Group items tagged

The U.S. Forest Service is developing an environmental cleanup plan for the San Mateo Uranium Mine under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The site is located on the Mount Taylor Ranger District of the Cibola National Forest, Cibola County, approximately 12 miles northeast of Grants. * The Forest Service prepared an Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) to identify and evaluate several cleanup alternatives to address the waste rock piles associated with past uranium mining. The recommended cleanup alternative is to consolidate the waste rock piles and place them in an on-site repository. A geomembrane would be placed above the waste rock in the repository and would be covered with clean soil, re-vegetated, and armored with rock. Rock armoring would reduce the potential for erosion during heavy storm events and reduce the potential risk of exposure to gamma radiation and direct contact, inhalation, or ingestion of waste rock. The agency is requesting public input and comments on the EE/CA and the recommended cleanup alternative. The EE/CA and the Administrative Record are available for review at the Southwestern Regional Office in Albuquerque and the Mount Taylor Ranger District Office, 1800 Lobo Canyon Rd., in Grants and also available at the following link: http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/cibola/projects/index.shtml.

The U.S. Forest Service is developing an environmental cleanup plan for the San Mateo Uranium Mine under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The site is located on the Mount Taylor Ranger District of the Cibola National Forest, Cibola County, approximately 12 miles northeast of Grants. * The Forest Service prepared an Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) to identify and evaluate several cleanup alternatives to address the waste rock piles associated with past uranium mining. The recommended cleanup alternative is to consolidate the waste rock piles and place them in an on-site repository. A geomembrane would be placed above the waste rock in the repository and would be covered with clean soil, re-vegetated, and armored with rock. Rock armoring would reduce the potential for erosion during heavy storm events and reduce the potential risk of exposure to gamma radiation and direct contact, inhalation, or ingestion of waste rock. The agency is requesting public input and comments on the EE/CA and the recommended cleanup alternative. The EE/CA and the Administrative Record are available for review at the Southwestern Regional Office in Albuquerque and the Mount Taylor Ranger District Office, 1800 Lobo Canyon Rd., in Grants and also available at the following link: http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/cibola/projects/index.shtml.

Some claim that nuclear energy has become safer and that the public is more accepting of it because it releases less emissions into the air compared to coal. As for the benefits of nuclear energy, Schacherl has strong views on this too. "Nuclear energy has no benefits to the public, not even in lower CO2 emissions when the full nuclear cycle is taken into effect. Nuclear is expensive and dangerous, and the only benefit is to the nuclear industry itself. The claim that the third generation reactors are safer is just a joke, since none of them have ever been built and for the ACR1000, not even the design is completed. How can you claim they are safer when the safety analysis showing the probability of a nuclear accident has not even been completed?" Schacherl is emphatic that nuclear energy be phased out and replaced by renewable energy that is safer, more cost-effective and sustainable. Schacherl also encourages the public to do their homework since there is a lot of misinformation out there. "The provincial government's nuclear panel report was full of misinformation. Albertans should do their own research on nuclear. The nuclear industry provides very little solid, factual information. They just ask us to trust them."

Some claim that nuclear energy has become safer and that the public is more accepting of it because it releases less emissions into the air compared to coal. As for the benefits of nuclear energy, Schacherl has strong views on this too. "Nuclear energy has no benefits to the public, not even in lower CO2 emissions when the full nuclear cycle is taken into effect. Nuclear is expensive and dangerous, and the only benefit is to the nuclear industry itself. The claim that the third generation reactors are safer is just a joke, since none of them have ever been built and for the ACR1000, not even the design is completed. How can you claim they are safer when the safety analysis showing the probability of a nuclear accident has not even been completed?" Schacherl is emphatic that nuclear energy be phased out and replaced by renewable energy that is safer, more cost-effective and sustainable. Schacherl also encourages the public to do their homework since there is a lot of misinformation out there. "The provincial government's nuclear panel report was full of misinformation. Albertans should do their own research on nuclear. The nuclear industry provides very little solid, factual information. They just ask us to trust them."

A UK study provides the first contemporary investigation of public perceptions of nuclear power among residents living close to existing nuclear plants. It indicates that responses are not simply 'for' or 'against', but a complex 'landscape of beliefs' that will need complex communication from authorities about plans for new plants. Climate change and energy supply concerns have put nuclear power back on the policy agenda. For example, recent UK government policy proposes that new nuclear power stations should form part of the future UK energy mix(1). As in other countries, many of the candidate sites are those that have existing nuclear facilities. The study examined local response to nuclear power in two UK locations near power stations: Oldbury and Bradwell-on-Sea. It used a technique where participants sorted statements on nuclear power according to how the statements reflect their point of view. The analysis indicated that there are four different 'points of view': * Beneficial and safe. A belief that nuclear power brings both local and global benefits and the power station workers are trustworthy. * Threat and distrust. Nuclear power is unsafe and the government and the nuclear industry are not trustworthy. * Reluctant acceptance. Nuclear power is 'the best of a bad lot'. * There's no point worrying. An indifference to nuclear power and a belief that it is out of our control * These four unique points of view were found at both locations, indicating the results are likely to be reflected in other communities, at least in the UK. Most participants in the study held the first two views.

A UK study provides the first contemporary investigation of public perceptions of nuclear power among residents living close to existing nuclear plants. It indicates that responses are not simply 'for' or 'against', but a complex 'landscape of beliefs' that will need complex communication from authorities about plans for new plants. Climate change and energy supply concerns have put nuclear power back on the policy agenda. For example, recent UK government policy proposes that new nuclear power stations should form part of the future UK energy mix(1). As in other countries, many of the candidate sites are those that have existing nuclear facilities. The study examined local response to nuclear power in two UK locations near power stations: Oldbury and Bradwell-on-Sea. It used a technique where participants sorted statements on nuclear power according to how the statements reflect their point of view. The analysis indicated that there are four different 'points of view': * Beneficial and safe. A belief that nuclear power brings both local and global benefits and the power station workers are trustworthy. * Threat and distrust. Nuclear power is unsafe and the government and the nuclear industry are not trustworthy. * Reluctant acceptance. Nuclear power is 'the best of a bad lot'. * There's no point worrying. An indifference to nuclear power and a belief that it is out of our control * These four unique points of view were found at both locations, indicating the results are likely to be reflected in other communities, at least in the UK. Most participants in the study held the first two views.

The story line that dominated media coverage of the second Iranian uranium enrichment facility last week was the official assertion that U.S. intelligence had caught Iran trying to conceal a "secret" nuclear facility. But an analysis of the transcript of that briefing by senior administration officials that was the sole basis for the news stories and other evidence reveals damaging admissions, conflicts with the facts and unanswered questions that undermine its credibility. Iran's notification to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the second enrichment facility in a letter on Sep. 21 was buried deep in most of the news stories and explained as a response to being detected by U.S. intelligence. In reporting the story in that way, journalists were relying entirely on the testimony of "senior administration officials" who briefed them at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh Friday.

The story line that dominated media coverage of the second Iranian uranium enrichment facility last week was the official assertion that U.S. intelligence had caught Iran trying to conceal a "secret" nuclear facility. But an analysis of the transcript of that briefing by senior administration officials that was the sole basis for the news stories and other evidence reveals damaging admissions, conflicts with the facts and unanswered questions that undermine its credibility. Iran's notification to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the second enrichment facility in a letter on Sep. 21 was buried deep in most of the news stories and explained as a response to being detected by U.S. intelligence. In reporting the story in that way, journalists were relying entirely on the testimony of "senior administration officials" who briefed them at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh Friday.

Craig Severance, CPA Author, Business Risks & Costs of New Nuclear Power Dr. Arjun Makhijani President, Institute for Energy & Environmental Research Perform an in depth analysis of the financial risks that San Antonio faces with the proposed expansion of the south texas nuclear project and discuss other alternatives that the city should be considering.

Craig Severance, CPA Author, Business Risks & Costs of New Nuclear Power Dr. Arjun Makhijani President, Institute for Energy & Environmental Research Perform an in depth analysis of the financial risks that San Antonio faces with the proposed expansion of the south texas nuclear project and discuss other alternatives that the city should be considering.

Start-up of Europe's first EPR nuclear power plant, the Olkiluoto 3 under construction in Finland, has been postponed beyond June 2012 because civil construction is taking longer than was previously estimated, according plant owner Teollisuuden Voima Oyj (TVO). Finland's nuclear regulatory agency has, meanwhile, called attention to "deficiencies" in the welding of the plant's cooling system, potentially causing further delays. The Finnish utility said last week that the plant's supplier, an AREVA-Siemens Energy consortium, is responsible for the current schedule, and that it has requested a re-analysis of the anticipated start-up date. Work on the long-awaited nuclear power project began in 2005, and the plant was originally due to come online in 2009, but the project has been consistently plagued with faulty materials and planning problems. AREVA in September revealed that the total cost of the flagship third-generation reactor had risen to some €5.3 billion-up from the originally estimated cost of €3 billion. Costs could go up even more because of timeline uncertainties.

Start-up of Europe's first EPR nuclear power plant, the Olkiluoto 3 under construction in Finland, has been postponed beyond June 2012 because civil construction is taking longer than was previously estimated, according plant owner Teollisuuden Voima Oyj (TVO). Finland's nuclear regulatory agency has, meanwhile, called attention to "deficiencies" in the welding of the plant's cooling system, potentially causing further delays. The Finnish utility said last week that the plant's supplier, an AREVA-Siemens Energy consortium, is responsible for the current schedule, and that it has requested a re-analysis of the anticipated start-up date. Work on the long-awaited nuclear power project began in 2005, and the plant was originally due to come online in 2009, but the project has been consistently plagued with faulty materials and planning problems. AREVA in September revealed that the total cost of the flagship third-generation reactor had risen to some €5.3 billion-up from the originally estimated cost of €3 billion. Costs could go up even more because of timeline uncertainties.

More than $1.2 billion awarded to firms on watchdog's list President Obama and members of Congress told federal agencies earlier this year to avoid awarding funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to contractors with troubled histories of work for the federal government. But that isn't happening at numerous agencies, a Washington Post analysis shows. So far, 33 federal departments and agencies have awarded more than $1.2 billion in stimulus contracts to at least 30 companies that are ranked by one watchdog group as among the most egregious offenders of state and federal laws.

More than $1.2 billion awarded to firms on watchdog's list President Obama and members of Congress told federal agencies earlier this year to avoid awarding funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to contractors with troubled histories of work for the federal government. But that isn't happening at numerous agencies, a Washington Post analysis shows. So far, 33 federal departments and agencies have awarded more than $1.2 billion in stimulus contracts to at least 30 companies that are ranked by one watchdog group as among the most egregious offenders of state and federal laws.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health announced that it's going to begin a major re-evaluation of its responsibilities, including the scientific and techical support, for the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. NIOSH also said it would conduct a national search for a new director of the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support as the successor to Larry Elliott, who will take a new role at NIOSH as an associate director in charge of "several high-priority projects" with institute-wide activities. Stuart Hinnefeld, technical program manager, will become interim OCAS director while that search is conducted, the institute said in the announcement.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health announced that it's going to begin a major re-evaluation of its responsibilities, including the scientific and techical support, for the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. NIOSH also said it would conduct a national search for a new director of the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support as the successor to Larry Elliott, who will take a new role at NIOSH as an associate director in charge of "several high-priority projects" with institute-wide activities. Stuart Hinnefeld, technical program manager, will become interim OCAS director while that search is conducted, the institute said in the announcement.

Utility officials and regulators next week will review an analysis of what caused a crack in the concrete wall of the Crystal River nuclear plant's containment building. Progress Energy will also present repair plans for the crack, which was discovered Oct. 2 as the utility was cutting a hole in the containment building wall to replace two generators. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will also share its findings of what caused the concrete in the 42-inch-thick wall that surrounds the nuclear reactor to crack. The NRC sent its own team of inspectors to survey the plant.

Utility officials and regulators next week will review an analysis of what caused a crack in the concrete wall of the Crystal River nuclear plant's containment building. Progress Energy will also present repair plans for the crack, which was discovered Oct. 2 as the utility was cutting a hole in the containment building wall to replace two generators. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will also share its findings of what caused the concrete in the 42-inch-thick wall that surrounds the nuclear reactor to crack. The NRC sent its own team of inspectors to survey the plant.

Hyperion Power Generation, which is designing a small, 25 MWe, nuclear reactor, revealed design details Nov 18 (slides) about the company's product at the winter meeting of the American Nuclear Society taking place in Washington, DC. This is the first release of reactor design information by the company. It marks the kick-off of the firm's pre-application process with the NRC for safety analysis review that leads to a reactor design certification decision by the agency.

Hyperion Power Generation, which is designing a small, 25 MWe, nuclear reactor, revealed design details Nov 18 (slides) about the company's product at the winter meeting of the American Nuclear Society taking place in Washington, DC. This is the first release of reactor design information by the company. It marks the kick-off of the firm's pre-application process with the NRC for safety analysis review that leads to a reactor design certification decision by the agency.

CHENNAI: About 55 workers of the Kaiga Atomic Power Station in Uttara Kannada, Karnataka, had to undergo medical treatment after they were exposed to an excessive radiation dosage when they drank water that had been mixed with tritium, a highly radioactive substance. Top officials of the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited blamed the incident on "an insider's mischief." They alleged that "an insider had mixed tritium in drinking water in a cooler kept in the operating island of the first unit" at Kaiga. The incident took place on November 25, when the first unit (220 MWe) was under shutdown for maintenance. Asked specifically whether security was so lax at the plant that a worker could access a bottle containing tritium, an authoritative official said there were sampling points in the reactor building from where workers took vials containing radioactive substances to the chemical laboratories for analysis. "There are standard protocols for handling and managing the transportation and depositing of such radioactive substances. Some insider has played the mischief," the official said. The incident was detected when the workers' urine samples showed an excess of tritium.

CHENNAI: About 55 workers of the Kaiga Atomic Power Station in Uttara Kannada, Karnataka, had to undergo medical treatment after they were exposed to an excessive radiation dosage when they drank water that had been mixed with tritium, a highly radioactive substance. Top officials of the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited blamed the incident on "an insider's mischief." They alleged that "an insider had mixed tritium in drinking water in a cooler kept in the operating island of the first unit" at Kaiga. The incident took place on November 25, when the first unit (220 MWe) was under shutdown for maintenance. Asked specifically whether security was so lax at the plant that a worker could access a bottle containing tritium, an authoritative official said there were sampling points in the reactor building from where workers took vials containing radioactive substances to the chemical laboratories for analysis. "There are standard protocols for handling and managing the transportation and depositing of such radioactive substances. Some insider has played the mischief," the official said. The incident was detected when the workers' urine samples showed an excess of tritium.

"TEPCO: Melted fuel ate into containment vessel The operator of the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has announced the results of an analysis on the state of melted fuel in the plant's Number 1 unit. The Tokyo Electric Power Company, or TEPCO, and several research institutes made public their analyses on the melting of fuel rods at 3 of the plant's units at a government-sponsored study meeting on Wednesday. The analyses were based on temperatures, amounts of cooling water and other data. TEPCO said that in the worse case, all fuel rods in the plant's Number 1 reactor may have melted and dropped through its bottom into a containment vessel. The bottom of the vessel is concrete covered with a steel plate. The utility said the fuel may have eroded the bottom to a depth of 65 centimeters. The thinnest part of the section is only 37 centimeters thick. TEPCO also said as much as 57 percent of the fuel in the plant's Number 2 reactor and 63 percent in the Number 3 reactor may have melted, and that some of the melted fuel may have fallen through reactor vessels. Wednesday, November 30, 2011 20:02 +0900 (JST)"

"Radioactive waste buried under the Olympic Park could jeopardise plans to develop the site after the Games, it is claimed. Traces of thorium and radium have been buried in a disposal cell under the site of the main stadium. The Olympic Delivery Authority insists the deposits pose no risk during the Games. But experts say that a reassessment of the site after 2012 may be necessary before any development plans - housing, for instance - are put in place. Independent nuclear analyst John Large said: "There is some doubt about the applicability and validity of the radiological risk analysis undertaken for the future legacy use." The Lower Lea Valley site was industrial land which was used for landfill and where illegal dumping of waste was common in the Fifties and Sixties."

"- An organization long critical of Los Alamos National Laboratory's plan for a new nuclear facility says the National Environmental Policy Act needs to be followed before the building can move ahead. The Los Alamos Study Group contends the project is on a larger scale than alternatives analyzed seven years ago and has not been subjected to a NEPA analysis. The watchdog group is sending a letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu and National Nuclear Security Administration head Tom D'Agostino about their concerns. The group says reasonable alternatives to the project were never analyzed."

"Three degrees might not sound like much. But according to FirstEnergy Corp., a three-degree reduction in Davis-Besse's operating temperature will provide enough safety over the next two years to ensure there is no additional cracking of the steel nozzles that penetrate the reactor's interim head. Now it's up to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to decide whether it agrees with the utility's analysis of what caused 24 of the massive steel device's 69 nozzles to either develop flaws or full-blown cracks. One had been leaking reactor acid on top of the lid when the flaws were found in mid-March, though - unlike eight years ago - the problem was caught long before any noticeable amount of steel had melted, according to Vito Kaminskas, Davis-Besse's director of plant engineering."

"NEW DOCUMENT REVEALS GOV'T PLANS TO * Abandon promised science and "ignition and gain" at Livermore Lab NIF mega-laser * Jack up funding for nuclear weapon "life extensions" beyond what the facts justify, and * Escalate bomb budgets through 2030 despite lip service to Obama disarmament goals LIVERMORE -- The Fiscal Year 2011 Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan (colloquially known as the "Green Book"), obtained recently by Tri-Valley CAREs, reveals that the U.S. Dept. of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) foments internal plans significantly at variance with the agency's public pronouncements and the Nation's disarmament goals. "The document demonstrates that the NNSA will reach deeper and deeper into the taxpayers' pockets in the coming decades, even as it jettisons scientific objectives and delivers less," charged Marylia Kelley, executive director of Tri-Valley CAREs, the Livermore-based nuclear weapons watchdog organization. " What the plan reveals about the National Ignition Facility (NIF) is shocking." (See attached analysis for details.)"

"We cannot look the other way on the Hanford cleanup controversy Referring in print to the Hanford Nuclear Reservation as America's Chernobyl is a pretty good way to get a call from Hanford's press office, which is understandably anxious to avoid comparison with the Soviet reactor disaster. But according to the latest analysis, Chernobyl may start calling to complain about being lumped together with Hanford. This is because the amount of deadly plutonium buried near the Columbia River in southeastern Washington state is three times what the U.S. government has previously estimated. Highly cancer-causing even at microscopic quantities, it is now thought that nearly 26,000 pounds of the bomb-making material was discarded as waste at Hanford."

THE SCOTTISH Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) yesterday said that radioactivity on Dalgety Bay foreshore is a significant cause for concern. Following analysis of 39 radioactive particles collected in September, recommendations have been made to create clearer warning signs and cement some areas of the beach. The contamination came from luminous aircraft dials dumped after the war and Ministry of Defence Estates will be held accountable for a solution.

The Tennessee Valley Authority continues its way on a troubling path of the unknown with nuclear power plants. Given all the potential ramifications of flaws at any nuclear power facility, the public has good reason to question the path taken by TVA. Among the most recent concerns about TVA operations are questions about the design for potential new nuclear reactors at the Bellefonte nuclear power site near Huntsville, Ala. TVA is seeking a license to build a plant based on a new design, the AP-1000 Westinghouse, but environmental groups say while the licensing process goes forward changes are being made to the design. Advertisement TVA insists the changes in the design are only peripheral to the basic plan. Design changes include changes to the pressurizer; changes in the seismic analysis involving rock and soil conditions; changes in instruments and a redesign of fuel racks. Advocates of the licensing process say the design changes at issue are only the kinds of items that can be carried easily on a parallel track with the application process. The basic design is said to be a simpler version of a nuclear reactor. The design is significant because if and when it is approved for Bellefonte, it streamlines the process for other plant sites that might want to build on a Bellefonte model.

The 1991 Soviet-U.S. Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I) expires December 5 next year. This brings to the fore the problem of reducing nuclear arsenals and the monitoring of the process because the 2002 Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT), which is valid through 2012, does not provide for irreversible reductions and does not establish a permanent mutual verification mechanism. The 1991 treaty, which entered into force in late 1994, limits the sides' strategic offensive potential to 1,600 carriers and 6,000 warheads. START II, the successor of START I, banned the use of MIRVs on ICBMs but it was never validated. In 2004, Russia officially withdrew from START II in response to the U.S. pullout from the 1972 ABM Treaty in 2002.