Orono Weekly Times, Wednesday, October 18, 1989-5 Kendal Hall News Report On Thursday, October 12th, the ladies of Kendal Hills L.O.B.A. met at the hall, when 3 new ladies j ed the Lodge. We were pleased ta have several ladies, from the Tyrone and Blackstock Lodges, visit with us. On Friday, October 13th, the first euchre party was held, this was hosted by the Members of the Junior Orange Lodge, a delicious lunch was provided provided by them. There were 12 tables, high score was won by, Carl Todd, 2nd Berniece Stark, 3rd and 4th a tie between Marg Todd arid Edward Skinner. The 50/50 draw was won by Cathy Switzer. Next card party Friday, October 27th- On Saturday, October 14th the Ladies Lodge held a very successful Bake Sale and Penny Sale, we wish to thank all who contributed and to all who came out to support us. Remember ladies, next month our Grand Mistress will be visiting with us. The men of Kendal L.O.L. 405 are holding a dance on Saturday, October 28th. This will be held in the Brownsdale Hall, come in costume or without, but plan to come and enjoy yourselves. These men always serve a good lunch, this time it will be roast beef and baked potatoes. If you wish to get your tickets ahead of time contact Dave Thrower, Kendal. Letter to the Editor Dear Roy: Re: Darlington Nuclear Generating Station Ontario Hydro - -Town of Newcastle Dear Sirs: In a recent letter (to Editor, Oshawa Times, Oct. 3, 1989), Mr. Arvo Niitenberg, Sr. V-P Operations, Operations, Ontario Hydro, made several statements which I take great exception exception to, which should be addressed. Mr. Niitenberg states that "...it is good policy to overreact to safety at a nuclear power facility. Ontario Hydro has been doing just that for over 30 years of nuclear operations.", and that: Ontario Hydro takes the health and safety of residents living around Darlington Darlington Nuclear Generating Station (DNGS) very seriously. We have certainly not "pooh-poohed" either local or AECB concerns...". When the DNGS comes on line, it shall be regularly emitting radioactive gases, said emissions probably including gases from the tritium-refining process. There is no other Tritium Refining Facility (TRF) in Canada. We don't know what effects there may be from these emissions. If we are going to be breathing this "stuff", then we have every right to know if it is effecting effecting the health of our children. Recent studies have shown increases in the incidence of leukemia in children living in the shadow of nuclear power facilities. What effects effects will regular releases of tritium gases have on our children? Having reminded ourselves of these'facts, I submit that Hydro is not taking the health and safety of residerfts living around DNGS very seriously for the following reasons. Area residents have been requesting requesting an adequate Baseline Health Study for several years now, said request having the support of the Town of Newcastle, the City of Oshawa, the Region of Durham, other area municipalities, and recently the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. This study is a priority in ensuring public safety. Although well aware of this request, Ontario Hydro has not only only refused to pay for the study, I submit that it does, indeed, "pooh- pooh" our concerns. t It has been suggested that the baseline health study could cost approximately approximately $2 - $3 million. Hydro has been crying that a licensing delay of the DNGS will lose them $20 million/month. Although 1 have limited understanding of the cr spt È = me 2 , I can clearly see ttw there is little comparison of the $12 billion plus which Ontario taxpayers taxpayers have payed for the DNGS, compounded with the $20 million/month profit which Hydro will collect from sales once the plant goes into ivnerntiiin. to the mesivre cost of protecting our health. If one were to extrapolate the $20 million/month figure and compare it to the $2 - $3 million to perform a baseline health study, in less "than one week of operation the baseline health study would be paid for. Regarding an emergency evacuation evacuation plan, Mr. Niitenberg states that it has been adopted by the provincial provincial government, and that copies of plan may be picked up at the Region of Durham offices. I believe that the Town of Newcastle has yet to be satisfied with any such plan. Furthermore, why is it that I can't get a copy in this municipality? In addition, it is my understanding that said plan is a generic plan which is not site-specific. This suggests suggests that all muncipalities which host a nuclear facility are one-and- the-same. They are not! When will there be a mock disaster in order that we can put this generic plan to thé test? If I am not mistaken, such a test was performed in Pickering, unsuccessfully. Have the problems since been ironed out? Finally, based based on media reports, I am not aware of the level of involvement of the local school boards, or the local hospital, and other medical practitioners. practitioners. Is there representation from either level on the Hydro Liaison Committee? ' Mr. Niitenberg comments that "Public and worker safety is Ontario Ontario Hydro's number one priority." These kinds of simplistic statements do nothing to alleviate my fears. Nor do they incite public trust when just a few days later a national, newspaper (Toronto Star, October 7/89) reports the details of an accident at the DNGS as provided provided by an anonymous caller. It has been reported that approximately 200 employees are to be tested for exposure to tritium because the accident accident may have occurred during an unknown time within a two-week period, and that it is as yet unknown how contaminated water that was in the inventory in line for processing got mixed up. This begs this cdtnment from Thoreau: "As if there were safety in stupidity alone!" and, to add insult to injury such a tritium leak is trivialized by not being reported immediately because "it's really a non-event"! Acceptable linriits, for tritium exposure exposure is 5'microcuries per kilogram - the contaminated water revealed 175. microcuries/kg. Whereas this information seems significant to me, Hydro's complacence bodes ill for employee safety. There are so many unknowns,' and so little regard for employee safety, one has to wonder just who is minding the store? Finally, I submit that Ontario Hydro expends more energy over- racting. to public opinion, rather than to public and employee safety. Sincerely, (Mrs.) Helen MacDonald The Corporation of the TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PUBLIC NOTICE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE PUBLIC NOTICE TO ITS CITIZENS AMENDMENT TO THE TOWN OF NEWCASTLE'S COMPREHENSIVE ZONING BY-LAW 84-63 Pursuant to Section 34(12) of the Planning Act and in accordance witt\ Regulation 404/83, notice is hereby given to a Public Meeting to be held on Monday., November 6, 1989, 9:30 a.m., in respect of the following proposed amendments to By-law 84-63, the Town of Newcastle's Comprehensive Zoning By-law. The subject amendments would have the following effect: 1) amend the definition of "Pit" to specify the following to be'permitted as ac cessory uses: an aggregate processing plant; aggregate stockpiling; and outside outside storage of aggregate materials. 2) amend the definition of "Quarry" to specify the following as accessory uses; and aggregate processing plant; aggregate stockpiling; and outside storage of aggregate materials. 3) amend the "Extractive Industrial" zone to delete "a processing plant- aggregate", "aggregate stockpiling" and "outside storage of aggregate materials" from the permitted non-residential uses. 4) amend Schedule 1 and Scheduled of the Town of Newcàstle Comprehensive Zoning By-law 84-63, to reflect a [eduction in the area licensed for aggregate extraction on three (3) sites béing: (a) Site 50 - Part Lot 32, Concession 9, former Township of Darlington. Licensed area reduced to 59.5 ha. (b) Site 52 - Part Lot 17, Concession 10, former Township of Darlington. Licensed area reduced to 134 ha. (c) Site 93 - Part Lot 6, Concession 4, former Township of Darlington. Licensed area reduced to 7.86 ha; 5) To delete the "Extractive industrial (M3)" zone to reflect those sites no longer licensed: (a) Site 90 - Part Lot 29, Concession 4, former Township of Darlington. Area no longer Licensed - 4 ha. (b) Site 98 - Part Lot 7, Concession 9, former Township of Darlington. Area no longer licensed - 2 ha. (c) Site 1Ô3 -Part Lot 27/28, Concession 7,"former Township of Clarke. Area no longer licensed - 2 ha. ■ The above noted sites are illustrated on the attached key maps. Copies of the proposed By-law amendment, explanations and details of the properties properties affected may be obtained during normal office hours, from the offices of the Planning and Development Department. Further information may«also be obtained by calling Heather Moulton, Planning Departments 623-3379. The Public Meeting required pursuant to Section 34(12) of the Planning Act will be held as follows: ■ , TIME: 9:30 A.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS, TOWN HALL, 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 1989, The meeting shall be open to the public and any person who attends shall be afforded afforded an opportunity to make representation in respect of the proposed amendment. FT Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P. Director-of Planning and Development 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario L1C 3K6 DEV 89-83 and DEV 89-117 i ~1 REMAINING LICENSED PORTION KS53 PORTION NO L0NGÈR LICENSED 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 M;3 ;A-1: : A-1 : KEY MAP SITE 50 ■ SITE NO LONGER UCENSEp 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 m A: A-1 |\J\\ ' i i rjr concession r T T7Ti TT KEY MAP SiTE 98 Date of Publication: October 18, 1989