The need for a thorough Impact Assessment for the proposal DGR in Revell Lake, ON

This project will affect people along the entire watershed and across the entire transportation route, and is the most environmentally concerning project of our generation. 

I am appalled by the strategies used up until now by the NWMO, pouring vast sums of money - money paid by ratepayers for electricity - to convince economically struggling communities that all the scientific elements of this proposed project have already been addressed, when this is far from the case.

The next phase of the Impact Assessment must include the following:

1. A full assessment of the potential impacts in detail, including transportation, processing, repository design and construction, the safety of the transfer and placement of waste underground, the nature and reliability of systems that monitor all aspects of the repository including releases to air and water from all operations, the retrievability of the wastes to enhance monitoring and allow remediation if a leak takes place, and the performance thresholds that will guide monitoring.
    
2. A full assessment of alternatives to the project (e.g. continued but improved and more secure long-term storage at the reactor stations) and alternative means of carrying out project component activities must be comprehensive and detailed. 
    
3. A full assessment of the long-distance transportation issues, including related exposures to radioactivity, the design and safety testing of the transportation containers, emergency response, support for First Responders, route selection, and notifications to local authorities.
    
4. The long-term safety and performance of the DGR / multiple-barrier “concept” must be part of impact assessment, not put off to far-future license applications; the “safety case” must be part of this Impact Assessment Review.
    
5. Free, Prior and Informed Consent from all FNs and municipalities in the connected watershed and along the transportation route.
    
6. Impact Assessment guidelines must be based on a rigorous assessment of scientific evidence rather than an approval process based on a small population sample. 

These areas of assessment are vital if the future well-being of the land, water, and people of Northwestern Ontario now and for generations to come.

I urge you to bring the highest standards to this task including consideration of alternatives to the current DGR proposal.