May 29, 2008
LLRW stats re who will be inconvenienced by being shut out of Barnwell
Low-level radioactive waste, is classified as Class A, B or C depending on its hazard and physical characteristics. About 96 percent of all commercial low-level waste generated in the United States is Class A, the least hazardous. About 95 percent of Class B and C waste is generated by nuclear power plants. The remainder of the Class B and C waste consists primarily of liquid wastes from radiochemical producers and sealed radioactive sources from industrial, research or medical licensees. It is these latter companies who will be impacted by Barnwell's July 1 withdrawal of service to all except South Carolina, New Jersey and Connecticut. Hanford accepts all LLRW classes, but only from the states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Alaska, Hawaii, Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico.
NRC has issued guidance for those companies which may find it a challenge to provide extended interim storage of the Class B and C waste previously shipped to Barnwell -- see NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2008-12, "Considerations for Extended Interim Storage of Low-Level Radioactive Waste by Fuel Cycle and Materials Licensees".
[Source: NRC Office of Public Affairs, "NRC UPDATES GUIDANCE TO LICENSEES FOR EXTENDED STORAGE OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE", press release, NRC NEWS No. 08-103, May 29, 2008 -- ACN ML081500171]
March 14, 2008
* EnergySolutions application to import n-waste from Italy prompts ban bill in US House
March 8, 2008
* Let Italy deal with its own N-waste, says Utah agency
February 24, 2008
This is from the front page of today's Chattanooga Times Free Press, of Tennessee.
February 15, 2008
LLRW - Colorado state permit granted for Clean Harbors' Deer Trail RCRA site
Recently the state of Colorado, under its NRC Agreement State authority, issued a radioactive materials permit to Clean Harbors to allow for limited disposal of certain low-activity waste at its Deer Trail facility. The decision by the state regulator to issue both a RCRA permit and a radioactive materials permit is one example of the potential of RCRA sites to safely accept some radioactive waste.
[Source: Gregory B. Jaczko (NRC Commissioner), "Can we expand low-level radioactive waste disposal to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Hazardous Waste Facilities?", prepared statement for ACNW&A meeting, February 13, 2008, NRC No. S-08-006 -- ML080440417]
February 8, 2008
Hanford Waste Treatment Plant - NRC is reviewing DOE's safety and environmental regulatory processes
In the report accompanying the FY2008 Omnibus Appropriations bill, Congress tasked NRC with reviewing the regulatory processes of the DOE for the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant. NRC is required to submit report containing assessment and recommendations by the end of June. NRC has planned to limit its review to safety and environmental programs and activities. NRC will not review security, material control and accounting (MC&A), emergency planning, management of plant output, or decommissioning. NRC's review will be an evaluation, relative to NRC's regulatory framework, of DOE regulations, requirements, orders and guidance. The review is NOT a detailed design or license review, nor is it a detailed audit of implementation of DOE's requirements, nor is it an assessment of security or vulneraility.
[Source: Patti Silva (NRC branch chief, Div of Fuel Cycle and Safeguards), "U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Role in the Review of the DOE Regulatory Processes for the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant", presentation slides prepared for public meeting in Hanford Washington, to be held February 13, 2008 -- ACN ML080370291]
February 2, 2008
This is from the front page of today's The Salt Lake Tribune, of Utah.
The Tribune's web site has full text of this article here.
January 29, 2008
This is from the front page of today's News Sentinel, of Knoxville, Tennessee.
October 30, 2007
* Utah Gov. Huntsman sees nuclear waste problem as reason to forego building any n-plant there
May 28, 2007
Pakistan - radwaste dump disaster in Baghalchur?
A recent incident in Baghalchur near Dera Ghazi Khan where uranium dumps resulted in major health disasters for both people and animals, continues to send out desperate distress signals. "There is no independent monitoring. Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) and PNRA release absolutely no information regarding nuclear waste disposal on the pretext of secrecy. There are assurances but no facts," says Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy, cited by Pakistani newspaper Dawn as a renowned professor of nuclear physics. "The wretchedly poor people of Baghalchur finally mustered up the courage to move the Supreme Court with the complaint that the nuclear waste had contaminated the environment, badly affecting them and their animals but were unable to get justice," he elaborates.
In response to Hoodbhoy's tirade, PAEC spokesperson Mohammed Tariq Rasheed says that there is a water pool in KANUPP where the waste is deposited and it is monitored by a camera which has been set up by the IAEA. "We cannot do anything ourselves as international rules apply to treatment," he says.
Interestingly, Senator Jamal Leghari, who had raised a ruckus over the contamination in his constituency of Dera Ghazi Khan was more than defensive about the lethal accident: "All nuclear safety standards are being followed and everyone at the local level is content. Another development is that all the employees who were on daily wages whether at the plants or in mining operations have been made permanent." When asked about the rampant health hazards caused by the incident, Leghari's reply was more than alarming. "It was mostly misinformation. There were a few cases which have been rectified," he said.
[Ref: Reemi Abbasi, "New nuclear power plant sets alarm bells ringing", article on Dawn website, May 27, 2007, distributed by BBC Monitoring under headline "Pakistan to establish three nuclear power plants near Karachi", May 28, 2007]
May 5, 2007
New ACNW items this week from NRC Public Document Room
* [2007-05-02] COMSECY-07-0011 - Action Plan for Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008 for the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) Staff Requirements ML070880800 2007-03-28 18 COMSECY-07-0011 2007-03-28 2007-05-01 COMSECY-07-0011 March 28, 2007 MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman Klein Commissioner McGaffigan Commissioner Merrifield Commissioner Jaczko Commissioner Lyons FROM: Michael T. Ryan, Chairman /RA/ Advisory Committee on Nuclear Was
* [2007-05-01] Transcript of 178th ACNW Meeting on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 in Rockville, MD. Pages 1-140. With Related Correspondence. ML071100129 2007-04-10 198 NRC-1520 ACNWT-0199 2007-04-10 2007-04-30 Official Transcript of Proceedings A CI7W -0/1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Title: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste 178th Meeting Docket Number: (not applicable) TEMPLATE: ACRS/ACNW-005 SUNSI REVIEW COMPLETE L
* [2007-05-01] Transcript of 178th ACNW Meeting on Wednesday, April 11, 2007 in Rockville, MD. Pages 1-142. With Related Correspondence. ML071100128 2007-04-11 201 NRC-1520 ACNWT-0199 2007-04-11 2007-04-30 Official Transcript of Proceedings à Qkj T7 0199 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Title: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste 178th Meeting Docket Number: (not applicable) PROCESS USING ADAMS F R ESL TEMPLATEi ACRSIACN
* [2007-05-01] Transcript of ACNW 178th Meeting on Thursday, April 12, 2007 in Rockville, MD. Pages 1-135. ML071100056 2007-04-12 169 NRC-1520 ACNWT-0199 2007-04-12 2007-04-30 Official Transcript of Proceedings 7- A-..9- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Title: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste 178th Meeting Docket Number: Location: Date: (not applicable) PROCESS USING ADAMS TEMPLATE: ACRS
EPRI/NEI items
* [2007-05-03] 05/17/2007 Notice of Meeting with Nuclear Energy Institute Re Industry Low-Level Waste Initiatives, to Discuss NEI/EPRI Draft Low-Level Waste Storage Guidelines and Possible Enhancements to LLW Disposal Reporting by Nuclear Power Reactor Licensees. ML071210287 2007-05-01 3 2007-05-01 2007-05-02 May 1, 2007 MEETING NOTICE MEMORANDUM TO: Scott Flanders, Deputy Director Environmental Protection and Performance Assessment Directorate Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection Office of Federal and State Materials
April 21, 2007
New this week from NRC Public Document Room
* [2007-04-21] SECY-07-0066 - Annual Report to the Commission on Licensee Performance in the Materials and Waste Programs - Fiscal Year 2006 ML070730515 2007-04-04 67 FSME 200700282 WITS 200200096 SECY-07-0066 2007-04-04 2007-04-20 ML070730498+ POLICY ISSUE (Notation Vote) April 4, 2007 SECY-07-0066 FOR: The Commissioners FROM: Luis A. Reyes Executive Director for Operations /RA/ SUBJECT: ANNUAL REPORT TO THE COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste-related
* [2007-04-21] ACNW Committee and Consultant Reports ML071030332 2007-04-13 6 AA110 2007-04-13 2007-04-20 April 13, 2007 MEMORANDUM TO: Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer FROM: Jenny M. Gallo, Chief Operations Support Branch, ACNW SUBJECT: ACNW COMMITTEE AND CONSULTANT REPORTS The enclosed documents were prepared
* [2007-04-21] Summary Report - 174th ACNW Meeting, 11/13-16/06 ML070080129 2006-12-26 10 WB200 ACNWS-0167 2006-12-26 2007-04-20 ACNWS-0167 December 26, 2006 The Honorable Dale E. Klein Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Dear Chairman Klein: SUBJECT: SUMMARY REPORTÑ174TH MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NU
* [2007-04-21] Summary Report - 175th ACNW Meeting, 12/12-14/2006 ML070430319 2007-01-22 8 WB 200 ACNWS-0168 2007-01-22 2007-04-20 ACNWS-0168 Revised March 19, 2007 January 22, 2007 The Honorable Dale E. Klein Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Dear Chairman Klein: SUBJECT: SUMMARY REPORTÑ175TH MEETING OF THE A
* [2007-04-21] Summary Report - 176th ACNW Meeting, 2/13-15, 2007 ML070720414 2007-03-07 6 AA110 WB 200 ACNWS-0169 2007-03-07 2007-04-20 Revised March 19, 2007 March 7, 2007 The Honorable Dale E. Klein Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Dear Chairman Klein: SUBJECT: SUMMARY REPORTÑ176TH MEETING OF THE ADVISORY
this weeks's spent fuel items are listed at:
* nuclear.com's Spent Fuel page
* nuclear.com's Yucca Mountain page
February 22, 2007
* New York - overview of two former radwaste disposal sites (West Valley and Cornell)
October 25, 2006
*
UK govt recommends deep disposal for nuclear waste UPDATE
AFX/Hemscott (UK)
LONDON - The government has confirmed it favours disposing nuclear waste in deep underground bunkers subject to a regional volunteer coming forward and ...
*
Radioactive waste 'to be buried'
BBC News (UK)
... Local councils are to be invited to volunteer to have a nuclear dump in their area. Those chosen will benefit from multi-million pound investment. ...
*
Row over nuclear waste disposal
BBC News
*
Government nuclear waste strategy panned
Greenpeace UK
*
Miliband announces radioactive waste disposal plan
netPR.pl (komunikaty prasowe) (Poland)
Higher activity waste, which includes waste from the nuclear and medical industries, military uses and academic research, will be managed in the long term ...
*
Nuclear waste dump plan for cumbria
News & Star
*
UK Asks Towns to 'Volunteer' For Site of Nuclear Waste Dump
Bloomberg
The UK government asked local authorities to 'volunteer'' take on a national dump for nuclear waste, offering investment in public services ...
*
Search begins to find nuclear waste site
ITN
*
Local councils are offered millions to bury nuclear waste
Philip Webster, London Times
*
Britain to offer incentives for town to house nuclear waste dump
Agence France Presse/Yahoo! News
*
Scots' plan for England as radioactive dustbin
Angus Macleod, London Times
*
Groups pressure DOE--Activists say changes for waste site rushed
Las Vegas Review-Journal
*
Goshutes elect new tribal leadership
Patty Henetz, Salt Lake Tribune
*
Waste to be moved through Gallup
Kathy Helms, Gallup Independent
*
Waste treatment firm may be sold
Annette Cary, Hanford News
July 4, 2006
* Australia - nuclear inquiry is a Trojan Horse of some sort, perhaps HLW waste import from USA?
June 28, 2006
* Switzerland takes step towards deep repository; site-selection criteria being developed
* [2006-03-14] Nuke dump rules: Base classifications of nuclear waste on risk
Salt Lake Tribune
* [2006-03-13] Nuclear waste: Bury it and forget?
Jeremy Lovell, Reuters
* [2006-03-10] Science panel urges major overhaul of nuke-waste rules
Robert Gehrke, Salt Lake Tribune
* [2006-03-09] Nuclear waste: bury it and forget?
Jeremy Lovell, Reuters
* [2006-03-09] Germany to build nuke waste storage site
UPI
February 16, 2006
* Ukrainian opposition party protests against nuclear waste facility plans
October 14, 2005
* UK to add a 6th nuclear waste ship for ocean transport
August 23, 2005
DOE's plan to use steam reforming, instead of vitrification, on sodium waste in Idaho unites pro- and anti-nuclear groups in opposition
Nuclear-power advocates and a nuclear watchdog group have joined forces to oppose a federal plan to treat liquid nuclear waste at the Idaho Cleanup Project. After studying, since 1997, the best way to deal with 900,000 gallons of radioactive, sodium-bearing waste at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center tank farm, DOE wants to turn the thick liquid waste into a sand-like material. Opponents worry that in that form, it could dissolve in water or blow away in the wind if accidentally released. Members of Coalition 21, a pro-nuclear-power group, and the watchdog group Snake River Alliance prefer a method that would convert the waste into a glasslike solid. "If we're going to be transporting and storing this for a very long time, we want it to be in a form that's least likely to get into the environment," Snake River Alliance spokesman Jeremy Maxand said. "Aside from storing this stuff as a liquid, a powder form is the next worst thing, especially if they're transporting it." At a Coalition 21 meeting last week, Idaho Cleanup Project site employee Darryl Siemer said "I think it's a horrible idea."
DOE's preferred process, called steam reforming, uses super-hot steam to vaporize the waste liquid, which is then purified. A sandlike substance is left behind. Industrial sites have used the process since the mid-70s, and a Tennessee site has used it to treat commercial radioactive waste for six years, said Jim French, the Energy Department's director for liquid waste facility closure. Opponents say vitrification, is a better choice because it turns the waste into a glasslike solid that can't dissolve in water or spread in the wind. Officials say steam reforming will leave the waste in a form suitable for repositories in New Mexico or Nevada. DOE officials concede the final destination is still uncertain. "It will be treated and road-ready, and we'll manage it safely until we have a permanent repository," said Brad Bugger, a spokesman for the Energy Department's Idaho field office. But that uncertainty worries critics. "DOE is assuming they can change all the rules," Siemer said. "There's a high probability whatever we make will stay right here in Idaho."
The state's Idaho National Laboratory oversight office also wants the waste shipped elsewhere. State officials say they would prefer vitrification, but believe the steam process could get the waste into a solid form faster. "If there's a technology that can move forward and can produce a solid form, that's a good thing," said Kathleen Trever, state coordinator for INL oversight. "You can run into lots of entanglements if you wait for every last detail of getting it offsite to be worked out." DOE must ship the final product out of state to comply with terms of its settlement of a lawsuit filed by the state. On Monday, the agency announced it would extend to Sept. 21 the public comment period for the waste-treatment plan.
[Source: Associated Press, "Groups oppose plan for liquid waste", Jackson Hole Star-Tribune (WY), August 23, 2005]
August 8, 2005
*
Ancient Egypt helps nuclear scientists
UPI/Middle East North Africa Financial Network
How can it best be guaranteed that records about nuclear waste will be able to read thousands of years from now. UK government took a page from the ancient Egyptian playbook, so to speak, in choosing a paper as close to papyrus as possible. About 423 documents were photocopied onto 11,718 sheets of the so-called 'permanent' paper, and were then packed in copper impregnated bags and stored in 16 special long-life archive boxes that simulate the dry, airless conditions of the desert pyramids. Two additional sets of the records will be stored at different locations.
May 28, 2005
[Source: The Boston Globe (Boston, Massachusetts), front page, lead story, May 28, 2005]
April 18, 2005
*
05/05/05: The election: SNP goes to war on nuclear dumping
Ken Banks, The Mirror, Scots Edition, p. 2
Scottish National Party leader Alex Salmond has gone to war on nuclear dumping by rubbishing 22 possible new sites throughout Scotland. Mr Salmond, demonstrating in Bennachie, Aberdeenshire, at the weekend, said: "The Government should rule out these sites - Scotland should not have to pay for Labour's nuclear madness. They are obsessed with creating a nuclear future for Scotland. There is no need for more nuclear power. Scotland has the potential to be the renewable energy powerhouse of Europe with exceptional offshore energy potential." The SNP said the new potential sites include areas such as Deeside, Skye and Lochaber, Argyll and Bute, and Caithness, to follow in the footsteps of Rosyth, Dounreay, Torness and Chapelcross.
April 16, 2005
*
Salmond under nuclear attack
Jason Allardyce and Kenny Farquharson, Sunday Times (Scotland)
The SNP [Scottish National Party] was accused of Òchildish scaremongeringÓ last night after it used a 26-year-old study to claim that Labour intends to turn Scotland into a nuclear dumping ground. Alex Salmond, the SNP leader, had claimed that 22 of 33 sites being considered as nuclear dumps are in Scotland and accused Labour of making Scots pay for its Ònuclear madnessÓ. The SNP cited as evidence a new report from the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM), which has been asked by ministers to look at options for the disposal of Britain's nuclear waste. However, CoRWM denied that finding locations for the dumps was part of its remit and said there had been no discussion about where the waste should go. ÒWe are not making any recommendations on sites,Ó said a spokesperson. ÒOur final report will be handed to the governments in July 2006.Ó Later it emerged that the SNP's list of 22 possible sites in Scotland was based on a 1979 study by the Institute of Geological Sciences.
*
In our view: A small success on nuclear waste
The Daily Herald (Provo, Utah), p. A6
After a meeting with Utah Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr., Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff agreed to study the security risks of shipping nuclear waste to remote sites such as Yucca Mountain in Nevada or Skull Valley in Tooele County versus leaving the material where it was created... Huntsman deserves credit for getting the Homeland Security department to look hard at the potential for terrorist attacks on nuclear waste shipments. Unfortunately, the fact that this hasn't been done already suggests the government hasn't thought it through very carefully. It shows that we're still not thinking as creatively as our enemies... If there is any lesson we should have learned from the attacks on New York and Washington it is that terrorists fight unconventionally, and we need to adjust our defenses accordingly. Who would have thought before 9/11 that terrorists would hijack commercial airliners and use them in kamikaze attacks on the World Trade Center's twin towers and the Pentagon? Likewise, we've not carefully considered how a terrorist could turn a nuclear waste shipment into a dirty bomb by simply punching a hole in a waste cask. We know from our experience in Iraq that it's not hard to get armor-piercing weapons. While spent fuel rods from nuclear reactors are not explosive, a ruptured cask could release radiation, killing or injuring people in the immediate area and creating widespread panic. A radiation release is not the kind of thing local police or emergency response teams train for on a regular basis, and many agencies likely don't have the resources or equipment to handle such a situation. If such an attack occurred in Salt Lake City, St. Louis or Las Vegas, the economic shockwaves would likely be felt around the country. In the case of Las Vegas, which depends upon tourism to survive, an attack on a radioactive waste shipment could be economically fatal...
*
Homeland clarifies position on study of storage of nuclear fuel
Robert Gehrke, Salt Lake Tribune
The Department of Homeland Security says it will look at security concerns involving storage of nuclear fuel, but has not committed to a formal study. The department clarified its position after Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. said following a Tuesday meeting with Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that the department committed to a study of the issue... "The secretary agreed to look into the issue to determine if the department would need to do a study," said Homeland Security spokesman Brian Roehrkasse. Roehrkasse said it's unknown at this point what the department's "look into" the nuclear storage issue might entail. Huntsman spokeswoman Tammy Kikuchi said that, "It's study more as a verb than as a noun."
*
Professor joins study of radioactive waste
Lawrence Journal World (Kansas)
Don Steeples, Kansas University professor of geophysics and vice provost for scholarly support, will be one of 20 scholars participating in a study, commissioned by the National Academy of Sciences, examining radioactive waste stored at three federal nuclear facilities. The group will examine the Bush administration's plan to pump out most nuclear material from a site in Savannah River, S.C., and move it to a facility near Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Officials plan to seal the remaining sludge inside the tanks and leave them in place at the Savannah River site. The group also will examine a plan to manage leftover waste at sites in Idaho and Washington state.
December 14, 2004
* Hot waste returns
Annette Cary, Tri-City Herald
The dose rate limit on drums accepted at WIPP is 200 mrem/hr. A drum was sent from Hanford with contact beta-gamma dose rate of exactly that. But during paperwork review after shipmet had left Hanford, somebody mentioned that the neutron survey technique used could not detect neutron dose rates of up to 0.2 mrem/hr. So the Hanford folks could not be sure that they had actually stayed within the WIPP limit. The shipment was stopped en route near Fort Collins. The truck turned around and headed back to Hanford. [nuclear.comMENT: How embarrassing. Millions of dollars of planning, and a load has to be turned around for lack of an administrative limit on packages with no detectable neutron dose. Well, you can bet there's an administrative limit with some room for not just this, but shifting of package contents during transport too, soon.]
* 'bulk vitrification'
Annette Cary, Tri-City Herald
On Monday, the state of Washington agreed to allow up to 300,000 gallons of radioactive tank waste to be vitrified at Hanford, as a test of a new process called "bulk vitrification". The state permit allows a full-scale pilot plant in central Hanford to operate for up to 400 days.
November 19, 2004
* Australia - NSW EM requests hold on new Lucas Heights reactor until waste solution verified
March 18, 2004
INEEL: Underground grouting proposed around buried waste to isolate aquifer from C14 contamination
Carbon-14 contamination was identified in 2002 near buried blocks of irradiated beryllium at INEEL. As an immediate risk reduction measure, before completing investigation and remediation plan for the entire Subsurface Disposal Area at the lab, officials have proposed injecting grout into the soil to isolate the blocks from water percolating down from the surface, and to isolate the contamination from the Snake River Plain aquifer.
[Ref: Associated Press, "Underground nuclear waste threatens aquifer", The Times-News (Twin Falls, Idaho), March 17, 2004]
Utah Radwaste Task Force co-chair urged to resign
An editorial in today's Salt Lake Tribune calls for resignation of co-chairman of Utah state legislature's Hazardous and Radioactive Waste Task Force (Sen. Curtis Bramble, Provo), due to his apparant partiality towards Envirocare Bramble told attendees at a meeting in Toole that the acronym HEAL should stand for "Help Educate Anal Liberals." Two members of HEAL, whose actual name is Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, took offense and left the meeting. Their departure was accompanied by applause from supporters of Envirocare, which is a principal firm in the industry that the legislative task force is studying.
[Source: Salt Lake Tribune, editorial, A question of bias, March 18, 2004]
March 13, 2004
Nevada - NGO decries namecalling by state senate radwaste task force chair
At a public meeting in Tooele about radioactive waste, Nevada state legislator Sen. Curtis S. Bramble, R-Provo, disparaged the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah. Bramble told the meeting in Tooele that HEAL stood for "Help Educate Anal Liberals." Bramble is the senate chair of the radioactive waste task force and was Utah County co-chairman of the Envirocare-funded effort to stop an initiative that would have regulated radioactive waste. HEAL now wants Bramble to step down as task force chairman.
[Source: The Daily Herald (Provo, Utah), "Beehives & Buffalo Chips", March 13, 2004, p. A6
March 10, 2004
* Hanford - injunction against waste from out-of-state until State's lawsuit resolved
* Hanford - State referendum expected this fall to block out-of-state waste until cleanup complete
* Hanford - State decries continued disposal of waste in unlined trenches
* Hanford - State concerned at implications of labelling ground water as irreversibly contaminated
February 19, 2004
* Susquehanna - sea land container arrived, not empty as placarded
January 2, 2004
Barge to Barnwell - low river level causes problems for Conn Yankee reactor vessel shipment
Conn Yankee's reactor vessel shipment to Barnwell has had some, uh, challenges. The barge was, well, stranded on the Savannah River. Low river level made the planned method of transfer from barge to highway problemmatic. Earlier this week, an attempt to move the 820-ton reactor vessel failed. The company has a rush order for new wheels and axles for the heavy duty tractor trailer, to replace the ones broken in the attempt. The Army Corps of Engineers was called on to pump water from Thurmond Lake Dam to lift the barge-bound steel vessel high enough to be lifted by crane onto land. This will be the fifth decommissioned vessel to be buried at the state-owned site managed by Chem Nuclear. The burial site fee: about $5 million.
[Ref: Jim Nesbitt (Chronicle's SC bureau chief), "Stranded barge: Corps to stage reactor rescue", The Augusta Chronicle (Georgia), January 2, 2004, p. B2]
December 1, 2003
* Radwaste transport - NAS committee formed this year to report by March 2005
August 27, 2003
Skull Valley - appellate court issues
The state of Utah appealed last summer's federal district court ruling which held that five state laws intended to block the Skull Valley spent fuel cask storage project are unconstitutional. A 10th Circuit federal appeals court panel heard oral arguments in the case on August 26. The state contends that Congress never authorized the NRC to license a facility like Skull Valley. That makes it an illegal project, and as such, it is quite appropriate for the state to legislate as it has. The state even argued that, since the Skull Valley applicants aren't eligible for a lawful license, they have no standing to challenge Utah's laws on the matter. [Source: Judy Fahys (Salt Lake Tribune), "Goshutes, N-consortium face off with state", The Salt Lake Tribune, August 27, 2003]
August 13, 2003
The County Board in Boyd County Nebraska dropped its proposal to ban, via zoning, the disposal or storage of radioactive materials and hazardous waste within the county. U.S. Ecology had claimed that the proposed zoning ordinance would be in violation of state and federal law, and suggested that it would file a lawsuit if it was enacted. On Tuesday, the County Board approved a different zning approach -- and its amended regulations now require such a facility to obtain a permit from both the planning board and the County Board of Supervisors after public hearings.
[Ref: Associated Press, "Boyd County will have to approve nuke waste dump", August 13, 2003 3:47 AM Eastern Time]
August 6, 2003
* Ukraine - 3 ISFSIs considered for 2007 - Rovno, Khmelnitski and South Ukraine
* South Korea - Wido islet slated for LLRW/ILRW repository by 2008; spent fuel by 2016
August 5, 2003, 2003
* new from NRC: NUREG-1640, Radiological Assessments for Clearance of Equipment and Materials from Nuclear Facilities
July 21, 2003
* HLW Repository Corrosion Issues: localized vs uniform
July 12, 2003
* Australia - feds commandeered 6 sq km for proposed n-dump
June 25, 2003 The NRC Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste elected Dr. B. John Garrick as Chairman and Dr. Michael T. Ryan as Vice-Chairman. Their terms of office will run from July 1, 2003, through June 30, 2004.
May 23, 2003
Everybody complains about the weather
The barge carrying Maine Yankee reactor vessel to Barnwell is stuck near Savannah, Georgia until Savannah River water level drops back down far enough to let tugboat pass under bridges. Best guess: 5-7 days. The vessel will be off-loaded at federal Savannah River Site.
[Source: Eric Williamson (Chronicle SC bureau), "High water halts reactor trip; Shipment awaits drop in river", Augusta Chronicle, May 23, 2003]
May 12, 2003
LLRW site chosen by Australia; state will fight feds in court
The site for Australia's first nuclear waste dump -- a low-level radioactive waste facility -- was announced today by Federal Minister for Science Peter McGauran. Arcoona sheep station in South Australia is the site. South Australian Premier Mike Rann said McGauran should prepare for legal battles if he chooses to go ahead with his plan. McGauran's assurance that South Australia wouldn't host another, intermediate-level radioactive waste facility prompted criticism from New South Wales' Environment Minister Bob Debus: "They've ruled out one state and now threaten communities in other states with a so-called shortlist of other possible sites," he says. "Which states are on this shortlist and when will the commonwealth share that information with those communities?" [Source: Julie Macken, "Under A Nuclear Cloud", Australian Financial Review, May 12, 2003, p. 52]
Spent fuel ocean-going boat retired; Greenpeace sez it failed safety test before transporting Australian fuel, too
... despite allocating $14 million in last year's budget to remove between 300 and 400 fuel rods from storage and transport them to France, where COGEMA is under contract to reprocess Australia's waste, the rods remain stored at Lucas Heights.
The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation says the shipment has been postponed "for operational reasons".
According to the St George & Sutherland Shire Leader, that "operational reason" may be a "lack of a purpose-built nuclear materials-carrying ship".
According to Carolin Wenzel of Greenpeace, the ship that carried the two previous shipments of spent fuel, the Beaugenais, has been retired due to its failure to meet safety standards.
"This ship failed to pass its last safety check prior to sailing with its last Australian nuclear cargo," she says.
[Source: Julie Macken, "Under A Nuclear Cloud", Australian Financial Review, May 12, 2003, p. 52]
May 10, 2003
What's at the root of the troubled relationship between the State of Washington and DOE regarding Hanford cleanup? Seattle Post-Intelligencer reporter Lisa Stiffler puts it like this: "There are fears that the federal government wants to make the Eastern Washington site a national dump... Energy wants to send 170 barrels of waste to Hanford from other cleanup sites so they can be closed. In return, Ecology wants a written plan setting timetables for the removal of Hanford and offsite waste... In December, Ecology officials agreed to temporarily accept garbage contaminated with long-lived radioactive elements such as plutonium if DOE officials would agree by March 1 to a plan for the cleanup and removal of some 78,000 barrels of buried waste at Hanford. When that deadline was missed, Ecology filed a lawsuit to halt the import of the so-called transuranic waste. State officials then ordered DOE to create a plan for cleaning up the debris buried at Hanford in dirt trenches. The federal agency countered with a lawsuit appealing the order. Ecology issued a second order April 30 saying DOE had broken state laws by burying garbage tainted with radioactive materials and dangerous chemicals in dirt trenches that have leaked. DOE responded with the stop-work order." [Source: Lisa Stiffler, "DOE-Ecology dispute holds up Hanford cleanup", Seattle Post-Intelligencer, May 10, 2003]
First big Yucca Mountain contract awarded. $30-million down, $58-billion to go
The total cost of the repository program is estimated above $58 billion, if it is able to overcome numerous technical, political, financial and legal challenges and get a burial complex built by DOE's stated goal of 2010. "We are going to be making thousands of procurements for goods and services over the next four or five years, and many will be for millions of dollars," Bechtel SAIC spokesperson Beatrice Reilly said. The first big prize was awarded yesterday - a $29.7 million contract for Cogema Inc. to plan and design robotic machinery over the next 4-1/2 years.
[Source: Steve Tetreault (Stephens Washington Bureau), "Major Yucca contract awarded: $29.7 million to design robotics to handle packages of nuclear waste", Las Vegas Review-Journal, May 10, 2003]
DOE seems pretty (pre)determined to build Yucca Mountain
"Quality assurance issues have been a problem with the Yucca Mountain project really since the beginning of the project." Steve Frishman is a geologist who's been working for Nevada's Nuclear Waste Project Office. He says if there's questions about quality assurance at Yucca Mountain, then there's questions about safely storing nuclear waste.
"We have no basis to believe any of their claims of safety. We do independent work and we come up with different answers than theirs in a number of areas." Frishman says the number one concern of the Department of Energy is to license Yucca Mountain in a timely fashion. He says whistleblowers slow down the process, so the DOE gets rid of, or moves people that bring questions of quality assurance.
"The Department of Energy seems hell bent on building it, whether it's built to standards or not." Some say the Department of Energy has lied to us in the past, and they'll lie to us again. "Given what we know about quality assurance program in the Yucca Mountain project, what we're now seeing with quality assurance professionals who are being thwarted in their work, we can't trust them."
[Source: Dana Wagner (News 3, Las Vegas), "More Oversight Issues Surround Yucca Mountain Controversy", KVBC TV-3 (Las Vegas), May 10, 2003]
Bechtel Jacobs Co. LLC has voluntarily suspended waste shipments from Paducah until investigation and corrective action, after two tractor-trailers were found to be slightly more contaminated than DOT regulations allow. The contamination was found on both flatbeds after waste shipments were unloaded at Nevada Test Site. Bechtel spokesperson told Nevada newspaper that source was considered most likely to be some funnel-shaped, 5-foot, hoppers. The hoppers had been decontaminated and an adhesive spray intended to prevent leaching of contamination had been applied to the hoppers before shipment. [Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal, "Radioactive Residue: Inspectors find taint on trucks", May 10, 2003]
April, 2003 -
Under South Carolina law, the Barnwell facility will ramp-down the total annual volume received at the site through the six-fiscal-year period that ends June 30, 2008. After that, the facility will only receive waste from generators in South Carolina and the other two Atlantic Compact states. The maximum waste disposal volumes that Barnwell is allowed to receive are listed below:
160,000 cubic feet in fiscal year 2001
80,000 cubic feet in fiscal year 2002
70,000 cubic feet in fiscal year 2003
60,000 cubic feet in fiscal year 2004
50,000 cubic feet in fiscal year 2005
45,000 cubic feet in fiscal year 2006
40,000 cubic feet in fiscal year 2007
35,000 cubic feet in fiscal year 2008
The State of South Carolina would like to enter into agreements with interested generators to reserve specific volumes of waste each year through 2008. This will allow generators some stability in planning their disposal needs. It will provide the State of South Carolina with a better basis for projecting disposal costs and revenues. South Carolina would like to reserve a significant portion of the available volume each year beginning now through 2008 through agreements of this type. The remainder of the volume that is not reserved through such agreements and is not set aside for Atlantic Compact regional generators will be made available to generators without such agreements each year on a space-available basis.
[Source: North Carolina Radiation Protection Commission, "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management in North Carolina",, Draft, April 2003, p. 6]