Back to All Events

WRITE NOW!: Comment on the additional information submitted by OPG

In March, 2016 the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Catherine McKenna requested Ontario Power Generation (OPG) to provide additional information regarding the proposed Deep Geologic Repository for Low and Intermediate Level Waste in Kincardine, ON. 

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) is asking the public to comment on the additional information submitted by the proponent, OPG. 

We urge you to write to the CEAA and help oppose the DGR project. The deadline has been extended to March 6, 2017! 

Copy the letter we drafted below, fill in your name and date and submit it to the CEAA!

Click the link below for more information:

Deep Geologic Repository Project
Project Manager
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor, Ottawa ON  K1A 0H3

From: [Enter Name/Address]
Date: [Enter Date]
CC: The Honourable Catherine McKenna; Prime Minister Trudeau; Honourable James Carr
Subject: The Canadian Government Needs to Stand up to OPG


Dear Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA):

It is time for the Canadian government to enforce the Environmental Assessment Act. In March of 2016, Honourable Catherine McKenna asked Ontario Power Generation (OPG) to identify specific alternate sites for the burial of nuclear waste and they have refused to do so. OPG’s proposal to construct a deep geologic repository (DGR) for radioactive nuclear waste on the shore of Lake Huron, in Kincardine, ON, should be rejected NOW.

OPG’s “Response to Information Requested from the Minister of Environment and Climate Change” submitted to the CEAA on December 18, 2016 is inadequate for the following reasons:

  1. OPG fails, for the fifth time, to clearly identify specific feasible alternate locations with reference to actual locations for the burial of nuclear waste.

  2. Its updated analysis of the cumulative environmental effects of the Project in light of the proposal for the DGR 2 by NWMO is inadequate and does not follow standard practice for cumulative effects analysis.

  3. Its updated list of mitigation commitments lacks credibility.

  4. OPG states that transporting radioactive waste by road to alternate locations in the province would have greater risk than burying it 900 metres from the shore of Lake Huron. They continue to fail to recognize that the efforts of every other country in the world have produced deep burial sites that have failed to prevent radiological waste from escaping into the surrounding environment.

OPG claims that people in Ontario have little interest in the Project despite a documented history of highly-biased public opinion research and ongoing, widespread public opposition in Canada and the U.S.

Ontario Power Generation’s repeated failure to adequately consider alternate sites for nuclear waste storage and its numerous violations of environmental laws are all the grounds the Canadian government needs to deny the Project.


Your truly,

[Enter Name]