Understanding the Risks to Our Local Waterways
Living here in Northwestern Ontario, we know that our lakes and rivers are more than just scenery; they are our pantry, our playground, and our heritage. Whether you are casting a line near Borups Corners or enjoying the quiet waters around Dyment, the health of our fish populations is personal. Recently, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) released technical details regarding the proposed Revell Site Deep Geological Repository (DGR). Specifically, we are looking at how site clearing, blasting, and water drainage might affect the fish swimming in our backyard.
What We Are Learning
The NWMO’s latest Impact Assessment acknowledges that building a major infrastructure project like the DGR involves risks to aquatic life. Their report identifies that activities like blasting, water withdrawal, and changing site drainage could stress fish or alter their habitats. To manage this, they are proposing standard industry protections: using "fish-friendly" water intakes, timing construction to avoid spawning seasons, and controlling sediment runoff.
Their technical team has tested the rock at the Revell Site and determined it is "non-acid generating," meaning they don't expect the excavated rock to turn local groundwater acidic. Ultimately, the report concludes that while there is a "moderate likelihood" of some effects, the overall risk to fish populations is considered "low" and the damage would be "negligible."
The Reality Check
As neighbours, we need to look past the assurances and examine the details. Here is how the promises stack up against what we need to verify:
- What is being promised: The NWMO states that residual effects on fish habitat will be "negligible" because their mitigation strategies are well-established.
- What we need to verify: The term "negligible" is subjective. We need to see the specific biological numbers. Does "negligible" mean zero fish die, or that a 5% drop in population is acceptable? Without a clear definition, it is hard to hold anyone accountable.
- What is being promised: Groundwater seepage won't hurt the fish because the rock isn't acidic.
- What we need to verify: Acidity isn't the only enemy. We need to see comprehensive testing for other contaminants, such as heavy metals or nitrogen residue from the explosives used in blasting, which can be toxic to aquatic life even if the water isn't acidic.
The Path Forward
To ensure the safety of our waters in Melgund Township, we need to close the gap between corporate predictions and local reality.
The Gap: The report relies on general industry standards and qualitative terms like "low risk" without fully integrating local knowledge or providing hard thresholds for what constitutes damage. Furthermore, there is a confusing contradiction where they claim mitigation is certain, yet admit there is a "moderate likelihood" of residual effects.
The Solution: We are calling for the establishment of a formal, Community-Led Environmental Monitoring Program. This shouldn't just be NWMO scientists checking boxes; it must include local anglers and Indigenous Knowledge holders from the start. We need a site-specific inventory of our fish species and a binding agreement on what "negligible" means in numbers. If the monitoring detects changes beyond these set numbers, work must stop immediately. This proactive approach is the only way to ensure safety.
Why It Matters Here
For those of us in Northwestern Ontario, a "negligible" impact on paper can feel very different in reality. If blasting vibrations drive walleye away from their traditional spawning shoals, or if construction noise disrupts the quiet we cherish, our lifestyle changes. It affects the Sunday family fish fry and the treaty rights of our Indigenous neighbours. We need to ensure that the "moderate likelihood" of effects mentioned in the report doesn't translate into a permanent loss for our local ecosystem.
Have Your Say
This affects our future. Submit your feedback on this specific issue via our Engage page to ensure the Impact Assessment Agency hears from our community.
The Melgund Integrated Nuclear Impact Assessment Project
The Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) is reviewing the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO) proposed Deep Geological Repository (DGR) at the Revell Site, located near Ignace and Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation in Northwestern Ontario.
This major nuclear infrastructure project is undergoing a joint federal review by the IAAC and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) to evaluate environmental, health, social, and Indigenous rights impacts over its projected 160-year lifecycle.
Public Feedback Open: Comments on the Initial Project Description are accepted until February 4, 2026. Submissions help shape the formal impact assessment guidelines.
This short article and summary is based on an initial analysis of a proponent’s initial project description. It does not represent, any community the NWMO or the Government of Canada. Learn more at the Melgund Integrated Nuclear Impact Assessment Project project page.
About the Author
