Require the Proponent to disclose the full list of '14 technical methods' and the specific environmental criteria used to exclude options, clarifying whether social preference ('what they heard') or technical safety was the primary filter.
Strategic Rationale
"The Initial Project Description states that the technical shortlist was based on methods the Proponent 'heard hold the most promise' during public consultation. This suggests a potential bias where social acceptability may have outweighed geological or environmental safety in the early screening. For Melgund, the integrity of the local watershed and geology is paramount. We must ensure that the 'alternative management approaches' were not narrowed down in a way that discarded safer, but less popular, technical options that might better protect the local environment."
Source Context
Understanding the Impacts of Nuclear Waste on our Community
This digital archive houses the public comments submitted to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada regarding Project 88774: The Nuclear Waste Management Organization Deep Geological Repository (DGR) for Canada's Used Nuclear Fuel Project. The impact assessment is led jointly by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. This archive preserves community perspectives, concerns, and observations shared during the assessment process, particularly in relation to Melgund Township, Northwestern Ontario and the communities of Dyment and Borups Corners who are the closest and most impacted of all in the process.