Issues with the IPD: Exclusion of Transportation and Pending Judicial Review

This Initial Project Description (IPD) for the Deep Geological Repository (which I'll call "the Project") has glaring fundamental issues that currently impede a good-faithed and appropriate path to moving forward at this time. 

(1) Exclusion of Transportation

One notable issue is the exclusion of including an assessment of the logistical scope and impact associated with transporting the radioactive waste to the proposed site in Northwestern Ontario in Treaty 3 lands, with the noted "host communities" being Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation, and the Township of Ignace.

The three reactors in Ontario are the Bruce, Darlington, and Pickering Nuclear Generation Stations. In the 70 page IPD summary (APM-REP-05000-0211 (https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p88774/164318E.pdf)) they are mentioned only once¹, and in reference only to projections about the total waste to be generated (5.9 million used fuel bundles). The actual location or distance from the current storage sites (which is currently stored on the reactor sites) to the proposed sites in Northern Ontario is not mentioned. 

The distance of each of these reactor sites is over 1,700km from the proposed repository site (Bruce Station located on the shore of Lake Huron, Darlington and Pickering on the shore of Lake Ontario). This means a roughly 18 hour drive, across multiple regions of Ontario both northern and southern. It should not need to be said that this means transportation is a crucial and inseparable component of the Project. Given that according to the NWMO, the waste would be transported there for a period of 45-50 years.

The IPD is written in such a way that it focuses on on-site operations, and explicitly "does not include transportation of used fuel from reactor sites to the Project beyond primary and secondary access roads at the Project Site, as this is regulated separately under CNSC certification and uses existing transportation infrastructure."²

This is a category mistake. Appealing to regulations being in place, or stating that it will be relying on usage of existing infrastructure, does not reflect, nor appropriately acknowledge or address the place and importance of transportation in the Project. To explicitly omit transportation of used fuel from the IPD grossly misrepresents the Project's actual scope and the reality of its operations. Whether it be from laziness, incompetence, or intentional misrepresentation (or perhaps any combination of the three), the IPD is clearly inadequate as a result. Especially given that the significant volume of radioactive waste being transported, over significant distances through multiple regions, over a significant period of time, has no precedent. 

it is at minimum absolutely necessary that a full impact assessment includes transportation to the site being acknowledging as an integral component of the project like it is, and consequent evaluations and assessments that stem from that (e.g., environmental risks, contingencies in the occurrence of required re-routing, highway closures, and timing disruptions (which at times can be significant), to name a few).

Again, it must be stressed that it is well understood, by the people of Northern Ontario especially, that this project is not transporting this radioactive waste incidentally, temporarily, or as a minor detail in the Project; and that the route from Southern Ontario to Northwestern Ontario is not a trivial one. Any assessment or proposal must reflect the reality of the situation and planning must be competent and comprehensive, which means including transportation; as this Project's very purpose lies in and requires the extensive and long-term transportation of the projected 5.9 million used fuel bundles over 50 years. 

(2) Pending Judicial Review 

Furthermore, and even more important at this time, there is currently a case against the NWMO brought forward by Eagle Lake First Nation (ELFN) pending decision. In it they state that the NWMO's selected site falls within ELFN territory—overlapping with Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation territory—while not recognizing ELFN as a "host community" for the site, despite repeated formal requests over the years to be included in such capacity.

ELFN has requested that this impact assessment be put on hold as the judicial review is still under way; and it should be.

The NWMO's decisions directly implicate and threaten ELFN's rights, interests, and territory, and the NWMO's exclusion and disregard of ELFN as a "host community" is inconsistent with their own stated principles and policy³:

• The NWMO acknowledges, respects and honours that First Nation and Métis peoples of Canada have unique status and rights as recognized and affirmed in s.35 of the Constitution Act (1982). The NWMO is committed to respecting the Aboriginal rights and treaties of First Nation and Métis peoples. The NWMO also recognizes that there may be unresolved claims between First Nation and Métis communities and the Crown to be considered in relation to a proposed site.
• The NWMO commits to meaningful engagement, including consultation as required, building respectful relationships, and seeking the free, prior, and informed consent of impacted Indigenous peoples before proceeding with development of a deep geological repository.
• The NWMO will foster respectful relationships among community partners, and recognizes that it takes time to develop knowledge, to experience deep understandings, and to establish trust and respect.

The impact assessment should be put on hold while the case is ongoing. For the Project to move forward minimally impeded, the NWMO must prioritize following the law, respecting rights, and remaining consistent with their own stated policy. This should perhaps go without saying, but in times like these must be stressed. 

¹ Initial Project Description Summary (https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p88774/164318E.pdf). Under 'Description of Project', pg. vii. 

² ^ pg. vii

³ NWMO Reconciliation Policy (https://www.nwmo.ca/-/media/Reports-MASTER/Policy-documents/2019-10-Reconciliation-Policy.ashx?sc_lang=en&rev=d8a14587ef904a818aad7d3e2a2d6d11&hash=80B7C0B8CB8662EA18592727258BB77C).