Lack of consideration of communities historic relationship with nuclear, how it impacts engagement

Good evening,

I have read the Draft Public Participation Plan (Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, 2026). I appreciate the document's succintness at just 18 pages. If I am not mistaken, I am disappointed to read that there is no intention to allow for comments to be submitted in-person. Instead, comments will only be accepted as written documentation online or through the mail. Please ensure that comments can be submitted as accessibly as possible, in multiple formats, and through multiple avenues.

My most significant concern with this Plan is that it fails to acknowledge the historic relationships that surrounding communities have with nuclear projects, and how this could impact response and engagement by the public. To this day, much of Canada's historic nuclear waste resides in Clarington and Port Hope (Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, 2025). Community members have come to feel discouraged from participating in opportunities for comment when they feel there has been little to no resulting impact. There is a feeling of futility. Residents have been arguing against such projects for years (Old Ontario Series, 2026), (Port Hope Community Health Concerns Committee, 2021), yet the burden of protest is placed upon them time and time again. How will the IAAC and other involved parties ensure that community members feel that their concerns are truly acknowledged and considered? How will they prove that it is worth while for community members to participate? 

Finally, if written documentation is to be the main form of communication with the IAAC and other involved parties, then such documentation should be accessible to Canadians of all reading abilities. While I understand that documents provided by the IAAC and other involved parties must be professional in appearance and language, they are not accessible to many Canadians (OECD, 2024) . If the IAAC and other involved parties truly care about ensuring Canadians are able to understand and engage with the information they are distributing, then their documentation must reflect this. I propose the development and distribution of multiple forms of a document, which represents the official version of the document, as well as one designed with simplification and plain language for public outreach purposes. 

Thank you.

Citations

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. (2025, May 5). Historic nuclear waste. Government of Canada. https://www.cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca/eng/waste/historic-nuclear-waste/

Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. (2026). Draft public participation plan. Retrieved May 5, 2026, from https://iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/documents/p89802/165943E.pdf.

OECD. (2024, December 10). Survey of adults skills 2023: Canada. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/survey-of-adults-skills-2023-country-notes_ab4f6b8c-en/canada_5ecab9d9-en.html