Thank you for taking action!
This campaign is now closed.
From May 5-10, 2026, 275+ letters were sent in support of our call
for Canada to step up impact assessment of the ‘Deep Geological Repository’ radioactive waste project
Your Voice Matters
When nuclear power plants like Pickering and Point Lepreau were built in the 1960s and 1970s, they were approved without Indigenous consent and without asking how the toxic radioactive waste they would produce could be safely managed and isolated from the environment, for hundreds of thousands of years.
Now, that question can no longer be ignored.
A nuclear waste dump – called the Deep Geological Repository (DGR) – is being proposed in Northwestern Ontario, to bury and abandon used nuclear fuel from across the country.
With the impact assessment for the DGR now underway, we urge you to join us in sending a message by May 10 telling the federal government that a project of this scale and risk warrants an equally robust assessment.
The Deep Geological Repository is not a standalone facility. It is the endpoint of a national nuclear waste system that includes the generation, handling, transportation, and long-term disposal of radioactive waste across Canada.
Yet, the proponent – the Nuclear Waste Management Organization – is already attempting to exclude or minimize key parts of this project from the impact study it will soon undertake, as part of the multi-phased impact assessment process.
We cannot let Canada or nuclear waste producers step back from their responsibilities to protect the health of citizens, nature and future generations – especially at a time when they are announcing billion-dollar investments in new nuclear projects for a multitude of purposes, including military uses.
Your participation will influence decisions being made now, that will last for generations. We must get this right.
Thank you to the 275+ peoeple who sent a message.
Below is a copy of the letter that was sent.
Dear Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, Minister Dabrusin and Minister Hodgson,
I am writing to urge you to strengthen the Draft Tailored Impact Statement Guidelines for the proposed Deep Geological Repository for Canada’s used nuclear fuel.
For decades, Canada’s nuclear industry has been allowed to operate without fully addressing the long-term management of high-level radioactive waste. This project and the challenges now faced, are a direct result of the lack of planning and foresight to establish reliable and socially acceptable methods of managing long-lived radioactive wastes, when nuclear power plants first came online over 50 years ago.
The Deep Geological Repository is not a standalone facility. It is the endpoint of a national nuclear waste system that includes the generation, handling, transportation, and long-term disposal of radioactive waste across Canada.
As such, the impact assessment must reflect the full scope and scale of this project. However, the current approach does not ensure sufficient clarity nor expectations of proponents, and lacks the hallmarks of a best practice IA, with little to no attention to international radiological protection principles, upholding Indigenous rights and the active and meaningful participation of the public and impacted communities.
The lack of precautionary and preventative planning for this waste means we must mitigate, as best we can, the unique environmental, human health and security risks the production of nuclear energy poses. It therefore requires the highest possible standard of review.
I am therefore calling on the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada to strengthen the Draft Guidelines to ensure the impact assessment:
1 – Clearly requires the proponent to conduct a cumulative effects assessment of the project, inclusive of activities at the nuclear sites where the waste is presently housed and along the transportation corridor, taking into account radiological risk from accidents and malfunctions;
2 – Respects and upholds Indigenous rights by aligning the IA process with the principles of UNDRIP, including the requirement of free, prior, and informed consent;
3 – Directs an assessment of alternatives that delivers the best options in the overall lasting public interest, with attention to cumulative, socio-economic, health and environmental effects and their interactions; and
4 – Applies an environmental justice lens, taking into account intergenerational impacts and the meaningful involvement of those impacted by environmental racism, in order to advance transparency and credibility in the IA process.
This is a critical opportunity to close a 50-year gap in accountability and ensure decisions are made in a way that protects people, communities, and the environment—now and for generations to come.
More ways to take action
- Send your own comment to the IAAC! You are welcome to draw on the text of our letter if you have capacity to send an individualized message directly to the IAAC via their comment portal. For assistance in navigating and submitting comments to the Registry, see our how-to guides or the IAA 101 toolkit.
- Share our call to action on social media! Check out our Facebook and Instagram posts