

operating at maximum reactor power

Note: All Project Activities are included in the EA. Project Activities in bold require a licence amendment

Each of the project activities are described in the following sections.

3.3.1 Units 1&2

Required Maintenance During Lay-up

Units 1&2 are currently maintained in a safely laid-up state (i.e., DFGSS) with the objective of preventing equipment degradation, facilitating return to service. The steam generator feedwater/condensate/turbine flow paths are drained and maintained dry through the use of fans, dryers or dry instrument air. The generator and auxiliaries are drained and maintained dry using desiccant dryers. Vault dryers are in normal operation. Negative pressure containment is maintained.

The heat transport system remains filled in Unit 1. The heat transport system in Unit 2 was drained and vacuum dried. The auxiliary moderator pump systems are in service to maintain chemistry control. Both units are subject to a regular safety system testing, as detailed in “Bruce A Lay-up Safety System Testing Plan”.

Required maintenance activities during lay-up are expected to generate low- and intermediate-level wastes (see Table 4-1). The DFGSS will continue until CNSC amends the licence permitting removal of the DFGSS to OPGSS, which is expected in approximately March 2008.

December 2004 12

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Fuel Channel Replacement

Within a CANDU®

reactor, a tank of moderator (the calandria) is pierced by an array of horizontal tubes called “calandria tubes”. Each calandria tube, in turn, contains an inner “pressure tube”, in which fuel bundles are positioned. Collectively, the pressure tube/calandria tube systems are referred to as “fuel channels”.

Bruce Power has evaluated the condition of pressure tubes and calandria tubes at Units 1&2. Although both units could be restarted in their current state, Bruce Power believes that it is economically advantageous to replace all pressure tubes and some or all calandria tubes and intends to replace fuel channels and associated feeders to the extent necessary before any return to service, eliminating the need for a retubing outage shortly after restart.

Each unit contains 480 pressure tubes and 480 calandria tubes, along with associated feeders, end fittings, shield plugs, inserts and closure plugs. The removed fuel channel components will be subject to processing and interim storage within the existing exclusion zone around Bruce A protected area, as allowed under the facility licence. Bruce Power intends to replace most fuel channel components as necessary using, cutting, crushing, chopping and packaging as appropriate before transporting them to the WWMF for management.

Fuel channel replacement is expected to generate intermediate and low level wastes including pressure tubes and calandria tubes, as well as replaced equipment and small quantities of other low-level wastes. Fuel channel replacement in Units 1&2 may begin as early as 2006 and will be complete by March 2008.

Nuclear Systems Upgrade (Including Steam Generators)

Nuclear systems comprise both nuclear steam supply systems (e.g., heat transport, moderator, steam supply and fuelling systems) and nuclear safety systems (e.g., containment and shutdown systems). A formal lay-up of the nuclear systems was completed in December 1999. Prior to the restart of Units 1&2, a number of refurbishments, upgrades and enhancements will be undertaken, including repair and replacement of valves, motors and instrumentation.

Although Units 1&2 are technically capable of restart and limited operation in their current condition, Bruce Power has evaluated the condition of the steam generators and concluded that it is economically advantageous to replace the steam generators prior to refuelling, avoiding the need for a steam generator replacement outage closely following restart. Each unit has eight steam generators, which are approximately 12 m tall and weigh over 100 tonnes each. The generators, which penetrate the reactor vault, will be removed intact and replaced. The removed steam generators will be subject

December 2004 13

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description to processing and interim storage within the Bruce A protected area, as allowed under the facility licence.

Nuclear systems upgrading is expected to generate wastes including steam generators, miscellaneous used equipment and small quantities of other low level wastes. The steam generators will be processed and prepared to meet OPG’s requirements for acceptance at the WWMF. Nuclear systems upgrading and enhancement in Units 1&2 may begin as early as 2005 and is expected to be complete by March 2008.

Balance-of-Plant Upgrade (Conventional Systems)

Bruce A Units 1&2 have been laid up since 1997 and 1995, respectively. Throughout the non-nuclear side of Bruce A – the balance of the plant – opportunities exist to upgrade and enhance non-nuclear systems. For example, 30 Unit 1&2 transformers which contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) will be removed and replaced with non-PCB transformers by 2008.

Bruce Power may modify or replace the turbines to allow additional power generation. Bruce A was designed to utilize a portion of its steam supply for heating and turbines were deliberately undersized relative to the maximum steam output of Bruce A reactors.

Upgrading conventional systems in the plant, which take place between 2006 and 2008, is expected to generate various non-radioactive wastes.

Refuelling With Initial Load of Fuel

With both nuclear and non-nuclear systems refurbished, upgraded and enhanced to help ensure safe and economic operation, Bruce Power will request CNSC permission to refuel Units 1&2 (requiring an amendment to their licence). After CNSC permission is received, Bruce Power will take Units 1&2 from a DFGSS to an OPGSS, loading the reactors with an initial load of fuel.

Bruce A Units 1&2 have been maintained throughout their lay-up to allow for a return to operation. Both units could be refuelled and restarted with approximately the same level of effort as Units 3&4. However, because of constraints on operating life after restart, Bruce Power intends to thoroughly refurbish, upgrade and replace major equipment in Units 1&2 before refuelling. Once the units are prepared for long-term operations, they will be refuelled after CNSC approval is received.

Fuel for Bruce A, in the form of compressed and sintered natural uranium dioxide pellets, is sheathed and sealed in Zircaloy-4 tubes. Thirty-seven tubes (elements) are assembled between two end plates to form one fuel bundle. Each of the 480 fuel channels contains 13 bundles (12-bundle fuel channels are also under consideration). Each bundle weighs 22.5 kg.

December 2004 14

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Fresh fuel bundles are received at a fuel receiving area. The fuel bundles are enclosed in protective palletized crates containing 36 bundles. The fuel storage areas have a capacity of approximately 23,000 bundles. Facilities are provided to store the fuel in its protective crates and to move it to loading facilities and inspection stations.

For the refuelling of Units 1&2, the reactor would be loaded with natural uranium fuel, except for a small number of depleted uranium fuel bundles at specific locations (depleted uranium is used to fine-tune reactivity in the fresh core). Each reactor will require 6,240 22.5 kg fuel bundles or approximately 280 tonnes of fuel for the initial refuelling of Units 1&2. No new construction or engineering works requiring large quantities of materials or non-renewable resources are expected.

Refuelling will require a licence amendment enabling Bruce Power to move the reactors from DFGSS to OPGSS. Refuelling could conceivable occur as early as the last quarter of 2007 (Unit 2) and early in 2008 (Unit 1). Refuelling and associated operations (refill primary heat transport system, final system integration and commissioning) will precede synchronization to the power grid by approximately five months. Refuelling is expected to produce low- and intermediate-level wastes typical of maintenance outages.

Restarting the Reactors and Operating Through Their Extended Life Including Required Maintenance

With CNSC permission, Bruce Power will remove the reactors from the OPGSS to achieve criticality and begin producing power. Given the anticipated refurbishments, upgrades and enhancements and Bruce Power’s positive experiences with a focused approach to maintenance at Bruce A Units 3&4 and Bruce B Units 5 to 8, Bruce Power anticipates that Units 1&2 will remain fit for service beyond their forty-year service anniversary (2017). Bruce Power expects that the Power Reactor Operating Licence renewals (continued operation) will continue throughout extended facility life.

Operation of Units 1&2 uses a self-sustaining fission reaction in uranium fuel to indirectly generate steam, which is harnessed by turbines to produce electrical power. Operation of Units 1&2 would be essentially identical to the existing operation of Units 3&4. The initial refuelling of the reactor will take place with the reactor shutdown and in an OPGSS. After CNSC approval is received, operators will adjust reactor systems, including poison concentrations in the moderator, to achieve criticality. After approximately six months, the core will approach equilibrium conditions and routine on-power refuelling would begin.

The inputs to the electricity production process include:

• Fuel;

• Heavy-water;

December 2004 15


• Lake water for cooling and services;

• Chemicals;

• Lubricants and oils; and

• Other supplies, typical of any industrial or manufacturing facility.

Cooling water is taken via an existing submerged intake from Lake Huron. This CCW is used to cool and condense steam after the steam has passed through the turbines. The cooling system is a once-through design, in which slightly heated cooling water is returned to Lake Huron after flowing through the main condensers. It is anticipated that operation of Bruce A Units 1&2 will return the flow and thermal load in the Bruce A discharge to the conditions that existed prior to lay-up. The Bruce A discharge channel is a navigable waterway containing some fish habitat.

Units 1&2 will be returned to service and operate for up to 30 years. These units will require on-going maintenance. Operations are conditional upon on-going fitness for service, which is assured through aging management programs. During operations it is expected that three general areas of maintenance will be performed at Bruce Units 1&2, namely, preventative maintenance, corrective maintenance and improvement or upgrade activities. Each plays an important role to ensure that Bruce A operates safely and in accordance with its licensing requirements.

As mentioned previously, restarting the reactors requires a licence amendment enabling Bruce Power to remove the reactors from OPGSS and begin to generate electricity. Units 1&2 will operate from as early as 2008 for up to 30 years, including planned and unplanned outages. Restarting is expected to produce used fuel, purification wastes and bituminized wastes (see Table 4-1).

Potentially Loading LVRF and Subsequently Operating at Maximum Reactor Power

Low Void Reactivity Fuel (LVRF) comprises a new fuel formulation in an improved bundle design. It has a number of advantages over natural uranium fuel, including increased safety margins with regard to certain low-probability accident scenarios. A project to use LVRF at Bruce B Units 5 to 8 is currently underway. The use of LVRF at Bruce A is being considered. Its use will depend on several factors, including: successful demonstration at Bruce B, availability of an adequate supply of new fuel and CNSC permission to use it.

Bruce Power intends to ask the CNSC for permission to load LVRF in Bruce A Units 1&2. After permission is received (amendment to licence), Bruce Power will make small changes to fresh and used fuel storage to eliminate the risk of uncontrolled criticality. Bruce Power will then consume its on-hand supply of natural uranium fuel, build up a six-month stock of LVRF and begin loading LVRF, instead of natural uranium fuel, using the existing fuelling system. Bruce A reactors are currently limited to 92.5% of maximum continuous rating. Bruce Power may request permission

December 2004 16

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description from the CNSC to operate Bruce A reactors at an upgraded maximum reactor power, which is currently expected to be 95.5% of maximum continuous rating, when it can demonstrate that it is safe and economically advantageous to do so, for instance, after retubing, steam generator replacement, turbine modification/replacement and the loading of LVRF. After permission is received, Bruce Power will uprate the reactors.

LVRF contains a neutron absorber and slightly enriched uranium dioxide containing approximately one percent uranium-235. The slightly enriched uranium dioxide pellets are contained within a 43-element CANFLEX fuel bundle, as opposed to the existing 37-element bundle design. The CANFLEX bundle design used for LVRF also has a more even power distribution and cools more effectively than the existing bundle design. This helps ensure that hot-spots do not develop during use.

LVRF reduces the probability of damage to the fuel bundles and fuel channel in the event of a large break loss of coolant accident, known as a “LOCA”. In a large break LOCA, a very rare type of accident that has not been observed in practice at a CANDU

® reactor, a break in the large diameter

piping in the reactor cooling circuit leads to a rapid depressurization and voiding of the coolant in the reactor core. Existing safety systems are sufficient to shut the reactor down. LVRF would reduce the power pulse predicted for a LOCA, giving greater assurance that the reactor could be shut down without fuel damage.

Together, the increased safety margins and improved cooling provided by LVRF are expected to prevent reactor power de-ratings as reactor components age. In combination with other refurbishments and upgrades, such as turbine modification/replacement, LVRF may also permit operation of Bruce A Units 1 to 4 at greater reactor power (i.e., greater than the present 92.5% of maximum continuous rating limitation).

Bruce Power is currently conducting an EA for the use of LVRF at Bruce B. Provided CNSC approval for the use of LVRF at Bruce B is received, Bruce Power will begin to load Bruce B reactors with the new fuel type. Based on the anticipated schedule for the Bruce B project, Bruce Power may propose to begin loading LVRF at Bruce A sometime after 2008. Operation at an uprated maximum reactor power may follow loading of LVRF.

Operation of Bruce A Units 1 to 4 at an uprated maximum reactor power will slightly increase the thermal load in the Bruce A discharge channel. The Bruce A discharge channel is a navigable waterway containing fish habitat.

This activity is expected to generate waste types similar to operations with natural uranium fuel with slight difference in the characteristics of the used fuel bundles and small (10%) increase in waste generation rate.

December 2004 17

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 3.3.2 Units 3&4

Required Maintenance During Operations

Required maintenance for Units 3&4 is similar to that previously described for Units 1&2 in Section 3.3.1. Units 3&4 are currently operating and are expected to continue in operations until the expiration of Bruce Power’s lease in 2043.

Fuel Channel Replacement

Bruce Power may replace all pressure tubes and some or all calandria tubes and associated feeders in Units 3&4 after Units 1&2 are restarted. Each unit contains 480 pressure tubes and 480 calandria tubes, along with associated feeders, end fittings, shield plugs, inserts and closure plugs. The removed fuel channel components will be subject to processing and interim storage within the existing exclusion zone around Bruce A, as allowed under the facility licence. Bruce Power anticipates that it will replace most fuel channel components. These will be cut, crushed, chopped and/or packaged before transporting them to the WWMF for management.

Fuel channel replacement in Units 3&4 may occur (approximately) in 2010 and 2020, respectively.

Nuclear Systems Upgrade (Including Steam Generators)

Upgrading the nuclear systems is similar to that described for Units 1&2 (Section 3.3.1). After the restart of Units 1&2, a number of refurbishments and upgrades to Units 3&4 may be undertaken, including repair and replacement of valves, motors and instrumentation. Nuclear systems upgrading and enhancement in Units 3&4 may occur in (approximately) 2010 and 2020, respectively.

The anticipated date for replacement of the steam generator in Unit 3 is 2010 as part of the overall refurbishment for Unit 3. The replacement of steam generators in Unit 4 is planned for 2007-2008.

Balance-of-Plant Upgrade (Conventional Systems)

As mentioned previously for Units 1&2 (Section 3.3.1), opportunities exist to upgrade or refurbish non-nuclear systems throughout Bruce A. The timing of the various refurbishment and upgrade activities (further described below) is yet to be determined; however, they would likely occur after the restart of Units 1&2 anticipated to occur in 2008. Approximate dates for Units 3&4 are 2010 and 2020, respectively. In addition, transformers containing PCBs will be removed and replaced with non-PCB transformers by 2007.

December 2004 18

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description As was also the case for Units 1&2, described previously, Bruce Power intends to modify/replace the turbines for Units 3&4 to allow additional power generation.

Potentially Loading LVRF and Subsequently Operating at an Uprated Maximum Reactor Power

This activity is similar to that previously described for Units 1&2 in Section 3.3.1. Operation of Bruce A Units 3&4 at an uprated maximum reactor power will slightly increase the thermal load in the Bruce A discharge channel. The Bruce A discharge channel is a navigable waterway containing fish habitat. This activity is expected to produce waste types similar to operations with natural uranium fuel with slight difference in the characteristics of the used fuel bundles and small (10%) increase in waste generation rate.

December 2004 19

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 4.0 WASTE GENERATION AND MANAGEMENT

As described in Section 3, the Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project activities will generate both operations and maintenance wastes. Operations will generate routine levels of low-, intermediate- and high-level radioactive wastes. Maintenance activities such as retubing and steam generator replacement will generate low and intermediate level radioactive wastes. Further descriptions of the expected wastes, which are similar to those produced by the current operations, are provided in Table 4-1, below.

Radioactive wastes will be managed at OPG’s WWMF (Waste Facility Operating Licence WFOL-W4-314.00/2007). To accommodate future wastes from various nuclear facilities, including Bruce A, it is anticipated that OPG will apply for a licence amendment to expand their facility. It is anticipated that OPG will conduct a separate EA for their expansion activities and that the necessary capacity will exist for Bruce A wastes at the WWMF when required.

Table 4-1: Typical Wastes Expected from Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project

Class Waste Description

Used Fuel (Natural Uranium)

• About 16 bundles discharged per unit per day • Each bundle is approximately 0.5 m long and 23 kg • Fuel pellets remain sealed in the individual elements of each

fuel bundle • Used bundles are highly radioactive because of fission

products and activation products • Activity decays to approximately 0.05% of initial activity

within 10 years

High-Level Waste

Used Fuel (LVRF) • Slight changes to the physical configuration of the bundle and small differences in the radionuclide inventory compared with current fuel

• Approximately 16 bundles discharged per unit per day • Possibility of criticality eliminated by engineered and

administrative controls (e.g., storing new fuel in trays with lids)

• Has been analyzed for Bruce B New Fuel Project • Expected to be as safe or slightly safer than used natural

uranium fuel (for example, total fission product inventory approximately 7% lower)

December 2004 20



Purification Wastes • Ion exchange (IX) resins and filters • Periodically generated • Annual volume fluctuates, is typically small3, and is

dependent upon extent and number of unit outages • Intermediate-level waste

Maintenance Wastes

• Compactable wastes, including respirator filters, light gauge metals, welding rods, metal cans, insulation, metallic air filters, air hose and small cables

• Non-processible wastes including lathe turnings and metal filings, heavy gauge metal and components, floor sweepings, glass, metallic air filters, and larger electrical cables

• Combustible wastes including paper, plastic booties and bottles, wood, plastic suits, cardboard, mop heads, cloth, ventilation filters (non-metallic), and safety shoes

• Moderate annual volumes4 (hundreds of cubic metres before volume reduction)

• Low-level waste

Bituminized Wastes

• Effluent from the reverse osmosis system, concentrated in an evaporator and solidified in bitumen

• Small volumes (tens of cubic metres) • Intermediate-level waste

Low- and Intermediate-Level Wastes

Pressure Tube and Calandria Tube Replacement Wastes

• 480 separate 0.1m by 6 m, 60 kg pressure tubes per reactor unit (intermediate-level waste)

• Up to 960 separate 0.2 m by 2.5 m, 300 kg end fittings per reactor unit (intermediate-level waste)

• Up to 960 separate 0.1 m by 1.2 m, 80 kg shield plugs per reactor unit (intermediate-level waste)

• Up to 960 separate 0.1 m by 0.1 m, 13 kg closure plugs per reactor unit (low-level waste)

• Up to 480 separate 0.1 m by 6 m, 22 kg calandria tubes per reactor unit (intermediate-level waste)

• Up to 960 separate 0.1m by 0.05 m, 1 kg calandria tube inserts per reactor unit (intermediate-level waste)

• Up to 960 typically 0.08 m by 15 m, 92 kg feeder pipes per reactor unit (low-level waste)

• Approximately 500 m3/unit/year additional “routine low-level waste” for the duration of refurbishment

• Miscellaneous decontamination wastes (intermediate-level waste)

3 E.g., approximately 6 m3 in 2003 (i.e., pre-restart of Bruce A Units 3&4), and estimated to be about 30 m3 in 2004 (i.e., post-restart of

Bruce A Units 3&4) 4 E.g., approximately 1030 m3 in 2003 (i.e., pre-restart of Bruce A Units 3&4), and estimated to be about 610 m3 in 2004 (i.e., post restart of

Bruce A Units 3&4)

December 2004 21



Steam Generator Replacement Wastes

• Eight 2.5 m by 12 m, 100 tonne generators per reactor unit (low-level waste)

• Potentially four 2.2 m by 5.5 m 45 tonne pre-heaters per unit (low-level waste)

• Several cubic metres of insulation per unit (low-level waste)

Radioactive gaseous and liquid emissions will be controlled, minimized, treated and released according to licence requirements. Non-radioactive wastes will be re-used or recycled to the degree possible. Hazardous wastes will be handled in accordance with regulations and are shipped off-site to licensed disposal facilities. Non-hazardous solid wastes meeting landfill requirements are disposed of in the existing on-site landfill. Non-radioactive gaseous and liquid emissions are controlled in accordance with Certificate of Approval requirements.

December 2004 22

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 5.0 TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Toxic and hazardous materials, which are present at the station, include liquid petroleum fuels, oils, lubricants and various chemical reagents. These materials are stored and handled in accordance with applicable regulations and Bruce Power’s own policies and practices. Bruce Power has programs in place to support the corporate objective of eliminating worker injuries and/or reportable releases. These programs include an ISO 14001 Environmental Management System. Hazardous wastes are disposed in compliance with both federal and provincial requirements, frequently using the services of a licensed contractor. These include expired chemicals, cleaners, paint waste, aerosol cans and electrical components.

There are PCB containing transformers at Bruce A. To ensure the continued safe management of all PCB containing equipment, Bruce Power has a PCB management program that relates to all in-service equipment, de-energized equipment containing PCBs, and waste PCB materials. The PCB management program consists of a comprehensive series of procedural documents outlining roles and responsibilities, and procedures for handling and storing PCB-containing equipment and waste. Bruce Power will replace the PCB containing transformers associated with Bruce A Units 1&2 prior to restart and those at Units 3&4 by 2007.

An asbestos control program has also been implemented at the Bruce Power site. This involves a number of activities, controls and monitoring. A current database of locations in Bruce A where asbestos is used is maintained, and routine inspection is made of all locations to ensure the asbestos is appropriately sealed and labelled. Any work that is required to be done at Bruce A that is likely to disturb this asbestos is controlled using established procedures. These procedures ensure that the proper procedures, equipment and training are employed to safely control and manage the asbestos hazard.

Ozone depleting substances (ODS) such as Freon-11, -12 and -22, are used during routine operations at Bruce A. Freon use at Bruce A is monitored to ensure it complies with the federal and provincial ODS regulations. Bruce Power has undertaken a program to replace chillers and A/C units that contain Freon. For example, small A/C units using Freon-12 will be replaced, as needed, by January 1, 2005 and/or the Freon-12 in the units will be replaced by a non-ODS coolant. Large chillers using Freon-11 will be replaced to meet the 2007 compliance deadline.

December 2004 23

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 6.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

6.1 Bio-physical Environment

6.1.1 Geology

Bruce A is situated on the shores of Lake Huron at the northern end of the Douglas Point Promontory, a feature of comparatively low relief rising approximately 13 m to 15 m above lake level. This promontory juts out into the lake 2.5 km to 3.0 km over a length of 5 km extending from Baie du Doré southward to Inverhuron Bay.

Inland, the dominant physiographic feature is the Algonquin Bluff, a ridge formed from shoreline erosion by post-glacial Lake Algonquin. The terrain above and inland from the Algonquin Bluff consists of comparatively flat clay plains with a network of streams that drain westward to Lake Huron.

There are no major rivers or lakes in the vicinity of the site other than Lake Huron. A former tributary of the Little Sauble River, named Stream C, drains into the southwest corner of the Baie du Doré to the north and the Little Sauble River empties into Inverhuron Bay to the south.

The region is underlain by limestone and dolostone formations of Lower Silurian age to the north and Middle Devonian age to the south. These formations are flat lying with a very gentle dip of approximately one-half percent towards the southwest. Bedrock locally crops out along the Lake Huron shoreline between Inverhuron Bay and Baie du Doré where it has been exposed by shoreline erosion. Overall, the regional bedrock geological setting is a very stable environment where structural features associated with faulting or folding of the rock sequence are rare.

The western Ontario region lies within the tectonically stable interior of the North American continent and is characterized by low rates of seismicity. The seismic zoning map in the National Building Code, places the site in Zone 0, with Zone 6 corresponding to the most seismically active regions of the country.

The surficial deposits below the Algonquin Bluff and underlying the Bruce Power site include silty to clayey till of the Elma (Catfish Creek) sequence overlying the bedrock surface. This till sequence varies in thickness up to approximately 15 m and locally contains interbedded sequences of sand. Overall, the soil beneath the site consists of natural soil derived from glacial deposits as well as construction fill materials that are also derived from glacial deposits.

Groundwater flow within the surficial deposits and bedrock of the local area is directed north-westward toward Lake Huron, generally sub-parallel to the well-established surface drainage pattern.

December 2004 24

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Groundwater discharges into the streams and within the swampy areas below the Algonquin Bluff. Above the Algonquin Bluff, groundwater gradients are downward from surface toward the bedrock. Below the bluff, adjacent to Lake Huron, the gradients are upward where groundwater in the bedrock, recharged over time from locations above the bluff, discharges into the lake.

Although there are local variations, groundwater movement within in the vicinity of Bruce A is generally towards Lake Huron. The principal hydrostratigraphic units descending from ground surface are as follows:

• A laterally discontinuous foreshore sand deposit;

• A coarse grained matrix supported sand and gravel;

• A dense fine-grained, glacial till aquitard; and

• A semi-confined carbonate bedrock aquifer.

However, direction of groundwater flow beneath the Bruce A Powerhouse is directly controlled by a system of foundation drains. The foundation drain sumps collectively discharge into the CCW discharge duct. The discharge rates are not affected by either the operational or lay-up status of the power plant. The sumps are gravity drains affected only by variations in the lake level and surrounding groundwater levels.

6.1.2 Hydrology

The Bruce Power site is located within the Stream C watershed, which is bounded by the Underwood Creek watershed at the north and the Little Sauble River watershed at the south. There is an extensive storm water infrastructure, including a network of sewer lines, catchbasins, manholes, open ditches, culverts and outfalls to Lake Huron. There are a total of 16 outfalls, which discharge directly to the lake.

The near-shore currents in the local area are predominantly bi-directional and parallel to shore. The ratio of northeast current movement to southwest current movement is about two to one throughout the entire year. Lake currents agree reasonably well with the prevailing wind, particularly during fall and winter.

The average current speed is about 10 cm/s, with maximum recorded current speed of 50 cm/s. Mean current speed varies from month to month, with relatively stable and slow speeds in spring, highly variable speeds in summer (due to stratified conditions), increasingly high speeds in the fall, and significantly lower speeds during winter (due to sheltering effect of ice cover).

Under most prevailing current conditions, there is little circulation in Baie du Doré. The Baie appears to be more heavily influenced by wind and wave action than by broad circulation patterns in the lake.

December 2004 25

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Sediment transport is bi-directional along the shoreline, principally driven by wave-generated currents alongshore. However, imbalances between the bi-directional transport results in net transport to the south. The existence of only limited depositional zones suggests very little deposition of sand-sized and smaller materials occurs in the vicinity of Bruce A, with the possible exception of a localized area at the head of Baie du Doré.

Lake Huron is a typical cold, deep oligotrophic lake, with low nutrient levels (relative to Lake Ontario and Lake Erie). Typical concentrations for nitrogen, phosphorus, dissolved solids, chlorophyll, calcium and silica, show little variation spatially and temporally. Results from sample collection and analysis conducted for the EA of the Restart of Units 3&4 results were consistent with those previously reported for Lake Huron, falling within the provincial water quality guidelines.

All Bruce A effluent is directed to the CCW intake or discharge channel, with the exception of the domestic sewage (which goes to the Sewage Processing Plant) and portions of the yard drainage, which flow directly to Lake Huron. The various effluent streams at Bruce A are monitored for chemical and radiological discharges to the environment. This monitoring is undertaken to ensure compliance with the MISA limits in accordance with the requirements of Ontario Regulation 215/95 and specific Certificates of Approval from the MOE.

The towns of Port Elgin, Kincardine and Southampton are located on the shores of Lake Huron In the region of Bruce A. These towns have municipal water supply plants (WSPs) which obtain water from Lake Huron, and water pollution control plants (WPCPs) which discharge treated wastewater to Lake Huron. MacGregor Point Provincial Park (13.5 km NE of Bruce A) is supplied from a water intake located 20 m into the lake at a depth of about 0.6 m. The Brucedale Conservation area campsites (6 km NE of Bruce A) is supplied by a well (48 m deep and 30 m from the lakeshore). Inverhuron Park has a community well 40 m deep and 180 m from the lake. The drinking water for these parks typically is treated using ultraviolet light and disinfection.

Most of the rural population in the area obtains their water from private or communal wells. Communities within the vicinity of Bruce A, such as the Village of Tiverton, the hamlet of Underwood, some residences of Scott Point, Woodland Court Trailer Park, and Lime Kiln Cottages are supplied by communal wells. Many inland cottages have water wells and septic tanks, but some lake front properties have direct intakes from the lake. One business at the Bruce Energy Centre obtains its drinking water (which is treated) from the lake taken at the shore of the Bruce Power site. Bruce A obtains its treated domestic water through withdrawals from the intake channel and treatment in the water treatment plant.

The near-shore ambient water temperature typically ranges from 0.2°C to 4.4°C in winter (December to April) with lows typically occurring in February. Water temperature ranges from 7°C to 20°C in spring, summer and fall (May to October) with peaks typically occurring in August. Ambient water

December 2004 26

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description temperature in the area is affected by upwelling and downwelling events primarily in summer. During these events, daily changes of about 10°C in ambient water temperature are common, with recorded extreme increases or decreases of more than 15°C over a few days.

Figure 6.1.2-1 presents the estimated areal extents of thermal plumes for existing conditions (Bruce A with two units in operation, Bruce B with four units in operation) for both warm water conditions and coldwater conditions. The estimated areal extents refer to the envelope curves covering all likely plume configurations. The shape of a thermal plume at any given time is highly variable and affected by a number of factors, including the prevailing currents and ambient water temperature. The maximum areal extent of the thermal plumes for existing conditions is approximately 4,400 hectares (ha) based on the criterion of 2°C above the ambient, in consideration of both warm and cold water conditions. The area affected by the combined Bruce A and Bruce B plume at any given time is conservatively estimated to be in the range of 70 ha to 3,600 ha with an average plume size of 1,250 ha for eight units in operation.

6.1.3 Aquatic Biology

The CCW discharge channel carries used CCW from Bruce A, which, in turn, is conveyed through an excavated channel that runs north from the site. An excavated channel in the near-shore lakebed continues to direct discharge water for approximately 300 m into Lake Huron.

The near-shore zone of Lake Huron is characterized by rocky outcrops and as a result the aquatic habitat features are largely comprised of rocky substrates. As such biological diversity is limited. The deeper, offshore areas also consist of primarily rocky substrate that potentially provides spawning areas for regionally important fish species, such as lake and round whitefish, as well as habitat for deepwater sculpin.

Baie du Doré, just to the north of Bruce A, is the first major embayment along the eastern shoreline of Lake Huron northward from Sarnia. The Baie is characterized by shallow depths and substrates comprised mainly of rock and bedrock outcrops. It is nearly completely transected by two rocky shoals that run in a northeast direction (i.e., parallel to the Lake Huron shoreline) and provide protected habitat at the head of the Baie. Substrates in the Baie are typically a mix of sand and gravel, interspersed among cobble and boulder, which alternate with bedrock outcrops. A number of small, localized wetlands occur at the head of the Baie and are connected to the Baie through small outflow channels.

The occurrence of aquatic vegetation throughout the area is sparse. A limited area of submergent aquatic vegetation occurs only in the discharge channel in the relatively protected barge dock area where suitable substrates exist. A few very small, localized patches of submergent vegetation have also been noted in Baie du Doré, where suitable conditions exist.

December 2004 27

a. The synoptic, areal surveys of 13 plumes forcombined operations of Bruce NGS A and B duringthe period 1987 to 1989

b. The synoptic, areal surveys of 17 plumes forBruce NGS A only during the period 1981 to1982

c. Continuous in-situ water temperature monitoringat various locations in the plume areas for the period1979 to 1989 and

d. Thermal modeling study for typical operating andambient conditions

OF BRUCE A AND B (EXISTING CONDITIONS)THERMAL PLUMES RESULTING FROM COMBINED OPERATIONS

ESTIMATED MAXIMUM AREAL EXTENT OF ALL6.1.2-1

NOTES:1. The 2°C isotherm extends beyond the Southamptonwater supply plant (about 23 km northeast ofBruce NGS A) less than 20 % of the time.

2. The 4°C isotherm extends beyond the Southamptonwater supply plant (about 23 km northeast ofBruce NGS A) less than 10 % of the time.

3. The 6°C isotherm extends beyond the Southamptonwater supply plant (about 23 km northeast ofBruce NGS A) less than 5 % of the time.

4. The 2°C isotherm extends beyond the Kincardinewater supply plant (about 15 km southwest ofBruce NGS B) less than 1 % of the time.

5. The areal extents of the thermal plumes resultingfrom combined operations of Bruce NGS A and B,were estimated based on the following:

LEGENDIsotherms of excess temperature aboveambient in °C

Estimated quartile limits(25% probability of exceedance)

Estimated maximum limits

Bathymetry contours (m)

2

2

Goderich is 176.0 meters above IGLD 1985.Depths are reduced to low water datum which atApproximate Depths in MetersBATHYMETRY NOTES

REFERENCEONTARIO HYDRO, Design & Construction Branch, Hydraulic Studies & Development Department,Paper File: DWG No. NK21-16-10140-0007 sht 001., Scale: 1:25,000, Dated : June 06, 1983.

2

Bruce A 914 m exclusion zone

THE ESTIMATED AREAL EXTENTS REFER TO ENVELOPECURVES COVERING ALL LIKELY PLUME CONFIGURATIONS. THE

SHAPE OF A THERMAL PLUME AT ANY GIVEN TIME IS HIGHLYVARIABLE AND AFFECTED BY A NUMBER OF FACTORS, INCLUDINGTHE PREVAILING CURRENTS AND AMBIENT WATER TEMPERATURE.

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Benthic habitat diversity is low, and at least in the near-shore areas (less than 4 m) can be characterized as severe and inhospitable. Benthic invertebrate habitats are primarily confined to rock and sand substrates with only a few localized areas of fine-grained organic sediment.

A similar lack of substrate diversity affects potential use of the area by fish populations. Much of the habitat consists of rocky areas interspersed with sandy substrates in protected areas. Adult and young-of-the-year fish species in the Great Lakes use a wide diversity of substrates, although gravel, sand and silt are the most preferred. These substrate types are often found within areas protected from wave and current action, such as occur at the head of Baie du Doré, where the highest numbers and diversity of fish were observed during 2001. Coarser substrates, such as those found in areas exposed to currents (i.e., discharge channels) or wind/wave action (i.e., exposed shoreline), are also important habitat features since they provide spawning, nursery and adult habitat for many fish species.

A review of shoreline attached algae (periphyton) from 1973 to 1981 found that differences in growth were observed relative to the various discharge points, with better algae growth in the discharge channels relative to unaffected areas along the near-shore. Biomass was also higher in Baie du Doré than in other areas along the near-shore and likely reflected warmer summer water temperatures in this area.

Plankton communities in the area have been characterized as highly variable both in biomass and species composition. Summaries of studies from 1975 to 1980 of the phytoplankton community noted that while phytoplankton were abundant near the Bruce A site, diatoms dominated the community.

Summaries of zooplankton sampling for 1975 to 1980, have noted that the most common group was rotifers, though copepods and cladocerans were also noted as important members of the community. The Baie du Doré is the most productive area for both zooplankton and phytoplankton.

Benthic community assessments found that benthic communities were limited by habitat characteristics to a number of primary groups: oligochaetes (Naididae); amphipods; chironomids; and ephemeroptera. Numerically, amphipods were the dominant group in the near-shore areas, while Naidids were the dominant group in the discharge channel (in association with Cladophora). Qualitative assessment of the near-shore benthic communities in 2001, conducted as part of the EA studies, indicated that a relatively diverse community of benthic organisms exists in the near-shore area, but that these were sparsely distributed within this area.

Between 1961 and 1993, 155 fish surveys were completed using several different gear types (gillnet, trap net, seine, windemere net, larval tows, electrofishing) and techniques (SCUBA and skin diving, impingement and entrainment sampling, creel surveys, surface visual surveys). A total of 85 species

December 2004 28

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description were recorded, the most common being the yellow perch, white sucker, smallmouth bass, alewife, rock bass, common carp and longnose sucker. In general, the composition of the fishes captured was a mixture of species preferring warmwater and coldwater habitats. The fish community in the area of the Bruce A site is comprised of two major types: those that range broadly throughout the region (the Lake Huron fish community); and those that are confined to the local area for most or all of their life stages (the local fish community).

Species included in the Lake Huron fish community category are round whitefish, lake whitefish, lake trout and deepwater sculpin. These fish prefer cooler water temperatures and spawn at depths of 1-8 m, outside the shallow inshore littoral zone. The majority of these species make use of the near-shore areas only during spawning preferring offshore deeper waters, particularly during the warmer summer months.

The Lake Huron fish community uses the near-shore area only during specific periods. An example of this community is the lake whitefish, which typically spawn in shallow areas on gravel and rock substrates. Adult whitefish are benthically oriented and spend most of the summer and fall offshore in deeper, cooler water beyond the influence of the Bruce Power site (18 m to 60 m). Seasonal migrations into the near-shore zone are made in spring, possibly to take advantage of near-shore food resources, and again in November/December for spawning when inshore water temperature cools. Spawning is expected to occur at depths ranging from 1 m to 8 m. Loscombe Bank, located northwest of the Bruce A discharge, has been postulated as the most southern extent of spawning area for both round and lake whitefish. A tag, release and recapture program for both round and lake whitefish will be initiated in fall of 2004 to determine the validity of this assumption as a result of the Bruce A Units 3&4 restart EA follow-up program.

Deepwater sculpin inhabit deep offshore areas well beyond the influence of the Bruce Power site for almost their entire life cycle. The species’ only potential interactions with Bruce A occur when newly hatched larvae migrate inshore and are susceptible to entrainment during late winter/early spring.

Species included in the local fish community category are smallmouth bass, northern pike, spottail shiner and bowfin.

Baie du Doré provides the largest area of warmwater fish habitat in the vicinity of the Bruce A site. The habitats of the Baie provide spawning, nursery and foraging areas for many species of fish including large predators (e.g., northern pike, smallmouth bass), lake resident smaller species (e.g., spottail shiner), wetland species (e.g., central mudminnow, banded killifish) and riverine species (e.g., common shiner).

The two most common inshore warmwater (i.e., local) species were yellow perch and smallmouth bass. Perch prefer water temperatures of approximately 20°C and migrate in and offshore according

December 2004 29

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description to seasonal temperature variations. They spawn in shallow water during spring and move offshore to depths generally less than 9 m during summer.

During various times of the year many fish species move between offshore and near-shore habitats to spawn, forage or enter tributaries. For example, emerald shiners spawn in the shallow littoral zone of lakes in spring and then move to deeper water during summer. The exposed coastline of Lake Huron periodically experiences rapid temperature fluctuations due to wind-driven currents such that the deeper offshore habitats become warmed enough to be exploited by warmwater fishes. When these conditions are present, warmwater fish often move out into the lake from their protected embayments and river mouths to forage.

It should be noted that the First Nations consider the surrounding waters of Lake Huron part of their traditional territory. Their lands, water and resources are an essential part of their identity and culture, as well as their sustainable economy. The harvesting of fish from Lake Huron is an important source of food for both communities and the commercial fishery is important to their livelihood (see Section 6.1.8).

6.1.4 Atmospheric Environment

The Bruce Power site is located on the east shore of Lake Huron, and as such, is subject to lake meteorological effects. The mean annual temperature measured at the Bruce Power site is 8.2°C. The mean daily temperatures fall below 0°C in December through March. The coldest month is January, with average mean daily temperatures of -3.4°C. The lowest recorded temperature for this period was -24.7°C, recorded in January of 1999. Summer temperatures average 19.0°C, or higher, and the highest temperature recorded was 31.2°C in June of 2001. Precipitation is quite consistent throughout the year. The average annual precipitation ranges from 944 mm to 1154 mm.

The prevailing winds are generally from the westerly direction approximately 50% of the time. There is also a strong south-westerly component that occurs approximately 11% of the time. The average measured wind speed at the 10 m level of the on-site 50 m tower was 3.45 m/s for the years 1998 to 2000. No average wind speed was determined for 2001 to 2003. In 2003, calms (wind speed <1.5 m/s) were reported 17% of the time and low to moderate wind speeds (1.5 to 3 m/s and 3 to 5 m/s, respectively) had the highest frequencies at 33% and 32%, respectively.

Local and regional air quality is typical of the general air quality in south-western Ontario. Air quality impacts are dominated by the substances that combine to produce smog or acid rain: carbon monoxide; nitrogen oxides; volatile organic compounds; sulphur dioxide; and particulate matter. Existing off-site noise levels reflect a rural sound environment and are generally characterized by the sounds of nature (rustling leaves, waves on the shore of Lake Huron, insects and birds).

December 2004 30

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 6.1.5 Terrestrial Biology

Bruce County contains a number of large forested areas and wetlands, providing core habitat for a variety of wildlife species. Approximately 37% of Bruce County is forested, with much of the north portion of the county under forest cover. The county contains a number of large forested areas and wetlands, providing core habitat for a variety of wildlife species. Major river systems within the region include the Saugeen, Sauble, and Rankin. The Lake Huron shoreline, which runs along the west edge of the County, provides a natural habitat corridor that extends north to the Bruce Peninsula. The Niagara Escarpment runs along the east side of the Bruce Peninsula, which forms the north end of Bruce County. The natural environment in the vicinity of the Bruce Power site consists of a mosaic of immature to mature deciduous and coniferous forest, wetlands, open water, and old field.

The Douglas Point Swamp, which is located within the Bruce Power site, is a locally significant wetland that is dominated by eastern white cedar swamp communities. Stream C runs through the Bruce Power site before discharging to Lake Huron through Baie du Doré, a recognized provincially-significant wetland.

Other watercourses near Bruce A include Tiverton Creek, Little Sauble River, Underwood Creek, and Mill Creek. Core natural areas in the area include: Inverhuron Provincial Park; Baie du Doré wetland; Scott Point wetland; and MacGregor Point Provincial Park. The Huron Fringe Deer Yard is another important natural feature. This deer yard runs along the Lake Huron shoreline from Inverhuron Provincial Park to MacGregor Point Provincial Park and provides significant winter habitat for white-tailed deer. Figure 6.1.5-1 shows significant environmental features in the vicinity of Bruce A.

The Bruce Power site is large and much of it is forested with white cedar as the dominant tree species. Figure 6.1.5-2 shows habitat types around Bruce A.

A large deer population is present on the site. Other wildlife species present on the site include groundhog, raccoon, beaver, porcupine, brown bat, coyote and a variety of breeding and migrant bird species, including wild turkeys.

A total of ten amphibian species and seven reptile species have been identified within and immediately adjacent to the Bruce A exclusion zone. Northern spring peeper and American toad are reported to be the most commonly heard species during the amphibian breeding season. Other frequently encountered amphibians included northern leopard frog, green frog, gray treefrog, and wood frog. Eastern garter snake was the most commonly encountered reptile. Midland painted turtles were also observed relatively frequently.

December 2004 31

BRUCE A

BRUCE B

LAKEHURON

BAIEDU DORE

MACPHERSONPOINT

SCOTT POINTLIFE SCIENCE ANSI

GUNNPOINT

HOLMESBAY

INVERHURONBAY

MCRAEPOINT

MACGREGOR POINTPROVINCIAL PARK

MIRAMICHIBAY

CHANTRYISLAND

MCNABPOINT

ARRA

N L

AKE

RON RIDGE

TIVERTON

PORTELGIN

UNDERWOOD

NORTHBRUCE

SOUTHAMPTON

TIVERTON CREEK

LITTLE SAUBLE RIVER

STREAM C

UNDERWO

OD CREEK

MILL CREEK

MACGREGOR POINTPROVINCIAL PARK

BRUCEDALECONSERVATION

AREA

INVERHURONPROVINCIAL

PARK

BAIE DU DOREWETLAND

SCOTT POINTWETLAND COMPLEX

LIFE SCIENCE ANSI

MACGREGOR POINTWETLAND COMPLEX

LEGEND

BRUCE POWER SITE BOUNDARY

914m EXCLUSION ZONE (SITE STUDY AREA)

REFERENCEBASE MAP SCANNED FROM PAPER COPY OF NRCanTOPOGRAPHIC MAPS. MAP NUMBERS 41 A/4, 41 A/5,41 A/3 AND 41 A/6, SCALE 1:50 000.

FIGUREBRUCE POWER SITE AND VICINITY

TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT FEATURES 6.1.5-1

0

SCALE

2 2 4

1:100000 KM

HURON FRINGE DEERYARD

WETLAND

PROVINCIAL PARK / CONSERVATION AREA

L A K EH U R O N

BRUCE A

POINTMACPHERSON

CNR

WNTC

CMF

BRUCESTORES

CENTRALGUARDHOUSE

FOREBAY

1

2

3

4

DIS

CH

AR

GE

CH

AN

NE

L

DOCK

C.W INTAKE TUNNEL

INTAKE

C.W. INTAKE CHANNEL

SWITCHINGAREA

SWITCHINGAREA

PARKINGAREA

PARKINGAREA

SWITCHYARDHYDRO ONE

UNIT

UNIT

UNIT

UNIT

Baie duDore

STRE

AMC

STREAM B

LEGEND

WATERFOWL SURVEYCONTROL SITES

WATERCOURSE

BRUCE POWER SITEBOUNDARY

( SITE STUDY AREA)914m EXCLUSION ZONE

A

BOUNDARYSITE STUDY AREA

DRY-MOIST OLD FIELDMEADOW

CONIFEROUS FOREST

MIXED FOREST

CULTURAL THICKET

OPEN FEN

SHRUB FEN

SHALLOW MARSH

SHALLOW WATER

CONIFEROUS SWAMP

DECIDUOUS SWAMP

THICKET SWAMP

WETLAND BOUNDARY

A

B

E

G

FC

D

MIXED SWAMP

(breeding, foraging)

snake (foraging)* Herpetofauna - American toad, northern leopard frog, garter warbler (breeding and migratory)* Songbirds - northern flicker, white-throated sparrow, mourning* White-tailed deer (winter cover)HABITAT FOR:CONIFEROUS FOREST

* Wild Turkey (breeding, foraging)* Small mammals (cavity trees, deadfall, burrows, and dens) (overwintering habitat) snake, garter snake (breeding habitat in vernal pools,* Herpetofauna - leopard frog, wood frog, green frog, northern ribbon woodpecker, brown creeper (breeding and migratory)* Songbirds - American redstart, black-capped chickadee, hairy* White-tailed deer (winter cover, browse)HABITAT FOR:MIXED FOREST

(breeding and migratory)* Songbirds - common yellowthroat, sedge wren, alder flycatcher mud flat use during migration)* Waterfowl, herons, and shorebirds (loafing and foraging, habitat in pools, overwintering) frog, gray treefrog, mudpuppy (breeding green frog, spring peeper, midland chorus* Herpetofauna - garter snake, northern water snake,* Painted turtle (breeding, feeding)* Bald eagle (feeding)SHALLOW WATER AND MARSH HABITAT FOR:BAIE du DORE WETLAND

* Herpetofauna - green frog, wood frog (breeding, foraging)* Songbirds - winter wren, northern waterthrush (breeding and migratory)* White-tailed deer (winter cover)HABITAT FOR:CONIFEROUS SWAMP

* Mammals - meadow vole, raccoon, mink, striped skunk (foraging)* Songbirds - alder flycatcher, house wren, yellow warbler (breeding, foraging)* Waterfowl and shorebirds - mallard, great blue heron (foraging) garter snake, snapping turtle, midland painted turtle (breeding, foraging, overwintering)* Herpetofauna - American toad, spring peeper, green frog, leopard frog, northern water snake,HABITAT FOR:STREAM C

northern ribbon snake (breeding, foraging)* Herpetofauna - leopard frog, green frog, midland painted turtle,* White-tailed deer (browse) and migratory)* Songbirds - indigo bunting, black-capped chickadee (breedingHABITAT FOR:MIXED SWAMP

(breeding habitat in vernal pools, foraging)* Herpetofauna - green frog, leopard frog, garter snake* Small mammals (foraging and shelter) and migratory) waxwing, rose-breasted grosbeak (breeding* Songbirds - eastern kingbird, brown thrasher, cedarHABITAT FOR:CULTURAL THICKET

* Wild Turkey (foraging)* Small mammals - meadow vole (foraging)* Herpetofauna - garter snake (foraging) and migratory)* Songbirds - bobolink, savannah sparrow (breeding* White-tailed deer (foraging)HABITAT FOR:CULTURAL MEADOW

* Herpetofauna - leopard frog, wood frog, spring peeper, yellowthroat (breeding and migratory)* Songbirds - hairy woodpecker, eastern kingbird, common* White-tailed deer (browse)HABITAT FOR:DECIDUOUS SWAMP

FIGUREBRUCE A AND VICINITYEXISTING WILDLIFE HABITAT

6.1.5-2

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description The greatest number and diversity of bird species are observed along the Lake Huron shoreline and in the Baie du Doré wetland. Species regularly observed in these areas included double-crested cormorant, ring-billed gull, herring gull, great blue heron, Canada goose and American black duck. Both of these areas provide protected embayments that may attract birds seeking refuge from wind and wave action that occurs at the mouth of the embayment. Less frequently observed species included red-breasted merganser, black-crowned night heron, and spotted sandpiper.

The majority of significant, rare or endangered species recorded in the vicinity of Bruce A are bird species. These include black-crowned night heron, bufflehead, bald eagle, wild turkey, pectoral sandpiper, dunlin, great black-backed gull, Caspian tern and red-headed woodpecker. Most of these bird species are found within the Baie du Doré wetland.

Yellow spotted turtle has been identified in the Baie du Doré wetland, although this species was not observed in the course of the field investigations carried out in 2001.

6.1.6 Radiation and Radioactivity

In terms of radioactivity, people living and working in the area are exposed to both natural and man-made sources of radiation. Natural sources of radiation include ionizing radiation from cosmic rays, naturally occurring radionuclides in air, water and food and gamma radiation from radioactive materials in soil, rock and building materials. Man-made sources of radiation are primarily from the operation of nuclear facilities (e.g., Bruce A, Bruce B and other CNSC licensed facilities).

6.1.7 Land Use

Land use in the area surrounding the Bruce Power site falls into two general classifications. Along the shoreline is a recreation area, while inland is primarily used for agriculture.

Title to Inverhuron Provincial Park, which is situated at the southern boundary of the Bruce Power site, was acquired by Ontario Hydro so that CNSC siting guidelines for heavy water plants (HWPs) are satisfied (the heavy water plant at the Bruce site has since been closed and is in the process of being decommissioned). However, Inverhuron Provincial Park is leased to the MNR, which operate the southern portion as a day-use provincial park. The MNR plans to re-open 125 overnight campsites sometime during the 2005 season.

Cottage development in the Bruce County has been growing at a rate of five per cent per year since 1968. In recent years, the number of cottages along the shoreline within 40 km of the Bruce Power site has grown to approximately 5,800. There are also three conservation areas, two provincial parks and numerous private parks that offer camping and trailer facilities. MacGregor Point Park, located approximately 13 km north of Bruce A is a day-use and overnight camping facility.

December 2004 32

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Agriculture is an important component of Bruce County with over 62% of the County’s area dedicated to the agricultural industry. There are over 2,300 farms in the County, and it is ranked first in Ontario for total cattle production, and second in Ontario for total pork production. The County is ranked third in Ontario in sheep production, and is also the top producer of oats and the second largest producer of canola in Ontario. There is also a wide variety of supporting and processing industries related to the production of food.

One of the major industrial developments within Bruce County is the Bruce Energy Centre. This is an 800 acre serviced industrial park located immediately southeast of the Bruce Power site that was established in 1986.

The Bruce Power site is within the Municipality of Kincardine. The municipality includes the communities of Kincardine and Tiverton as well as several smaller residential areas. Bruce A is approximately 4, 5 and 8 km from the closest of these residential centres, Scott Point, Inverhuron and Tiverton, respectively. The local area is predominantly rural in nature, with isolated residences such farm homes and country cottages. No residences occur within the 914 m exclusion zone of the Bruce A station, or within the Bruce Power site boundary, which encompasses the majority of the Douglas Point promontory west of Tie Road.

6.1.8 First Nations

There are two First Nations communities in the area of the Bruce Power site: the Chippewas of Saugeen First Nation Reserve No. 29 and the Chippewas of Nawash Unceded First Nation located at the Cape Croker Reserve No. 27.

The Chippewas of Saugeen First Nation Reserve No. 29 is located adjacent to the town of Southampton on the shoreline of Lake Huron, between the mouths of the Saugeen and Sauble Rivers, approximately 30 km north of the site. The population on this reserve in 1998 was estimated by the Department of Indian & Northern Affairs at 617, with an additional 773 members living off-reserve, many within the traditional territory in the County.

The Chippewas of Nawash Unceded First Nation is centred at Cape Croker Reserve No. 27, located on the north side of Colpoys Bay and the east shore of the Bruce Peninsula north of the town of Wiarton. The population on this reserve in 1998 was estimated by the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs at 718 with an additional 1,246 members living off-reserve many within the traditional territory in the County.

As noted previously the First Nations consider the surrounding waters of Lake Huron part of their traditional territory. Their lands, water and resources are an essential part of their identity and

December 2004 33

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description culture, as well as their sustainable economy. The harvesting of fish from Lake Huron is an important source of food for both communities and the commercial fishery is important to their livelihood.

Métis people are recognised as a distinct group of Aboriginal peoples in the 1982 Constitution Act. There are a number of Métis people in the vicinity of the Bruce Power site who are part of the broad community and who are represented by the Saguingue Métis Council. The Council has shown a continuing interest in environmental studies relating to the operation of facilities on the Bruce Power site.

Two registered archaeological sites, Upper Mackenzie and Dickie Lake, are on record as having been located within the confines of the Bruce Power site, discussed in more detail in the next section.

Bruce Power is working cooperatively with the First Nations to address two specific issues related to:

• the on-going care of the burial ground within the Bruce Power site; and

• participation in an international lake-wide monitoring program of lake whitefish in Lake Huron. Lake whitefish is an important commercial and traditional fish species for the First Nations.

Two registered archaeological sites, Upper Mackenzie and Dickie Lake, are on record as having been located within the confines of the Bruce Power site. A third heritage area, the “Indian Burial Ground”, was identified by Ontario Hydro in the mid-1970s and demarcated by signposts in the early-1980s. A joint council meeting of the Chippewas of Saugeen and Chippewas of Nawash on March 10, 1998 resolved that the site previously known as Dickie Lake and the “Indian Burial Ground” be assigned an Ojibway name. The site is now referred to as Jiibegmegoong (Spirit Place). Both Chippewas of Saugeen and Chippewas of Nawash have requested and have received approval in the past to access the Bruce Power site to conduct either ceremonies or monitoring at the Jiibegmegoong burial ground.

6.1.9 Socio-economics

The economic base of Bruce County (the County) is diverse and includes agriculture, tourism and recreation, a service sector, manufacturing, light industry, fishing and some aggregate resource extraction. The County has a significant agricultural sector involving over 3,750 farm operators (approximately 63% of farms are family owned and operated) and is ranked number one in cattle in Ontario, with approximately half of all of the County farms dedicated to beef cattle production. Tourism and recreation, hospitality services and the area’s heritage-oriented tourism attractions and associated crafts manufacturing/retailing are well established.

December 2004 34

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description Saugeen Shores is the largest community in the County and Kincardine is the closest urban centre to the Bruce Power site. The Bruce Power site is within the municipality of Kincardine, which had a population of 11,255 in 2003. The municipality includes the communities of Kincardine and Tiverton as well as several smaller residential areas, including Inverhuron and Underwood. Bruce A is approximately 4, 5 and 8 km from the closest of these residential centres, Scott Point, Inverhuron and Tiverton, respectively.

The overall population growth pattern for the County is stable. The towns of Kincardine, Walkerton, Port Elgin and Southampton (the lattermost two making up the majority of the population in Saugeen Shores) are the largest nearby communities with 2001 populations of 6,113 (2,542 households), 5,036 (1,951 households), 9,865 (2,651 households) and 3,151 (1,402 households), respectively. Tiverton, located approximately eight kilometres from the site, had a 2001 population of 743 (338 households). Inverhuron has a year-round population of approximately 200, plus approximately 250 seasonal cottagers.

The Bruce Power site is the single largest employer in the County, currently employing over 3,800 people. These full-time high paying jobs, along with the Bruce A related expenditures and tax payments, represent a major factor in the local economy.

December 2004 35

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Bruce Power Continued Operations Project Project Description 7.0 POTENTIALLY AFFECTED COMPONENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT

One of the purposes of this document is to assist the CNSC and FAs in the early identification of potential environmental issues that should be considered in preparing the scope of the assessment in the event that it is determined that an EA is required. Table 7-1 identifies the potential interactions between the Project and the environment, based on a preliminary analysis and the changes expected to result in the environment, if any. The identification of potential interactions between the Project and the environment and a determination of expected change is based on the judgement of the technical specialists who prepared this report based on their experience with similar EAs at Bruce Power and other Ontario facilities.

December 2004 36


Table 7-1: Potential Project-Environment Interactions and Changes

Environmental Component Potential Interaction Expected Change

ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT

Air Quality Periodic discharge of steam generator chemicals (e.g., hydrazine) is a potential source of exposure to humans and non-human biota. No greenhouse gases or smog-producing substance releases are expected.

No change anticipated.

Noise No new construction proposed. Facility is located entirely within zoned industrial area and within 914 m exclusion zone.

HYDROLOGY, WATER QUALITY AND AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT

Lake Circulation Discharges from the station have the potential to affect near-shore conditions in Lake Huron.


Lake Water Quality The Project has potential to affect lake water quality through release of substances in routine and stormwater discharges (e.g., tritium and other radionuclides, steam generator chemicals, metals, oil, road salt).

Aquatic Biota Aquatic biota may be affected by thermal discharges, high flow and releases of substances in discharges from the CCW and through other discharges as stormwater drainage.

There is the potential for changes to occur.

Aquatic Habitat Aquatic habitat may be affected by thermal discharges, high flow and releases of substances in discharges from the CCW and through other discharges as stormwater drainage.

TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT

Vegetation Communities There will be no direct physical disturbance. Indirect effects are possible through release of radioactive and non-radioactive substances.


Wildlife Habitat No direct physical disturbance is expected; however, site is adjacent to a provincially significant wetland. Indirect effects may occur through release of radioactive and non-radioactive substances.

Wildlife Communities There will be no direct physical disturbance. Indirect effects are possible through release of radioactive and non-radioactive substances.

Natural Heritage System No new construction or alternation of existing landscape is expected.

December 2004

37



GEOLOGY, HYDROGEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY

Geology No new construction is planned as part of the Project. The Project is a potential source of soil and groundwater contamination, through spills of heavy water, oils and chemicals.


Hydrogeology No new construction is planned as part of the Project. The Project is a potential source of soil and groundwater contamination, through spills of heavy water, oils and chemicals.

Seismicity Plant is designed to safely withstand earthquake greater than any earthquake likely to occur.

LAND USE AND RESOURCES

Land Use No new construction or changes in land use or zoning are planned as part of the Project. No change anticipated.

Transportation The Project has the potential to affect local traffic due to site-related traffic (transportation of workers and supplies).

Landscape and Visual Setting No new construction or alteration of existing structures.

RADIATION AND RADIOACTIVITY

Radiation Dose to Workers Nuclear generating station is a potential source or radiation exposure to workers.

Radiation Dose to General Public Radioactive releases to air and water are a potential source of exposure to members of the public.

Radiation Dose to Aquatic Biota Radioactive releases to air and water are a potential source of exposure to aquatic biota.

Radiation Dose to Terrestrial Biota Radioactive releases to air and water are a potential source of exposure to terrestrial biota.

Under normal operating conditions, no change is anticipated; however, there is the potential for changes to occur as a result of accidental radioactive release to the work place and to the environment.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

Population and Economic Base The meaning people attach to the presence of a nuclear facility and their community and the influence of normal station operations may potentially affect people’s feelings of personal security.

There may be a change in people’s feeling in regards to personal security.

Residents and Communities The meaning people attach to the presence of a nuclear facility and their community and the influence of normal station operations may potentially affect people’s feelings of personal security.

December 2004

38



Community Infrastructure No change anticipated.

Community Services

Municipal Finance and Administration

The Project could have potential effects on finances, employment and demand for services.

PHYSICAL AND CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES

Physical Heritage Sites No new construction or alteration of existing structures is planned. No change anticipated.

Cultural Heritage Sites

ABORIGINAL INTERESTS

Aboriginal Communities

Traditional and Current Land Use

Cultural Heritage and Spiritual Sites and Activities

Affects on Mother Earth and Future Generations

Employment and Business Opportunities

Treaty Rights/Land Claims

The meaning aboriginal people attach to the presence of a nuclear facility and their community and the influence of normal station operations may potentially affect people’s feelings of personal security.

There may be a change in regards to feelings of personal safety.

December 2004

39


8.0 REFERENCES

Bruce Power. August 2001. Bruce A Units 3&4 Restart Project Description.

Bruce Power. August 2002. Bruce A Units 3 & 4 Restart Environmental Assessment Study Report No. NK21-07000-P.

Bruce Power. October 2003. New Fuel Project for Bruce B Project Description. Report No. NK29-REP-00778-00001, REV 001.

Bruce Power. April 2004. Request for Approval of Revisions to Bruce A OP&P 30.3 and 30.4. Report No. NK21-CORR-00531-02707.

Bruce Power. June 2004. New Fuel Project for Bruce B Draft Environmental Assessment Study Report No. NK29-REP-07730-00001 REV 000.

Bruce Power. June 2004. Operating Policies and Principles – Bruce A. BP-OPP-00002 R004.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. August 2000. Preparing Project Descriptions under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Operational Policy Statement OPS - EPO/5 – 2000.

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. August 2003. Environmental Assessment Guidelines (Scope of Project and Assessment) Environmental Assessment of Proposed Modifications to Hydro-Quebec’s Gentilly-2 Radioactive Waste Management Facilities.

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. August 2003. Records of Proceedings, including Reasons for Decisions, Environmental Assessment Screening Report – Proposed Modifications to the SRWMF.

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. March 2004. Records of Proceedings, including Reasons for Decisions, Application for the Renewal of Bruce A Nuclear Generating Station Operating Licence.

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. 2004. Nuclear Power Reactor Operating Licence, Bruce Nuclear Generating Station A. PROL 15.01/2009.

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. May 2004. Approval of Revisions to Bruce A OP&P 30.3 and 30.4. Report No. NK21-CORR-00531-02791.

CH2M Hill Canada Limited. August 2002. Bruce Nuclear Power Development Fuel Oil Storage Tank Compliance Assessment Final Report.

CH2M Hill Canada Limited. August 2002. Phase II (Part 2) Environmental Site Assessment at Eight Sites, Bruce Nuclear Power Development, Tiverton, Ontario. Vol. 1 & 2.

Dollmaier, T., Bruce Power. 2001. Spills to the Environment. Report No. BP-PROC-00093.

December 2004 40


Farooqui, R. June 1992. Lake Huron Nearshore Currents, 1987 – 1989 and a Long-term Summary

of Water Movements in the Vicinity of Bruce NPD 1969-1989. Design and Development Division – Generation. Report No. 92065 (2087)

Johnston, Holly M., Kinectrics. September 22, 2000. Bruce Nuclear Environmental Site Assessment: Phase II Part I. Report No. 8010-001-RA-0001-R00.

Lawler, D.W. June 1992. Lake Huron Water Temperatures in the Vicinity of Bruce NPD 1988 & 1989 and Summary for the Period 1973 to 1989. Design and Development Division – Generation. Report No. 92146 (3364)

LGL Environmental Research Associates. August 2001. Bruce Nuclear Power Development Bioinventory Study - Interim Report 2001. LGL Limited Project TA2522.

New Brunswick Power. March 2001. Project Description Solid Radioactive Waste Management Facility Modifications. Report No. 87RF-00521-130-000.

Ontario Power Generation (OPG). June 2000. Bruce Nuclear Power Development Ecological Effects Review. Revision R00. Report No. G99242.

Ontario Power Generation (OPG). April 2000. Pickering A Return to Service Environmental Assessment.

Ontario Power Generation (OPG). September 1984. BNPD: An Assessment of the Effects of Construction and Operation on the Natural Environment to 1981. Report No. NK37-07000-18 (84363).

Regulations Respecting the Coordination by Federal Authorities of Environmental Assessment Procedures and Requirements, SOR/97 – 181.

December 2004 41


APPENDIX A

List of Acronyms

December 2004


LIST OF ACRONYMS

Acronym Descriptive Term

µSv microsievert

Bq Becquerel

Bq/L Becquerels per litre

Bruce A Bruce A Nuclear Generating Station

Bruce B Bruce B Nuclear Generating Station

Bruce Power Bruce Power LP, or Bruce Power, Inc., as the case may be depending on context

CANDU® A Canadian developed nuclear power reactor system. The name is derived from

Canada Deuterium Uranium, indicating the moderator is deuterium or heavy water, and that the fuel is natural uranium.

CANFLEX Trade name for new 43-element CANDU® Fuel Bundle

CCW Condenser Cooling Water

CEAA Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

CNSC Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

DFGSS Defuelled guaranteed shutdown state

DFO Fisheries and Oceans Canada

DIAND Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

EA Environmental Assessment

EC Environment Canada

FA Federal Authority

FEAI Federal Environmental Assessment Index

GUCSO Ministry of the Environment Guideline for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario

Ha Hectares

HC Health Canada

HLW High Level Waste

HWP Heavy Water Plant

IX Ion Exchange

kg Kilogram

kg-C Kilograms of Carbon

km kilometer

LILW Low and Intermediate Level Waste

LLW Low Level Waste

LOCA Loss of Coolant Accident

LVRF Low Void Reactivity Fuel

December 2004


Acronym Descriptive Term

MISA Municipal Industrial Strategy for Abatement

MNR (Ontario) Ministry of Natural Resources

MOE (Ontario) Ministry of the Environment

mSv milliSievert

MW Megawatt

MW(e) Megawatt Electricity

NRCan Ministry of Natural Resources Canada

ODS Ozone Depleting Substances

OP&P Operating Policy and Procedures

OPG Ontario Power Generation

OPGSS Overpoisoned guaranteed shutdown state

PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls

PROL Power Reactor Operating Licence

RA Responsible Authority

SCUBA Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus

SDS2 Shutdown System 2

SG Steam Generator

The County Bruce County

TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

TWh Terawatt Hours

TSSA Technical Standards and Safety Authority

U-235 Uranium isotope 235

WPCP Water Pollution Control Plant

WSP Water Supply Plant

WWMF Western Waste Management Facility

December 2004


APPENDIX B

Proposed Communications and Consultation Plan

December 2004

Bruce A Refurbishment Bruce Power for Life Extension and Proposed Communications Continued Operations Project and Consultation Plan

Bruce Power

Communications and Consultation Plan

Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and

Continued Operations Project

Revision 1 December 2004

December 2004


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................... 1 2.0 OBJECTIVE ............................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Specific Objectives .................................................................................... 2 3.0 COMMUNICATIONS AND CONSULTATION PLAN................................................ 3

3.1 Focus Area ................................................................................................ 3 3.2 Process...................................................................................................... 3 3.3 Stakeholders.............................................................................................. 4 3.4 Stakeholder Database ............................................................................... 4 3.5 Notification Advertisements and Letters .................................................... 5 3.6 Stakeholder Contact .................................................................................. 5 3.7 Stakeholder Briefings and Interviews ........................................................ 5 3.8 Open Houses............................................................................................. 6 3.9 Community Displays.................................................................................. 6 3.10 Newsletters/Brochures .............................................................................. 7 3.11 Bruce Power Employee Consultation Activities......................................... 7 3.12 Web Site .................................................................................................... 7 3.13 Comments and Issues Tracking ................................................................ 7 3.14 Media......................................................................................................... 8

December 2004


1.0 BACKGROUND

Bruce Power will formally announce its intent to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) to proceed with the Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project (hereinafter referred to as the “Project” for the purposes of the EA).

The Project entails restarting Bruce A Units 1&2 (currently laid-up), replacing key components of Units 3&4 (currently operating), and operating the four-unit station, potentially using a new fuel formulation, through the extended lives of the refurbished reactors, potentially at full capacity. The four Bruce A reactors are located on the Bruce Power site in Kincardine, Ontario.

The restart of Units 1&2 will create approximately 1,650 MW of additional electrical generating capacity for Ontario. Upgrading and enhancing activities and the potential future use of LVRF will permit long-term high-output operation and potentially allow operation at greater than 92.5% capacity (the current authorized output for of Units 3&4). In total, the Project may ultimately generate in excess of 1,700 MW in clean, non-greenhouse-gas-generating power for Ontario.

The Bruce A Refurbishment for Life Extension and Continued Operations Project is comprised of the following principal activities:

• Required maintenance of Units 1&2 during lay-up;

• Fuel Channel Replacement in Units 1-4;

• Nuclear Systems Upgrade in Units 1-4 (including steam generators);

• Balance-of-Plant Upgrade in Units 1-4 (conventional systems);

• Refuelling Units 1&2 with initial load of fuel;

• Restarting Units 1&2 and operating through their extended life including maintenance; and

• Potentially loading Low Void Reactivity Fuel (LVRF) and subsequently operating at maximum reactor power6.

It is Bruce Power’s understanding that some of these project activities (highlighted in bold) will require amendments to the license by the CNSC, including an EA under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). Bruce Power understands that the CNSC will determine the scope of the EA which would at a minimum encompass all project activities including those which will require licence amendments and those which are permitted or required by the existing licence. The EA will also assess the direct effects of all project activities on the environment over a time frame that extends from 2004 to 2043. The EA will also assess the cumulative effect of

6 Maximum reactor power is currently expected to be 95.5 % of maximum continuous rating.

December 2004 1


other projects, including Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG’s) Western Waste Management Facility (WWMF).

This document provides a plan for conducting consultation and communication activities which will be undertaken as part of the EA.

2.0 OBJECTIVE

The primary objectives of this communication plan are to:

• Deliver project information;

• Address community issues and concerns;

• Provide opportunities for input by the community at large and to groups and individuals with a specific interest in the Project; and

• To meet requirements under CEAA.

Bruce Power and its consultants will implement this communications and consultation plan and will ensure that Bruce Power's Corporate interests and messages are utilized to fulfill communication objectives.

As project issues and events arise, this document is open to review and revision to ensure appropriate action and response to the changing needs of interested public, stakeholders and interested groups.

Revisions to this Plan must be approved by the Vice President Corporate Communications and accepted by the Bruce A Restart Nuclear Safety and Licensing Manager.

2.1 Specific Objectives

To form the basis of the initial communications initiatives of the Project, an educational approach must be taken to allow a good understanding of the Project. The focus of the communications plan is to address project issues and provide information on the anticipated effects on the environment, human health and safety. After the initial announcement of the Project, the communications will address issues and questions such as the following:

1. What is involved in the Project?

2. What is the objective and timelines of the Project?

3. What effect will the Project have on the environment, human health and safety?

4. What are the benefits of the Project?

December 2004 2


3.0 COMMUNICATIONS AND CONSULTATION PLAN

3.1 Focus Area

The primary focus area for this communications plan consists of the five municipalities proximate to the Bruce Power site. In addition, some members of the public, including stakeholders and interested parties that do not live in close proximity to the Bruce Power site will be included in all aspects of this communication plan. The municipalities identified, as the primary focus area for this communications plan could include the following six municipalities:

a) Huron Kinloss;

b) Brockton;

c) Arran Elderslie;

d) Saugeen Shores;

e) Kincardine; and

f) Owen Sound.

In addition to these Bruce County municipalities, elected representatives and County officials in Bruce County could also be consulted.

3.2 Process

To maximize the effectiveness of this communication plan, the following key processes will be followed:

a) Identify interested stakeholders (defined in section 3.3, following) along with their communication needs. If required, establish an EA-specific stakeholder list as identified by CNSC;

b) Inform all stakeholders about the progress of the Project, i.e., milestones and key activities;

c) Provide opportunities for stakeholders to exchange information and identify and discuss any concerns they may have;

d) Ensure communications activities identified for the Project align and do not conflict with other Bruce Power activities;

e) Document and maintain a record of all communication processes and outcomes;

f) Identify and document issues, comments and concerns raised by stakeholders related to the Project and Bruce Power in general, as they arise;

g) Develop and maintain an up-to-date stakeholder comment database;

h) Develop and document all appropriate responses to address issues as they arise; and

December 2004 3


i) Post comments and responses to a dedicated public website.

3.3 Stakeholders

To ensure all interested members of public, individuals and groups are captured in this communication process, stakeholder identification will consider the following:

a) Past Bruce A Restart EA stakeholder list;

b) Past Bruce B New Fuel EA stakeholder list;

c) Interveners in the Bruce Power re-licensing process;

d) Response to advertisements/brochures/newsletters;

e) Attendance at project public information sessions; and

f) Suggestions.

Stakeholder groups and individuals will be identified in, but not limited to the following key stakeholder categories:

a) Regulatory Agency – CNSC;

b) Federal government – local and area MPs, departmental and agency staff;

c) Local First Nations communities;

d) Provincial government – local and area MPPs, ministry and agency staff;

e) Regional and local municipal councils, agencies and staff;

f) Community Committees including Regional Nuclear Emergency Preparedness Group;

g) Bruce Economic Development Committee;

h) Bruce Energy Center Customers;

i) Established non-governmental organizations;

j) Neighbouring landowners in the vicinity of the Bruce Power site;

k) Community residents, ratepayers, business associations, and suppliers;

l) Bruce Power Employees;

m) General public; and

n) Print and Broadcast Media.

3.4 Stakeholder Database

To ensure all pertinent stakeholder contact information is maintained, a stakeholder database, with the appropriate contact information, will be developed and kept current throughout the

December 2004 4


environmental assessment, CNSC decision on the EA, and the initial phases of work, anticipated to extend to 2008.

While building on the existing Bruce B New Fuel EA stakeholder database, this database will identify the name, address, phone, fax, email and affiliation.

3.5 Notification Advertisements and Letters

Media outlets such as: dailies, community papers, radio and television could be utilized to announce, in advance any project community involvement activities.

Direct mail flyers and advance notification letters will also be sent to persons on the contact list announcing these occasions in the event.

3.6 Stakeholder Contact

Appropriate stakeholder contact activities will be undertaken to conduct initial identification of stakeholder concerns and issues. Communication will be maintained throughout the Project period to ensure questions and concerns are addressed in a timely fashion as they arise. The number, severity, nature or frequency of the concerns and issues raised will determine the nature and frequency of the contact with stakeholder groups.

Key stakeholders will be notified of Open Houses and/or Workshops through formal invitations, announcements in the media and through the regular project newsletters.

3.7 Stakeholder Briefings and Interviews

All stakeholders with a known interest in the Project could be offered presentations and a chance to have questions and comments answered. Project material will be made available to participants in advance of any presentation. Where appropriate and in consultation with First Nations representatives, special meetings may be arranged for First Nation communities. All feedback received from these will be recorded for incorporation into the stakeholder comment database, response and issue management tracking system, as appropriate.

Regular project updates will be presented to elected representatives of the following committees on a frequency commensurate of key project activities and milestones at a minimum:

a) Impact Advisory Committee; and

b) Local Liaison Committee.

December 2004 5


3.8 Open Houses

Three or four rounds of Open Houses could be held throughout the initial phase of the Project to identify and address public concerns or issues pertaining to the Project.

The first Open House will be held at the Bruce Power Visitors’ Centre with the subsequent Open Houses held in the surrounding communities. These would provide a forum for two-way communication between participants and Bruce Power. Table 3-1 presents the planned focus of each series of Open Houses.

Table 3-1: Planned Focus of the Open Houses

Open House Focus

1) Round 1 • Project process and calendar • Preliminary Project Description • Public Communications Plan • Public questions and answer period • Study process and components • VEC selection

2) Round 2 • Project calendar up-date • Project interactions with the environment • Preliminary existing conditions • Comments received and responses

3) Round 3 • Project calendar up-date • Project interactions with the environment • Preliminary EA results • Comments received and responses

4) Round 4 • As necessary

3.9 Community Displays

Following each series of Open Houses, the information provided at Open Houses, such as newsletters comment sheets, etc., will be available for viewing at identified local library information repositories.

The libraries used as public information repositories for the Project are:

a) Kincardine;

December 2004 6


b) Port Elgin;

c) Tiverton;

d) Southampton;

e) Walkerton;

f) Paisley; and

g) Hanover.

The location of the repositories will be made known to the community and interested stakeholders through the Project newsletters, web page and other information materials. Addition information repositories can be added if a need is identified.

3.10 Newsletters/Brochures

Newsletters/brochures relating to Project updates and Open House events could be prepared and distributed to all contacts listed in the stakeholder database, residents and businesses in identified areas within the primary focus area.

3.11 Bruce Power Employee Consultation Activities

As part of ongoing communication with employees, Bruce Power informs its employees of environmental assessments through various means. Newsletters are displayed on site brochure racks throughout the Bruce Power site, and display versions of Open House panels are mounted in cafeterias, administration areas and the Bruce Power Visitors’ Centre. Team talks, The Point weekly newsletter and the company’s intranet site are also used to inform Bruce Power employees of the EA.

3.12 Web Site

A project web page on the main Bruce Power web site will be established. The web site will serve as a vehicle to provide information to interested persons, as well as a mechanism to receive input from interested persons as an enhancement of the public consultation program. Information such as: scope, schedule, descriptions, events and contacts pertaining to the Project and the EA study process will be maintained current.

3.13 Comments and Issues Tracking

A comment database will be created to track, record and monitor all comments, correspondence and communications with stakeholders in the Project communication process.

December 2004 7


The Stakeholder Comment Database objectives are:

a) Identify and record the source of the comment (name of person or group);

b) Indicate the date and event of origin;

c) Identify the type of communication and the original document for cross-referencing (letter, meeting report, email, voicemail report, etc.);

d) Provide a summary of the comment and response;

e) Indicate the response action taken, when and by whom; and

f) Document how the response was communicated to the comment source, where applicable.

3.14 Media

The media are an important vehicle to disseminate information to a wider audience. Bruce Power will ensure that the media are advised of Project events and the progress of these activities.

December 2004 8

bruce power project-description

Documents

units of bruce

bruce power site bruce

operations of bruce

bruce power plans

bruce b reactors

bruce powers proposal

service of units

ontario power generation