Public Comment on the Proposed Deep Geological Repository for Canada's Used Nuclear Fuel – Project No. 88774

I am submitting this comment in response to the Initial Project Description for the proposed Deep Geological Repository (DGR) for used nuclear fuel in northwestern Ontario. I appreciate the opportunity to participate at this early stage; however, I note that the 30-day comment period is exceptionally brief given the scale, duration, and unprecedented nature of this proposal. Accordingly, these comments should be understood as preliminary and not exhaustive.

1. Need for a Full Impact Assessment, Including an Independent Review Panel

The Initial Project Description provided by the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) does not contain sufficient detail to enable meaningful public or expert evaluation of the project’s potential impacts. The permanent disposal of used nuclear fuel in a deep geological repository is unprecedented in Canada and remains unproven at an operational scale globally.

Given the long operational timeframe and the potential for irreversible impacts to land, water, communities, and future generations, I strongly urge the Agency to require a full impact assessment under section 43 of the Impact Assessment Act, including the establishment of an independent integrated review panel. A project of this magnitude demands the highest level of independent scrutiny, transparency, and public accountability.

2. Transportation of Used Nuclear Fuel Must Be Included in the Project Scope

I am deeply concerned that the transportation of used nuclear fuel has been excluded from the scope of the project description. This exclusion is inconsistent with section 22 of the Impact Assessment Act, which requires assessments to consider environmental, health, social, economic, and cultural effects, Indigenous rights, public concerns, and reasonable alternatives or alternative means of carrying out the project.

Transportation is not ancillary or optional. The proposal anticipates the daily transport of used nuclear fuel for approximately 50 years, over thousands of kilometres, along public transportation corridors, including highways that are already known to be dangerous—particularly in northern and remote regions. There is no independent utility to transporting nuclear waste on public highways apart from enabling this project to proceed.

Off-site transportation of used nuclear fuel has never occurred in Canada. This unprecedented activity introduces risks related to public safety, emergency response capacity, cumulative environmental effects, and community well-being that must be fully assessed. Excluding transportation from the project scope undermines the intent of the Impact Assessment Act and prevents a comprehensive evaluation of project impacts.

3. Deficiencies and Gaps in the Initial Project Description

The Initial Project Description fails to provide adequate information on several critical issues, including:

• Risks associated with long-distance transportation of used nuclear fuel through numerous communities and watersheds, with potential routes exceeding 1,800 km per trip.
• Cumulative and downstream impacts of repository operations and transportation on freshwater systems, Indigenous territories, and ecosystems, including within the Wabigoon and English River watersheds.
• Clear, substantiated evidence demonstrating that the underground disposal of high-level nuclear fuel waste can be safely managed over the extremely long timeframes required, given that no such facility has yet been successfully operated anywhere in the world.

These gaps prevent informed public participation and reinforce the need for a full impact assessment.

4. Indigenous Rights, Consent, and Host Community Recognition

Canada has adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) into domestic law through the UNDRIP Act, as affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada. Article 29(2) of UNDRIP affirms that hazardous materials shall not be stored or disposed of on Indigenous lands or territories without the free, prior, and informed consent of the Indigenous peoples concerned.

Recent Federal Court jurisprudence has further clarified that, in the context of nuclear waste disposal, the honour of the Crown requires deep consultation with the objective of obtaining consent, and that consultation must be tailored to Indigenous laws, knowledge systems, and governance practices.

In this context, I am particularly concerned by the exclusion of Eagle Lake First Nation, whose traditional territory overlaps with the proposed project area and is shared with Wabigoon First Nation, from meaningful participation in consultation and site selection processes. This omission undermines the legitimacy of the project and raises serious concerns about whether Indigenous rights are being respected in both substance and process.

I strongly assert that no impact assessment process should proceed until Eagle Lake First Nation is formally recognized as a host community, with the same standing, rights, and decision-making capacity as other identified host communities. Without such recognition, Eagle Lake First Nation would be participating in the assessment process under inequitable and coercive conditions, rather than as an equal rights-holder.

5. Broader Public and Intergenerational Considerations

Land, water, and community well-being are inseparable. For many people in northwestern Ontario, particularly Indigenous peoples, relationships to land are foundational to culture, identity, health, and responsibility to future generations. Any assessment of this project must take seriously the long-term, cumulative, and intergenerational risks of environmental harm, cultural disruption, and irreversible loss.

Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully urge the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada to:

1. Require a full impact assessment with an independent integrated review panel;
2. Expand the scope of the project to fully include the transportation of used nuclear fuel; and
3. Ensure that Indigenous rights, consent, and meaningful host community recognition, including for Eagle Lake First Nation, are addressed before the project advances further.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments for the public record.