Bruce C Transportation Planning

I noticed the following in the Bruce-C IPD (Initial Project Description) :

“Project detail information has been included in this IPD to support many of the questions raised during the Pre-Planning Phase of the Project. As part of the Project, Bruce Power will be completing a Transportation Planning Assessment. A Traffic Impact Study Update was completed in 2017 to capture traffic associated with ongoing operations and Major Component Replacement [MCR].”

In the on-going MCR project, large items like steam generators are shipped by rail to the terminal at Goderich, and then trucked to the Bruce site by Hwy. 21.

Anticipating the Bruce C project, wouldn’t it make more sense to build a rail spur along Hwy. 21, and skip the transfer to truck transport?

The Bruce site used to have a rail connection via Paisley, but the tracks were removed in 1989, converting the right-of-way to a bike trail.

Also, considering that the Bruce site will be shipping used nuclear fuel to a DGR for decades, wouldn’t it make more sense to ship by rail, to the Goderich terminal?
It seems that every other nuclear station in Canada has rail access.

People certainly don’t want more truck traffic on local highways.

That applies to the DGR end, where a rail spur would also be preferred.

The IPD blandly states that “Transportation of nuclear waste is considered outside of the Project scope”, as if the combination of MCR, Bruce-C, and used fuel transport to a DGR, had no bearing on the preferred mode of transport, than any one of the three projects alone.

How can such nonsense be justified?

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1500/1*qBVYSYU9ih1djHKHAT8U2Q.png