IGNACE — With about 48 hours left for initial comments on a proposed nuclear waste site, regional environmental advocates say they’re pleased with what they’re seeing.
The first public comment period to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada is scheduled to close at 11:59 p.m. on Feb. 4. It’s the first chance for residents to weigh in to federal officials about the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s plan to store highly-radioactive used fuel from Canada’s nuclear power plants.
As of 3:30 p.m. ET Feb. 2, the registry had 330 comments posted and Wendy O’Connor, a volunteer with We the Nuclear Free North, said that shows the high level of interest in, and concern about, the project.
“I think the fact that the transportation routes travel over most of eastern Canada, so a great many people are affected,” she said. “I think, through this process, a lot of people who didn’t have this on their radar before, now they do, and they’re coming out to respond.”
The impact assessment agency has said this first comment period will help inform a summary of issues to be presented to the waste management organization for its review and response.
It’s the first step in a legislated 180-day “planning phase” which will include a decision from federal officials on whether to undertake a full impact assessment, including the striking of an independent review panel (an IAAC official told Newswatch not doing one would be “pretty unlikely” given the complexity of the NWMO’s proposal) and culminate in guidelines to the NWMO about what additional information it is to submit.
Another public comment period on draft guidelines from assessors is slated to happen sometime in March.
O’Connor said many submissions to this point are expressing concern about transportation not being included in the waste management organization’s initial project description, or IPD, for the proposed deep geological repository. The full document, totalling over 1,200 pages, and a separate 92-page “plain language summary” were publicly posted on Jan. 5, kicking off both the 30-day comment period and the overall impact assessment process.
“The NWMO is monitoring the submission to the registry and is aware of the comments and their nature,” the waste management organization said in an emailed statement to Newswatch. “The number of submissions and comments shows that the process is working as intended, and we look forward to receiving and responding to the summary of issues when we receive it later this month.”
In its IPD, the nuclear industry-funded not-for-profit, which has a federal mandate to manage the long-term storage of spent fuel, submitted that the project should only include transportation “along the primary and secondary access roads within the project site.”
The NWMO is proposing that the scope for assessment not include “transportation of used fuel from reactor sites to the project beyond primary and secondary access roads at the project site.” In effect, that means the hundreds and thousands of kilometres between the country’s nuclear plants and the proposed site, located just over 40 kilometres northwest of Ignace, wouldn’t be examined as part of the assessment agency’s expected years-long review.
The NWMO has maintained the scope of the assessment for the repository doesn’t need to include highway transportation “as this is regulated separately under (Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission) certification and uses existing transportation infrastructure,” according to its project description.
We the Nuclear Free North, which is a coalition of organizations and individuals opposed to the deep geological repository, and others don’t agree and are pushing for the federal review to include site-to-site transportation.
“The project cannot happen without transportation,” O’Connor said. “So, that omission was surprising and a lot of people have reacted.”
A final decision on whether the deep geological repository goes ahead or not is expected to take roughly another four years.
Other submissions to the impact assessment agency’s registry have criticized the length of time people have to submit comments, O’Connor said. The federal NDP called for an extension of the initial 30-day window in January; federal officials have said that, legislatively, once the planning phase starts, only the proponent (in this case, the NWMO) can pause it.
The waste management organization has not indicated it intends to alter the timeline, telling Newswatch its “intent is to follow the impact assessment and regulatory process as closely as possible.”
