“Lessons Learned and Best Practices from Public Involvement in Decisions Related to Siting Nuclear Facilities”

EXPERIENCES FROM S I M O MUNICIPALITY ,

Mr. Esko Tavia Mayor of Simo Municipality

OECD Headquarters, Paris

February 15, 2011 February 15, 2011 --Haparanda Region

February 15, 2011

Today, nuclear power is generated in Finland Fennovoima 1 by two companies.

Olkiluoto 4

Olkiluoto 3

Olkiluoto 1–2

Loviisa 1–2

February 15, 2011 Fennovoima has two suitable greenfield sites in Northern Finland

Environment and safety • Both sites passed review by environmental authorities and nuclear authority STUK

Oulu Regions support Fennovoima • Both municipalities, regions, and majority of local people support the project

February 15, 2011 Finnish nuclear licensing process

STUK = Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority

Decisive Decision Statements makers Fennovoima Schedule

Environmental Impact Assesment February 20, 2009 STUK, Ministry of Environment Ministry of Employment and the Economy

Decision-in-Principle May 6, 2010 STUK, Municipality Government, Parliament July 1, 2010

Construction License Application end of 2013, STUK Government Granting expected mid 2015

Operating License 2019 STUK Government

04-Mar-11 Timeline

Fennovoima is founded

40 optional sites

Opening of the local offices in 4 sites 2 optional sites

2007 2008 2009 2010

EIA program EIA report hearing by

hearing by MEE MEE

Election

Positive DiP MEE = Ministry of statements with 2/3 Employment and the majority from the

Economy Municipal municipalities

Fennovoima and Simo municipality share information about the project to public

February 15, 2011 Land use planning started 2008

Three levels of land use plans: • Regional land use plan • Local master plan • Local detailed plan

In every level: • Plans are public • Appeals can be made

Land use planning process for the Fennovoima NPP project completed in 2010

February 15, 2011 Local involvement

Alongside the legitimate actions Simo and Kemi-Tornio area support versatily the preparations in the area

• Events and seminars for public audience and companies • Municipality has organized public events with Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) to share information and to discuss about the project • Different stakeholders in the region have organized seminars for companies interested about the opportunities offered by the project • Networking tool for the companies interested about the NPP construction works has been developed • Assessment to clarify the effects of the project to the area and to provide information about the area for Fennovoima

February 15, 2011 Majority in the region support the project

What is your opinion about Fennovoima’s plan to build a nuclear power plant in the region?

Simo and surrounding Simo (N=200) municipalities* 100% 100% 90% 25 90% 30 80% 40 36 36 44 80% 43 38 49 47 8 70% 70% 2 2 60% 13 Strongly disagree or 5 60% 4 disagree 6 5 50% 50% 4 5 Neither agree or disagree 40% 40% 67 Agree or strongly agree 30% 62 63 55 30% 58 57 49 47 48 52 20% 20% 10% 10%

0% 0% 5/2008 11/2008 5/2009 1/2010 10/2010 5/2008 11/2008 5/2009 1/2010 10/2010

* Ii, Kemi, , Tornio, , Best practices

• Nuclear Energy Act • Environmental Impact Assessment • Ministry of Employment and the Economy (hearings) • Public events with nuclear authority STUK organized by the municipality • Fennovoima’s way to be present at the municipality • Local office • Open and honest communication • Good contact with the decision makers and inhabitants of the area • Municipality is committed to the project

February 15, 2011

Simo site

Areva (EPR and Kerena) and Toshiba (ABWR) as reactor options

February 15, 2011 Open and honest communication with all stakeholders is a key to a success.

Thank you for listening!