Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

January 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Rare Public Critique of French Reactors

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2014

In a highly unusual attack, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued a report Nov. 28 critical of France’s nuclear industry. The stury hints that France’s aging power reactors, 58 of them, are growing dangerously in need of additional oversight. Additionally, a US expert suggested that France’s nuclear power community needed to do more to protect whistle blowers from retaliation. 

The French reactor complex is operated by the state-owned utility Electricité de France. The utility is in turn regulated by a federal watchdog agency—rather like the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission—known as “ASN.” The IAEA’s criticism “highlighted the need for more staff and money in the future,” Reuters said. 

The IAEA’s mission within the United Nations is to promote the expansion of nuclear power worldwide, so it is loath to issue public criticism of anyone’s nuclear reactor operations. 

The head of ASN, Pierre-Frank Chevet, “has regularly warned the government of the need to increase the authority’s budget and workforce, but has so far obtained only a fraction of its estimates,” Reuters said. “We were given an extra 30 positions over the next three years by the government. We say ‘thanks’… but that’s not enough.” Chevet told reporters he needed at least 170 more inspectors “as soon as possible.” 

The urgency is related to the nearly 40-year-old reactors’ upcoming operational reviews. 

The IAEA’s study group identified some needed regulatory improvements and recommended changes in “processes needed to deliver ASN’s mandate.” The NRC’s executive director for operations, Mark Satorius, said this was about something called “safety culture” among employees. 

“Safety culture has to do with having an organization where the members [i.e. whistle blowers] feel free to come forward with problems and voice those problems to management without fear of being retaliated against,” Satorius told Reuters.  —Reuters, Nov. 28, 2014 —JL

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

January 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nine Groups Sue NRC Over Failure to Obey 2012 Waste Ruling

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2014

Nine large environmental groups filed lawsuits in federal court Oct. 29 charging that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has violated earlier court findings.

The NRC has issued proposed rules that would allow high-level radioactive waste to pile up at reactor sites and would permit a generic environmental impact statement to be used in reactor license applications, regardless of the vast differences in size, type, location, population density and water use by separate reactors. The nine groups allege that the NRC’s proposed rules violate a 2012 federal court ruling that had reversed previous agency plans.

Filed in the District of Columbia, the earlier lawsuit resulted in halting US reactor licensing until the NRC finished a study of the impact of long-term storage of high-level reactor wastes at individual reactor sites. The government’s failure to site a centralized disposal site for the industry’s 141,000 metric tons of waste fuel means that reactor operators have to continue to store their extremely hot and radioactive wastes onsite for many decades.

Geoffrey Fettus, Senior Attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of the plaintiffs, said, “The NRC disregarded the explicit direction of the DC Circuit [Court] to examine the environmental impacts of indefinite storage of [waste] fuel in the event there is no [permanent] repository. … Instead … the NRC created an expedient fiction that ‘nothing will ever change … and safe agency practices will persist forever, obviating the need for a [central] repository.’”

The lawsuit asks the court to order the NRC to do the work that the earlier decision required.

“Dr. Arjun Makhijani, an expert who analyzed the NRC rule for the nine groups, said, “Until the NRC has studied the … environmental impacts of [waste] fuel disposal, it should [not] allow the generation of more highly radioactive [waste] reactor fuel.”

Filed Under: Direct Action, Environment, Environmental Justice, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

January 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

European Reactor Improvements Opposed by US and Russia

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2014

In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, Europeans want to change the Convention on Nuclear Safety to require countries to illustrate how they’ll manage emergency response in the event of another radiation disaster in which reactors run out of control and catastrophically meltdown.

The European Union’s efforts to strengthen the treaty’s requirements are opposed by the United States and Russia, whose representatives said in October that the improvements sounded too expensive.

Diplomats familiar with proposal, who spoke to Bloomberg News, on condition of anonymity, said they’re ready to compromise with the US and Russian and would drop demands to legally amend the convention in exchange for “binding commitments” to take safety more seriously in the future.

In Belgium, the future of the Doel-3 and Tihange-2 reactors has been challenged since cracks were found in their pressure vessels in 2012. Over half the world’s 438 power reactors are over 30 years old, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency. Reactor vessel cracks are a generic failure among old reactors and cracks have also been found in several old US units.

While the cracks pushed US regulators to examine reactors here built from the same materials, the Belgian flaws didn’t cause any US facilities to be closed. US reactor operators reviewed records and did computer modeling, but not direct and more costly ultrasonic inspections, as was done in Belgium.

Rebecca Harms, Co-President the of the European Parliament’s Green-European Free Alliance, which wants more rigorous reactor testing, told Bloomberg, “I would not like to see France investing $13 billion on improvements in nuclear safety and only around $3 billion in the US. This is obviously unbalanced.”

—Bloomberg News, Dec. 1, 2014

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

January 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

WIPP Update: More Information Surfaces on  February Radiation Leak at Country’s Only  High-Level Radioactive Waste Repository

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2014
By Arianne Peterson

Since Nukewatch’s Fall Quarterly update on the February barrel explosion that caused a radiation leak at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests made by Santa Fe’s New Mexican newspaper have revealed more about the gross negligence that led to the leak, exposing at least 20 workers—and the public—to radiation released from the underground repository.

“Waste Drum 68660”, the barrel that ruptured on Feb. 14 and caused the airborne radiation release, was packed with radioactive waste on Dec. 4, 2013, as part of clean-up efforts at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and shipped to WIPP for permanent disposal. As Nukewatch reported in the Summer Quarterly, the barrel was one of many that had been packed with a wheat-based, organic “kitty litter” rather than the clay-based litter that had formerly been used to absorb liquid and neutralize waste in the barrels. Organic material is commonly known among industry chemists to react with the nitrate salts in the waste. Additionally, a WIPP briefing paper obtained by the New Mexican reveals that Drum 68660 contained waste from a batch with an unusually acidic pH of zero. Rather than following the lab’s guidelines and taking time to determine the proper treatment of such acidic waste, the lab’s contractors took shortcuts and added the wrong neutralizer to the barrel. An internal LANL memo from May 21 revealed that the drum’s main ingredients, including the organic litter and the neutralizer, matched the makeup of patented plastic explosives.

The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) celebrated this 1000th shipment of plutonium-laden weapons production waste to WIPP in 2012, hailing it as a milestone in hurried efforts to pack and remove the waste before the 2014 fire season. LANL photo.

If the lab had labeled Drum 68660 with its true ingredients, it would not have met federal transportation standards to make the 330-mile trip on public roads to WIPP, nor would it have met the repository’s own acceptance criteria. But the documents sent with the drum were deeply flawed, failing to mention anything about the extraordinarily high acidity level or the neutralizer, and mischaracterizing the volatile organic litter, presenting it as the regular, clay-based version. According to the FOIA emails, LANL did not let WIPP officials know about the volatile ingredients described in the May 21 memo until May 27, when someone from LANL leaked the memo to them—presumably out of concern that WIPP was scheduled to send staff underground on May 28 to sample the area where the barrel ruptured.

“I am appalled that LANL didn’t provide us this information!” wrote Dana Bryson, Deputy Manager of the Department of Energy’s field office in Carlsbad, in an email to a WIPP manager sent after she learned of the memo. As a result of the memo leak, the May 28 sampling plan was postponed until May 30—and the LANL-based employee who shared it with WIPP was reprimanded.

When Drum 68660 was packed in December 2013, LANL was under a deadline imposed by New Mexico’s governor, Susana Martinez, to remove radioactive waste—including gloves, machinery, and equipment from Cold War-era weapons production—from an area called “The Hill” that had been threatened by a fire in 2011. Los Alamos National Security LLC, the consortium of private companies that runs LANL, was rushing to package and ship the waste before June 30, 2014, in an effort to avoid another fire season and to help secure an extension of its $2.2 billion Energy Department contract. (Since the operation of LANL was privatized in 2007, annual compensation for its top executive has tripled to over $1.5 million.) Ironically, of course, the shortcuts the lab took in packaging the waste probably caused the failure and shutdown of the country’s only high-level radioactive waste repository, making it impossible for them to meet the deadline.

Neither LANL nor its waste packaging subcontractor, EnergySolutions, has publicly acknowledged the reason for the change from regular clay-based material to the volatile organic kitty litter used in packing Drum 68660. Internal emails obtained by the New Mexican, however, reveal an explanation that may be shockingly simple: a “typographical error.” A policy manual revision approved by LANL that took effect on August 1, 2012, specifically required waste packagers to “ensure an organic absorbent (kitty litter) is added to the waste” (emphasis added) for drums containing nitrate salts, which react with organic materials. In an email to a colleague, Mark Pearcy, who evaluates waste that is to be stored at WIPP, implied that the policy manual revision accidentally included the word “organic” instead of the intended “inorganic.”

“General consensus is that the ‘organic’ designation was a typo that wasn’t caught,” Pearcy wrote. Oddly, the policy change was made just after a visit made by Governor Martinez to commend LANL for staying on track to meet its waste shipment deadline. In any case, the new policy took effect almost immediately, with waste packagers using wheat-based litter as early as September 2012—meaning that the number of incorrectly labeled drums containing the potentially explosive mixture number up to 5,565.

At the same time LANL was speeding up its packaging process, in 2012 and 2013, it was rebuffing attempts made by the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) to carry out regular inspections and audits to ensure the facility was complying with its state permits. NMED officials claim they were told to stay out of the waste handling facility because they did not have the appropriate training to be around the radioactive waste. On Dec. 6, following a nine-month investigation, NMED announced it had found 13 permit violations at WIPP and 24 at LANL. The state imposed civil penalties in the amounts of $17.6 million and $36.6 million, respectively, on the facilities.

According to the recovery plan released by the Energy Department in September, officials were sending workers into the underground WIPP facility four times a week with plans to resume daily entries. Experts have raised concerns that not only are other mislabeled barrels with dangerous ingredient combinations still remaining in the site, but temperatures in the storage area following the rupture of Drum 68660, which reportedly soared to 1,600 degrees Fahrenheit, may have made their contents even more volatile. Though WIPP operators assure workers the facility is safe for them to enter, they have not responded to requests from the workers’ union to provide safety reports that include the detailed risk and radiation measurement numbers.

Official estimates on the cost of the clean-up at WIPP, which experts have called conservative, are around $500 million. With 5,564 more potentially explosive radioactive waste barrels spread throughout nuclear facilities in the Southwest, no one knows what the negligence of the Energy Department and its contractors will ultimately cost us.

—Albuquerque Journal, Nov. 13 & Dec. 6; New Mexican (Santa Fe), Nov. 15 & 29, 2014

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste

January 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Chronicling the Plume: Fukushima’s Boundless Fallout

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2014
Aug. 6: Total melt-through of Reactor 3 admitted

Tokyo Electric Power Co., which owns the wrecked Fukushima-Daiichi reactor complex in Japan, has admitted that all the uranium fuel in Reactor 3 melted and burned into the bottom of the reactor’s cement containment vessel. In November 2011, Tepco said it thought 63 percent of the reactor’s 100 tons of uranium had melted through. According to the company’s new estimate, all the fuel burned through the steel pressure vessel, fell to the bottom of the containment and burned over two feet into the concrete, the Japan Times reports. So harrowing is the problem of removing this mass of hot, molten fuel wreckage, that Tepco has said it won’t begin the attempt for seven years, the daily Asahi Shimbun reported Aug. 7.

Aug. 12: Bribes offered to areas to store waste

Japan’s government is offering billions in subsidies to communities that agree to store contaminated soil and debris cleared from areas hard hit with radioactive fallout. Greenpeace said the payments were nothing but bribes.

The government has offered to pay an annual subsidy of $2.8 billion to Fukushima Prefecture, and the towns of Okuma and Futaba, in return for permission to construct temporary radioactive waste dump sites. About 900 million cubic feet of contaminated soil and debris need storage.

Asahi Shimbun reports that, “Funds will also be provided to develop measures to alleviate concerns elsewhere in Japan that farm, forestry and fishery products in Fukushima Prefecture are contaminated with radioactive materials.”

“Alleviating concern” over radiation exposure is cheaper than decontaminating heavily poisoned areas to the exposure standard required prior to the disaster. The subsidy proposal was launched after the failure of a plan to purchase private land for dump sites.

NBC News said Sept. 1 that soil being collected from cleanup sites is now stored in plastic bags in over 600 temporary sites outside the evacuation zones, “raising health and safety concerns.”

Aug. 12: Ice wall may not solve problem

In July workers began inserting 1,550 pipes 100 feet vertically into the ground inland from the reactor complex to form a long cordon around the wreckage—costing $300 million. Coolant fed into the pipes is supposed to freeze the surrounding earth and create a barrier to the groundwater now pouring into the reactor buildings at a rate of 400 tons per day.

Ice walls have never been built on such a large scale. “I’m not convinced the freeze wall is the best option,” said Dale Klein, a former head of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and a senior adviser to Tepco, Kyodo News reports. “What I’m concerned about is unintended consequences. Where does that water go and what are the consequences of that?”

Sept. 10: First reactor restart said to be safe 

Japanese regulators announced that one nuclear power station is safe to restart, the New York Times reports. All of Japan’s 48 operable reactors were shuttered in March 2011 following Fukushima’s triple meltdowns. Two reactors at the Sendai station, in the far southwest, are the first to be re-certified in spite of operating in a volcanically active area. Actual restart would take months as operators seek local government consent. A final decision will be made by the prime minister. Public opinion is heavily against any Sendai reactor restart as millions of Japanese are deeply skeptical about its safety. On Sept. 24, 16,000 people marched through Tokyo protesting any such restart.

Oct. 2: Public wary of “allowable” radiation doses

Of those surveyed in Japan, 22.5 percent said the government should impose stricter limits for radiation exposures and radioactive contamination of food; 47 percent said they would like to avoid foods with radioactive substances even if the radiation level is below government-set limits. The latest survey by the Consumer Affairs Agency was conducted in August, and surveyed 5,176 adults in 11 prefectures.

Oct. 12: Groundwater contamination jumps after typhoon

The amount of tritium—radioactive hydrogen—and strontium-90 in groundwater samples at Fukushima jumped more than tenfold in October, reportedly because of heavy rain caused by typhoon Phanfone. Some 150,000 Becquerels of tritium per-liter were measured in groundwater taken Oct. 9 from a well near Reactor 2. The figure is a record and over 10 times the level measured the previous week. The amount of strontium-90 also shattered records with a well water reading of 1.2 million Becquerels per-liter, Tepco reported.

Tepco also revealed that, at a separate well also east of Reactor 2, groundwater was emitting a record 2.1 million Becquerels of strontium-90-like beta radiation, nearly double the level from a week earlier.

Oct. 15: Contaminated exports raise protest

The Wall Street Journal reports that South Koreans are still leery over contaminated imports from Japan. Residents of Changwon, a city on South Korea’s southeastern coast, staged a rally Oct. 14 at a steel company to protest its import of scrap steel from Japan at the port of Masan. The protesters demanded local steel companies stop importing Japanese steel through seaports that aren’t equipped with radioactive detection devices, such as Masan.

“A case in August, in which imports of scrap steel from Japan were found to contain radioactive material and sent back to Japan clearly shows we’re exposed to a real risk,” said Park Jong-kwon, Chairman of the Masan Changwon Jinhae Korea Federation of Environmental Movements.

Oct. 17: Tepco pretends to de-contaminate water

Asahi Shimbun reports that Tepco has decided to simply pretend it’s had some progress in decontaminating tons of water from its flooded reactors. The paper reports, “Although the water treated with … strontium removal systems alone still needs to be processed … to eliminate additional radioactive substances, Tepco officials said the company will temporarily deem such water as being ‘purified’ to achieve its initial goal of completing the processing work by the end of the fiscal year.”

Oct. 29: Radioactive soil stored at schools has nowhere to go

Japan Times reports that tons of contaminated and bagged up topsoil that was removed from school yards will have to stay where it is rather than be shipped to temporary dumps—because of a technicality. The soil was removed before a law on radioactive contamination took effect in January 2012, so its shipment off school grounds isn’t covered by the law. The Fukushima Prefecture Government says the delay is discriminatory and has repeatedly called on Tokyo to allow the soil to be shipped to temporary dump sites.

[In this context, thousands of tons of contaminated soil removed from school grounds and other areas have been incinerated in Japan’s ordinary municipal incinerators. Problems with contaminated incinerator ash arose almost immediately. In August 2011, ash with too much radioactive cesium to allow it to be buried has been found at 42 facilities in Tokyo Prefecture, and five other prefectures as well as Fukushima, the Environment Ministry said Aug. 27, 2011. In the summer of 2011, a 16-prefecture survey of 469 incinerator operators in Tohoku and Kanto was reported to a panel of experts at the Environment Ministry which was discussing how to bury incinerator ash and dust with cesium levels above 8,000 Becquerels-per-kilogram.]
Nov. 11: Cesium found in west coast waters

The Oregon Statesman Journal reports that scientists at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute found cesium-134 in seawater from Fukushima had reached the California coast. Tepco downplayed the finding saying in a statement, “It has been … expected … that … radioactivity from … the March 2011 accident … would be carried by ocean currents.” The radioactivity found “raises no concern for human or animal health,” Tepco also said.

Less than 2 Becquerels per-cubic-meter of cesium-134 were found in 10 sea water samples taken between Alaska and California by the researchers.

No US agency is testing Pacific waters for radiation from Fukushima, so the Institute took on the task as a public service.

While the Woods Hole report said the contamination was insignificant, cesium persists in the environment for at least 300 years, during which it bio-accumulates and bio-concentrates in aquatic life as it moves up the food chain.

Nov. 15: Greenpeace: Radiation risks understated 

Radioactive “hot spots” are still prevalent across parts of Fukushima Prefecture, according to Greenpeace monitors who surveyed areas contaminated with fallout from the March 2011 triple meltdowns.

In addition to finding hots spots, Greenpeace experts charged that Japanese authorities consistently underestimate both the amount of radioactive contamination and the health risks it carries. The group began monitoring radiation around Fukushima’s reactor wreckage within a few days of the start of the catastrophe and has conducted independent on-site monitoring visits every year since—the most recent between Oct. 24 and 27.

Greenpeace radiation monitor Heinz Smitai, a nuclear physicist, told foreign journalists Oct. 30 in Tokyo that hot spots exist as far as 37 miles from the site of the disaster, Al Jazeera reported. Mandatory evacuation covered only a 12 mile radius.

Japan’s Ministry of Environment disputes Greenpeace’s charge that it underestimates radiation contamination and risks. The ministry claims that radiation in Fukushima has steadily diminished over time.

However, critics charge that government numbers are made up of estimated averages of radiation findings, meaning that individual “hot spots,” like those Greenpeace recorded, would go unreported and unmapped. Individuals near hot spots could be exposed to greater radiation doses than the government “average” estimates over a large area.

The government’s most recent airborne radiation survey was conducted in December 2013. —JL 

Filed Under: Environment, Fukushima, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • …
  • 94
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch