Deep Geological Repository (DGR) for Canada's Used Nuclear Fuel Project

Comments with respect to the Draft Integrated Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines

Reference Number
783
Text
Greetings,
I submit this intervention as a concerned citizen and as former Director/CEO of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment.
Upon reading through the Draft Integrated Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines for the Deep Geological Repository (DGR) for Canada’s Used Nuclear Fuels I am left incredulous and aghast at the fact that the Impact Assessment Agency is excluding consultations and considerations concerning the transport of such used nuclear fuels from their original location (of which there will be many) to the proposed depository in the Revell Batholith .
There are a number of reason for my incredulity:
  • Do not the communities through which these frequent nuclear-laden transports must pass not have the right to express their concerns about life/health/safety issues that may be posed by the passage of these transports through their communities? Or is it that there would be so many of such communities requiring consultation, that it was thought better to simply ignore them.   
  • Due in part to ill-trained transport truck drivers now on Ontario roads and the proliferation of 18/24/38 wheeled behemoths, transport vehicles in 2024 were involved 8,807  motor vehicle–related collisions as reported by the OPP  — including fatal, injury, and property-damage-only collisions.
  • Fully 21% of fatal collisions involving transport trucks killed 86 people. While statistics are not yet available, this provides a baseline for what a typical 2025 year looks like when the Ontario Road Safety Annual Report or Ontario Collision Database datasets are released later this year.
  • Are you ready for repeated highway barricades which will emerge from members of those communities, particularly from Indigenous communities through which these nuclear-laden transports must pass and who have not been consulted at all in this process.
  • In addition to the NWMO who have used their funds to successfully "entice" communities like Ignace into submission, are there any other independent agencies or specialist organizations who have "assured the public" of the absolute safety of these nuclear-laden transports?
In my opinion the Impact Assessment Agency would be in serious dereliction of its duty if it failed to include in the project description plans for comprehensive consultations with communities and traditional territories impacted by the transport of nuclear-laden fuels part of the consultation process.
Cordially yours
 
Peter Andre Globensky

511-145 Fanshaw st.

Thunder Bay, ON ~ P7C 5Y4

431-337-7823

Greetings,
I submit this intervention as a concerned citizen and as former Director/CEO of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment.
Upon reading through the Draft Integrated Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines for the Deep Geological Repository (DGR) for Canada’s Used Nuclear Fuels I am left incredulous and aghast at the fact that the Impact Assessment Agency is excluding consultations and considerations concerning the transport of such used nuclear fuels from their original location (of which there will be many) to the proposed depository in the Revell Batholith .
There are a number of reason for my incredulity:
  • Do not the communities through which these frequent nuclear-laden transports must pass not have the right to express their concerns about life/health/safety issues that may be posed by the passage of these transports through their communities? Or is it that there would be so many of such communities requiring consultation, that it was thought better to simply ignore them.   
  • Due in part to ill-trained transport truck drivers now on Ontario roads and the proliferation of 18/24/38 wheeled behemoths, transport vehicles in 2024 were involved 8,807  motor vehicle–related collisions as reported by the OPP  — including fatal, injury, and property-damage-only collisions.
  • Fully 21% of fatal collisions involving transport trucks killed 86 people. While statistics are not yet available, this provides a baseline for what a typical 2025 year looks like when the Ontario Road Safety Annual Report or Ontario Collision Database datasets are released later this year.
  • Are you ready for repeated highway barricades which will emerge from members of those communities, particularly from Indigenous communities through which these nuclear-laden transports must pass and who have not been consulted at all in this process.
  • In addition to the NWMO who have used their funds to successfully "entice" communities like Ignace into submission, are there any other independent agencies or specialist organizations who have "assured the public" of the absolute safety of these nuclear-laden transports?

  • As well, there is no further obligation on the proponent to explore alternatives to this project. We do know that the proponent looked into alternatives in the past and the IAAC is satisfied with this. However, we think the proponent's work in this area is dated and possibly doesn't reflect alternatives that are currently available. 

In my opinion the Impact Assessment Agency would be in serious dereliction of its duty if it failed to include in the project description plans for comprehensive consultations with communities and traditional territories impacted by the transport of nuclear-laden fuels part of the consultation process.
Cordially yours
 
Peter Andre Globensky

511-145 Fanshaw st.

Thunder Bay, ON ~ P7C 5Y4

431-337-7823

 

Submitted by
Peter Globensky
Phase
Planning
Public Notice
Public Notice - Comments invited and information sessions on the draft Integrated Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines and draft Public Participation Plan
Attachment(s)
N/A
Date Submitted
2026-04-29 - 4:16 PM
Report a problem on this page
Date modified: