Evaluating the NWMO Strategic Climate Assessment
This article is part of a series exploring the views and perspectives of youth, artists and community members working with the Melgund Integrated Nuclear Impact Assessment Project. This initiative is a climate entrepreneurship and arts-based community recreation program, developed through community consultation, engagement participation in the integrated impact assessment process for the NWMO’s proposed Deep Geological Repository for nuclear waste fuel.
What is Proposed
The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) has outlined its commitment to the Strategic Assessment of Climate Change (SACC) as required under Section 95 of the Impact Assessment Act. The proponent claims that the project’s energy needs will be “substantially met” by the Ontario power grid, with any remaining on-site needs—such as standby power—being addressed through a “best available technologies” assessment. A primary claim within the Initial Project Description is that no other strategic assessments are currently required for the project.
Underlying Assumptions
- The Ontario provincial grid will provide a consistent and sufficient power supply for the duration of the project.
- On-site standby power requirements constitute a “small amount” of energy that does not require immediate quantification.
- Greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction priorities are primarily relevant during the site preparation and construction phases.
- Publicly available information is exhaustive in determining the necessity of further strategic or regional assessments.
Community Assessment
Our community assessment reveals that the NWMO’s strategic assessment lacks the technical specificity required to assure residents of Melgund Township, Dyment, and Borups Corners of the project’s true environmental footprint. By using vague qualifiers like “substantially met” and “small amount,” the proponent obscures the actual industrial scale of the Revell site operations. For a community located less than 10 kilometers from the proposed site, the distinction between grid reliance and on-site generation is critical; standby systems are often diesel-reliant, contributing to localized noise and air quality degradation. Furthermore, the current narrative functions as a rhetorical shield, using terms like “best available technologies” to avoid disclosing specific engineering constraints. This matters to the community because it minimizes the perceived impact of massive land clearing and the removal of carbon-sequestering boreal forest, while ignoring the long-term “stigma effect” on local land use and shared water systems.
Path Forward
To improve transparency and accountability, the proponent should provide a quantitative breakdown of the energy required for on-site standby power, including specific fuel types and expected emission ranges. It is essential that the commitment to greenhouse gas reduction is extended beyond the construction phase to include the entire operational and decommissioning lifecycle. We recommend establishing clear, auditable performance indicators for “best environmental practices” to ensure the project aligns with Canada’s long-term net-zero targets and provides the public with measurable benchmarks for success.
About the Integrated Assessment Process
The federal Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) has formally launched the integrated impact assessment process for the proposed Deep Geological Repository (DGR) for Canada’s Used Nuclear Fuel Project, a major national infrastructure initiative led by the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO).
The proposed underground repository is designed to permanently contain and isolate used nuclear fuel in a secure geological formation. Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation and the Township of Ignace have been selected as host communities for the project. The site is located approximately 21 kilometres southeast of Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation and 43 kilometres northwest of Ignace, Ontario, near Highway 17.
According to project materials, the repository would provide permanent storage for approximately 5.9 million bundles of used nuclear fuel. The full lifecycle of the project is expected to span roughly 160 years, including site preparation, construction, operations, closure, and long-term monitoring.
Integrated Federal Review
Major nuclear projects in Canada are subject to an integrated assessment process jointly led by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). This “one project, one review” approach is intended to streamline regulatory oversight while ensuring rigorous evaluation of environmental, health, social, economic, and Indigenous rights impacts.
Under this framework, IAAC oversees the impact assessment requirements under the Impact Assessment Act, while the CNSC regulates nuclear safety under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act. The CNSC will issue the initial site preparation licence and manage all subsequent nuclear licensing for the project’s duration.
The integrated assessment also includes a focus on potential impacts on Indigenous Peoples, including rights, land use, cultural practices, health, and socio-economic conditions. Where potential adverse effects are identified, the process is intended to identify mitigation measures to reduce or avoid harm.
Public Comment Period Now Open
The first public comment period for the project is currently open and will run until February 4, 2026. During this phase, the public is invited to provide feedback on the Summary of the Initial Project Description submitted by the NWMO. Submissions received during this period will inform IAAC’s summary of issues, which will guide the next stages of the impact assessment. All comments submitted become part of the public project record and are posted to the federal Impact Assessment Registry.
This plain-language summary is provided by ECO-STAR North and Art Borups Corners to support public engagement.
Disclaimer: The views and perspectives expressed in this article are solely those of the independent arts program led by ECO-STAR North and Art Borups Corners. They do not reflect the official positions of the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) or the Government of Canada.
About the Author
