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
    • Workshops
  • Donate

June 21, 2022 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

U.S. Still Buying Russian Uranium in Spite of War on Ukraine

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2022
By Bob Mayberry

 

Uranium Pellets, wikimedia.org

 

It’s ironic to contemplate, devastating to realize, that while the U.S. has banned Russian oil, coal, and gas imports, we continue to buy uranium for our nuclear reactors from Moscow. How much are we spending on reactor fuel? Estimates differ wildly. Senator John Barrasso, R-Wyo., claims the U.S. is “underwriting Putin’s war machine” to the tune of $100 million a month. But Sen. Barrasso has reason to exaggerate since uranium mining revenues in his state might increase following a ban on Russian imports.

The Washington Post reported that International Trade Commission figures for 2016 show the U.S. spending just over $1 billion on Russian uranium, but that figure shrank to $568 million in 2020. However, even those figures aren’t certain. Post reporter Glenn Kessler located a Senate Energy Committee webpage showing sales to the U.S. from Rosatom, Russia’s state-owned nuclear power company, totaled $784 million in 2020.

Clearly the U.S. is spending between five hundred million and a billion dollars annually on Russian uranium. Interestingly, Rosatom was founded by Vladimir Putin in 2007. And, according to The Verge, it now produces 20% of the world’s reactor fuel.

According to Reuters, the U.S. relies on Russia, and its allies Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, for roughly half of the uranium used to fuel our 93 reactors. Those units are responsible for nearly 20% of U.S. electricity. The Biden administration exempted uranium from the bans on Russian imports in part to keep electricity prices low.

Meanwhile, Sen. Barrasso and others are lobbying to add uranium to the Russian import ban, while simultaneously trying to kick-start uranium mining in states like Wyoming, Utah, Texas and Arizona, where large reserves are found. Uranium mining was largely abandoned in the U.S. due to the dangers of radioactive pollution. Thousands of abandoned uranium mines on the Navajo Reservation in Arizona have led to high levels of radioactive metals in the bodies of the women living on the reservation, according to a recent report from the University of New Mexico’s Navajo Birth Cohort Study.

While Sen. Barrasso and others call for renewed uranium mining, Native Americans demand long-overdue cleanup of abandoned mines, mills, and mountains of tailings scattered across the western U.S. that continue to emit dangerous radiation and contaminate water on Indigenous lands.

Transitioning to renewable energy would avoid uranium imports and cut toxic and radioactive pollution.

—Bob Mayberry is a retired English and Theatre Professor at Cal State University-Channel Islands.

Calma, Justine, “The US Can’t Seem to Quit Russian Uranium,” The Verge, 31 March 2022; Daniel, Will, “The U.S. is Miles Away from True Energy Independence, and It’s Not Because of Oil,” Fortune, 29 March 2022; Kessler, Glenn, “Does Russia Sell Nearly $1 Billion in Uranium to the U.S. a Year?,” Washington Post, 20 April 2022;  Navajo Birth Cohort Study, University of New Mexico College of Pharmacy

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Uncategorized, Uranium Mining, War

December 28, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

The Hype About Thorium Reactors

by Gordon Edwards*, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, December 26 2021.

www.ccnr.org/thorium_hype_2021.pdf

There has recently been an upsurge of uninformed babble about thorium as if it were a new discovery with astounding potentiality. Some describe it as a nearly miraculous material that can provide unlimited amounts of problem-free energy. Such hype is grossly exaggerated.

Thorium and Nuclear Weapons

One of the most irresponsible statements is that thorium has no connection with nuclear weapons. On the contrary, the initial motivation for using thorium in nuclear reactors was precisely for the purposes of nuclear weaponry.

It was known from the earliest days of nuclear fission that naturally-occurring thorium can be converted into a powerful nuclear explosive – not found in nature – called uranium-233, in much the same way that naturally-occurring uranium can be converted into plutonium.

Working at a secret laboratory in Montreal during World War II, nuclear scientists from France and Britain collaborated with Canadians and others to study the best way to obtain human-made nuclear explosives for bombs. That objective can be met by converting natural uranium into human-made plutonium-239, or by converting natural thorium into human-made uranium-233. These conversions can only be made inside a nuclear reactor.

The Montreal team designed the famous and very powerful NRX research reactor for that military purpose as well as other non-military objectives. The war-time decision to allow the building of the NRX reactor was made in Washington DC by a six-person committee (3 Americans, 2 Brits and 1 Canadian) in the spring of 1944.

The NRX reactor began operation in 1947 at Chalk River, Ontario, on the Ottawa River, 200 kilometres northwest of the nation’s capital. The American military insisted that thorium rods as well as uranium rods be inserted into the reactor core. Two chemical “reprocessing” plants were built and operated at Chalk River, one to extract plutonium-239 from irradiated uranium rods, and a second to extract uranium-233 from irradiated thorium rods. This dangerous operation required dissolving intensely radioactive rods in boiling nitric acid and chemically separating out the small quantity of nuclear explosive material contained in those rods. Both plants were shut down in the 1950s after three men were killed in an explosion.

The USA detonated a nuclear weapon made from a mix of uranium-233 and plutonium-239 in 1955. In that same year the Soviet Union detonated its first H-bomb (a thermonuclear weapon, using nuclear fusion as well as nuclear fission) with a fissile core of natural uranium-235 and human-made uranium-233.

In 1998, India tested a nuclear weapon using uranium-233 as part of its series of nuclear test explosions in that year. A few years earlier, In 1994, the US government declassified a 1966 memo that states that uranium-233 has been demonstrated to be highly satisfactory as a weapons material.

Uranium Reactors are really U-235 reactors

Uranium is the only naturally-occurring material that can be used to make an atomic bomb or to fuel a nuclear reactor. In either case, the energy release is due to the fissioning of uranium-235 atoms in a self-sustaining “chain reaction”. But uranium-235 is rather scarce. When uranium is found in nature, usually as a metallic ore in a rocky formation, it is about 99.3 percent uranium-238 and only 0.7 percent uranium-235. That’s just seven atoms out of a thousand!

Uranium-238, the heavier and more abundant isotope of uranium, cannot be used to make an A-Bomb or to fuel a reactor. It is only the lighter isotope, uranium-235, that can sustain a nuclear chain reaction. If the chain reaction is uncontrolled, you have a nuclear explosion; if it is controlled, as it is in a nuclear reactor, you have a steady supply of energy.

But you cannot make a nuclear explosion with uranium unless the concentration of uranium-238 is greatly reduced and the concentration of uranium-235 is drastically increased. This procedure is called “uranium enrichment”, and the enrichment must be to a high degree – preferably more than 90 percent U-235, or at the very least 20 percent U-235 – to get a nuclear explosion. For this reason, the ordinary uranium fuel used in commercial power reactors is not weapons-usable; the concentration of U-235 is typically less than five percent.

However, as these uranium-235 atoms are split inside a nuclear reactor, the broken fragments form new smaller atoms called “fission products”. There are hundreds of varieties of fission products, and they are collectively millions of times more radioactive than the uranium fuel itself. They are the main constituents of “high-level radioactive waste” (or “irradiated nuclear fuel”) that must be kept out of the environment of living things for millions of years.

In addition, stray neutrons from the fissioning U-235 atoms convert many of the uranium-238 atoms into atoms if plutonium-239. Reactor-produced plutonium is always weapons-usable, regardless of the mixture of different isotopes; no enrichment is needed! But that plutonium can only be extracted from the used nuclear fuel by “reprocessing” the used fuel. That requires separating the plutonium from the fiercely radioactive fission products that will otherwise give a lethal dose of radiation to workers in a short time.

Thorium Reactors are really U-233 reactors

Unlike uranium, thorium cannot sustain a nuclear chain reaction under any circumstances. Thorium can therefore not be used to make an atomic bomb or to fuel a nuclear reactor. However, if thorium is inserted into an operating nuclear reactor (fuelled by uranium or plutonium), some of the thorium atoms are converted to uranium-233 atoms by absorbing stray neutrons. That newly created material, uranium-233, is even better than uranium-235 at sustaining a chain reaction.  That’s why uranium-233 can be used as a powerful nuclear explosive or as an exemplary reactor fuel.

But thorium cannot be used directly as a nuclear fuel.  It has to be converted into uranium-233 and then the human-made isotope uranium-233 becomes the reactor fuel. And to perform that conversion, some other nuclear fuel must be used – either enriched uranium or plutonium

Of course, when uranium-233 atoms are split, hundreds of fission products are created from the broken fragments, and they are collectively far more radioactive than the uranium-233 itself – or the thorium from which it was created.  So once again, we see that high-level radioactive waste is being produced even in a thorium reactor (as in a normal present-day uranium reactor).

In summary, a so-called “thorium reactor” is in reality a uranium-233 reactor. Some other nuclear fuel (enriched uranium-235 or plutonium) must be used to convert thorium atoms into uranium-233 atoms. Some form of reprocessing must then be used to extract uranium-233 from the irradiated thorium. The fissioning of uranium-233, like the fissioning of uranium-235 or plutonium, creates hundreds of new fission products that make up the bulk of the high-level radioactive waste from any nuclear reactor. And, as previously remarked, uranium-233 is also a powerful nuclear explosive, posing serious weapons proliferation risks. Moreover, uranium-233 – unlike the uranium fuel that is currently used in commercial power reactors around the world – is immediately usable as a nuclear explosive. The moment uranium-233 is created it is very close to 100 percent enriched – perfect for use in any nuclear weapon of suitable design.

Uranium-232 — A Fly in the Ointment

There is a complication that arises in the form of another human-made uranium isotope, uranium-232. In a thorium reactor, the uranium-233 that is created is accompanied by a very small quantity of uranium-232. As it happens, U-232 (along with its decay products) gives off very powerful gamma radiation that makes it difficult to fabricate an atomic bomb, given the danger to the workers and the heat generated by the intense radioactivity of U-232 and its decay products. But these difficulties can be overcome, or even avoided altogether, by making suitable adjustments to the reactor operation.

Without going into too much detail, when a thorium-232 atom absorbs a neutron, it is transformed into an atom of protactinium-233, which in turn is spontaneously transformed into an atom of uranium-233. But if either of those two non-thorium atoms absorbs an additional neutron, before the conversion is complete, atoms of uranium-232 can be created – which act as unwanted pollutants. However, if the protactinium atoms are removed from the reactor core, addition neutron collisions are avoided and an uncontaminated supply of almost 100 percent pure uranium 233 can be obtained by just waiting for the spontaneous conversion to be completed.

Is the thorium-fueled “Molten Salt” reactor a proven technology?

The first thorium-fueled molten salt reactor ever built was intended to power an aircraft engine in a long-range strategic bomber armed with nuclear weapons. Despite massive expenditures, the project proved unviable as well as prohibitively costly and was ultimately cancelled by President Kennedy. However, the Oak Ridge team responsible for the aircraft engine reactor project, under the direction of Alvin Weinberg, was allowed to conduct a further thorium-fuelled molten salt reactor experiment for a period of four years, from 1965 to 1969. At the beginning, only U-235 was used; soon afterwards, a smaller amount of U-233 was used.

During its four years of operation under experimental conditions, the Oak Ridge molten salt reactor experienced over 250 shutdowns, most of them completely unplanned.  The molten-salt thorium fuelled experience of 52 years ago at Oak Ridge – the only such experience available to date – consumed about one quarter of the total budget of the entire Oak Ridge nuclear complex. It is difficult to understand how anyone could construe this experiment as demonstrating that such a technology would be viable in a commercial environment.

There are, at the present time, no thorium reactors operating anywhere in the world.

Summary (Thorium Reactors)

It appears that thorium-fuelled reactors pose the same kinds of problems, qualitatively speaking, that afflict existing nuclear reactors. Problems associated with the long-term management of nuclear waste, and the potential for proliferating nuclear weapons, are not fundamentally different even though the detailed considerations are by no means identical. Since a nuclear reactor accident will have off-site consequences only due to the unintended release of high-level nuclear waste materials into the environment, there is no qualitative difference there either.  Thorium reactors pose the same risk of reactor accident risks as in the case of a comparable non-thorium reactor.

The “Front End” of the Nuclear Fuel Chain

So much for the “back end” of the fuel chain, but what about the “front end”? What about the dangers and environmental consequences associated with mining a radioactive ore body to obtain the uranium or thorium needed to sustain a uranium-based or thorium-based reactor system?

Thorium versus Uranium

Uranium and thorium are naturally occurring heavy metals, both discovered a couple of centuries ago. Uranium was identified in 1789. It was named after the planet Uranus, that was discovered just 8 years earlier. Thorium was identified in 1828. It was named after Thor, the Norse god of thunder.

In 1896, Henri Becquerel accidentally discovered radioactivity. He found that rocks containing either uranium or thorium give off a kind of invisible penetrating light (gamma radiation) that can expose photographic plates even if they are wrapped in thick black paper.

In 1898, Marie Curie discovered that when uranium ore is crushed and the uranium itself is extracted, it is indeed found to be a radioactive substance, but the crushed rock contains much more radioactivity (5 to 7 times more) than the uranium itself. She identified two new elements in the crushed rock, radium and polonium – both radioactive and highly dangerous – and won two Nobel Prizes, one in Physics and one in Chemistry.

The radioactive properties of both radium and thorium were used in medical treatments prior to the discovery of fission in 1939. Because of the extraordinary damage done to living tissues by atomic radiation (a fact that was observed before the advent of the twentieth century) these radioactive materials derived from natural sources were used to shrink cancerous tumours and to destroy ringworm infections in the scalps of young children. It was later observed that while acute doses of atomic radiation can indeed kill malignant as well as benign growths, atomic radiation can also cause latent cancers that will not appear until decades later, even at chronic low dose radiation levels that cause no immediately perceptible biological damage.

Uranium Mining and Mill Tailings

It turns out that 85 percent of the radioactivity in uranium ore is found in the pulverized residues after uranium is extracted, as a result of many natural radioactive byproducts of uranium called “decay products” or “progeny” that are left behind. They include radioactive isotopes of lead, bismuth, polonium, radium, radon gas, and others. Uranium mining is dangerous mainly because of the harmful effects of these radioactive byproducts, which are invariably discarded in the voluminous sand-like tailings left over from milling the ore. All of these radioactive decay products are much more radioactive and much more biologically damaging than uranium itself.

See www.ccnr.org/U-238_decay_chain.png .

Thorium Mining and Mill Tailings

Thorium is estimated to be about three to four times more plentiful than uranium. Like uranium, it also produces radioactive “decay products” or “progeny” – including additional radioactive isotopes of lead, bismuth, polonium, radium, radon gas, thallium, and others. These radioactive byproducts are discarded in the mill tailings when thorium ore is milled. See

www.ccnr.org/Th-232_decay_chain.png .

Most of the naturally-occurring radioactivity found in the soil and rocks of planet Earth are due to the two primordial radioactive elements, uranium and thorium, and their many decay products. There is one additional primordial radioactive element, potassium-40, but it has no radioactive decay products and so contributes much less to the natural radioactive inventory.

*Dr. Gordon Edwards is a mathematician, physicist, nuclear consultant, and president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility (www.ccnr.org ).

P.S. I have written about thorium as a nuclear fuel several times before, beginning in 1978.

See www.ccnr.org/AECL_plute.html  ;  www.ccnr.org/aecl_plute_seminar.html ;

www.ccnr.org/think_about_thorium.pdf ;  and  www.ccnr.org/Thorium_Reactors.html

 

 

Filed Under: Environment, Nuclear Weapons, Uranium Mining

November 25, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

A Second Churchrock Spill in the Making?

A banner in a walk July 16, 2009 as part of the 30th anniversary of the Churchrock uranium tailings spill. Photo: Navajo Times – Leigh T. Jimmie

By Leona Morgan
Nuclear Issues Study Group and Halt Holtec

Editor’s Note: Submit your comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement regarding the Churchrock spill cleanup online by December 28, 2020 here  or during an NRC Public Meeting webinar on Dec. 2 or Dec. 9.

On July 16, 1945, the Trinity Test devastated communities in southeast New Mexico. Thirty-four years later at Three Mile Island Generating Station in Pennsylvania, the United States poured extensive resources into the largest and most expensive nuclear energy disaster of that time. Less than four months later, the country didn’t flinch when it came to the second largest ever release of radiation in the world. The United Nuclear Corporation (UNC) uranium mill “accident” was largely overlooked as it happened in a rural, community of color–a form of environmental racism. The Churchrock Spill occurred in a Diné community on the same day and at the same time as the Trinity Test, July 16th at 5:30 in the morning, but in 1979.

In an August 4, 2020 interview, Edith Hood, a Diné elder and matriarch, explains the impacts from the massive uranium spill and abandoned uranium mines and mill that she and others are still fighting to get cleaned up. Hood and her family are residents of the Red Water Pond Road (RWPR) community, north of Churchrock, New Mexico. They live between the former UNC mill, former UNC Northeast Church Rock Mine (NECR), and two former Kerr McGee/Quivira mines. The mill is on privately owned land, and the rest are on the Navajo Nation, near Navajo allotment, state, and federal lands–all within a few square miles.

“We were just children when the drilling companies came in…in the 1960s, to [do] exploratory drilling for uranium. So, by the end of the sixties, there were buildings going up, setting up the mine…United Nuclear on the south side and of course Kerr McGee, which today is known as Quivira.” Hood worked at Kerr McGee from 1976 to 1982. When asked about the dangers of her job, Hood replied, “Never did I hear ‘unsafe’ or ‘dangerous’… if I was educated about this, I wouldn’t probably have gone to work there.”

Since 2008, the U.S. government has been working with the Navajo Nation to clean up 523 abandoned uranium mines and four former mill sites on Navajo Nation. However, there are hundreds of additional contaminated sites, adjacent to or located within the reservation boundary, but not technically on Navajo Nation proper.

The federal agencies working on this cleanup include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Bureau of Indian Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Department of Energy, Indian Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry, and Centers for Disease Control. The Navajo Nation (NN) agencies involved are NN EPA and Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Department. Other partners include NN Department of Water Resources, the University of New Mexico and Northern Arizona University, as well as the Hopi Nation.

Due to its proximity to the RWPR community, the NECR mine has been a high priority from the beginning, yet is nowhere near completion. The residents have insisted that wastes be moved off the Navajo Nation. Some remediation of the NECR mine has been conducted, including removal of contaminated soils from residences to lands that are not on Navajo Nation, but are close enough to be carried back by the wind.

General Electric, which acquired UNC, is responsible for remediation of the former NECR uranium mine and the former mill. The mill operated from 1977 to 1982 and released over 1,100 tons of radioactive sludge into the environment in the 1979 Churchrock Spill, and over 90 million gallons of liquid radioactive waste that flowed at least 100 miles westward into Arizona.

For cleanup of the NECR mine, GE proposes to move and permanently store approximately one million cubic yards of mine waste on top of existing mill waste and to transport approximately 32,200 cubic yards of more radioactive wastes offsite, most likely to the White Mesa Mill in southeast Utah which impacts another indigenous community. The White Mesa Mill is the only operating uranium mine in the U.S. and also doubles a catch-all nuclear waste storage just three miles from the Ute Mountain Ute community.

The former UNC mill site has been undergoing remediation and monitoring, but the offsite contamination from the Spill has never been adequately addressed. The Churchrock Spill was not widely broadcast on national news, like Three Mile Island. Downstream residents were not informed and not aware of the dangers of the liquid, as children unknowingly played in the wastewater. Ranchers also reported burns to their feet and ankles as they went into the water to get their livestock out. Hood recalls about the Spill, “For us in the community…it was not like today where you instantly get messages…we didn’t hear about it for a few days… not really knowing about radiation and the bad stuff that was in that liquid…At the time, it really was not alluring … for most people, not till they get sick, or not until something affects them, especially physically. Then, you know we were in a dangerous place.” Hood continues, “we never heard about the disadvantages or the bad stuff about this. All we knew [was] that mining was good economy for the country, and it’s all in spirit with…making the country look good. They’re making weapons, but you never know what went into those weapons. Till forty years later, you hear about the bad stuff…Our children were getting sick…All the elements that we use were affected.”

The RWPR community has been demanding clean-up of their area and all sites across the Navajo Nation for over a decade, including demands for new housing, funding for education, and a comprehensive health study. “We want the community and the impacted ground cleaned up… We want this concept of ‘hózhó’ back in the community, all across the Navajo Nation, with us included,” said Hood, referring to the traditional Diné teaching which encompasses the Diné philosophy of living in harmony and balance with the universe.

A banner in a walk in 2014 as part of the anniversary of the Churchrock uranium tailings spill. Photo: The Republic – David Wallace

The proposed cleanup action to move mine waste to the mill site requires an amendment to the NRC materials license (SUA-1475) for the mill. GE submitted a license amendment application in September 2018. NRC notified the public of its intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS), to conduct a scoping process, and request for public comments in February 2019. NRC held two scoping meetings in Gallup, New Mexico on March 19, 2019 and on March 21, 2019. At these meetings, locals expressed disappointment in the slow remediation process and strong opposition against moving mine waste on top of the mill waste, which they said is in a flood plain and alluded to the possibility of another Churchrock Spill.

On November 17 this year, the NRC announced it’s accepting public comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement of this proposal until December 28th with two virtual public comment meetings on December 2nd and December 9th. The Final EIS is expected in August 2021, and final decision in January 2022.

Since 2009, on the 30th anniversary of the Spill, the Red Water Pond Road Community Association has held an annual public event around July 16th with a sunrise prayer, walk, and talks to raise awareness about uranium mining, the spill, and cleanup. Due to Covid-19, this year’s event was canceled. According to Hood, next year they plan to “carry-on” and welcome “anyone who is doing something to help Mother Earth.”

 

Sources:

“Church Rock, America’s Forgotten Nuclear Disaster, Is Still Poisoning Navajo Lands 40 Years Later”, VICE article by Samuel Gilbert (August 12, 2019)
https://www.vice.com/en/article/ne8w4x/church-rock-americas-forgotten-nuclear-disaster-is-still-poisoning-navajo-lands-40-years-later

The Church Rock Uranium Mill Tailings Spill: A Health And Environmental Assessment
https://semspub.epa.gov/work/06/1000720.pdf

Interview with Edith Hood (starts at 1:31:45)
https://www.facebook.com/537856386561307/videos/633889527249870

Quivira Mines – Red Water Pond Road
https://response.epa.gov/site/site_profile.aspx?site_id=6801

Abandoned Mines Cleanup: Federal Plans
https://www.epa.gov/navajo-nation-uranium-cleanup/abandoned-mines-cleanup-federal-plans

Navajo Nation: Cleaning Up Abandoned Uranium Mines, Northeast Church Rock Mine
https://www.epa.gov/navajo-nation-uranium-cleanup/northeast-church-rock-mine

Uranium-mine cleanup on Navajo Reservation could take 100 years
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/arizona/investigations/2014/08/06/uranium-mining-navajo-reservation-cleanup-radioactive-waste/13680399/

UNC–Church RockMill Uranium Recovery Facility
https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/uranium/is-united-nuclear-corporation-unc.pdf

“Dam Break Investigated; Radiation of Spill Easing”, New York Times Article By Molly Ivins (July 28, 1979)
https://www.nytimes.com/1979/07/28/archives/dam-break-investigated-radiation-of-spill-easing.html

Application for Amendment of US NRC Source Material License SUA-1475, Volume 1, Prepared for UNC and GE by Stantec (10/14/2019)
https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1928/ML19287A009.pdf

Application Documents for Amendment of License SUA-1475 for UNC Mill Site Near Church Rock, New Mexico, Volumes I and II (09/24/2018)
https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1826/ML18267A235.html

NRC Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) and conduct a scoping process; request for comment re: United Nuclear Corporation License SUA-1475 (02/08/2019)
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/02/08/2019-01642/united-nuclear-corporation-unc-church-rock-project

Official Transcript: NRC Public Scoping Meeting for the Environmental Impact Statement for the Church Rock Uranium Mill Site (03/19/19)
https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1909/ML19092A102.pdf

Official Transcript: NRC Public Scoping Meeting for the Environmental Impact Statement for the Church Rock Uranium Mill Site (03/21/19)
https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1909/ML19091A160.pdf

NRC Seeks Public Comment on Draft Environmental Study on Waste Transfer at Church Rock Site in New Mexico, NRC Press Release (11/17/2020)
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2020/20-056.pdf

Environmental Impact Statement for the Disposal of Mine Waste at the United Nuclear Corporation Mill Site in McKinley County, New Mexico Draft Report for Comment (October 2020)
https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2028/ML20289A621.pdf

NRC Public Meeting Schedule for Dec. 2, 2020: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for proposed disposal of mine waste at the United Nuclear Corporation Mill Site
https://www.nrc.gov/pmns/mtg?do=details&Code=20201275

NRC Public Meeting Schedule for Dec. 9, 2020: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for proposed disposal of mine waste at the United Nuclear Corporation Mill Site
https://www.nrc.gov/pmns/mtg?do=details&Code=20201276

NRC United Nuclear Corporation Uranium Mill Site Status Summary
https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/decommissioning/uranium/united-nuclear-corporation-unc-.html

“Poison in the Earth: 1979 Church Rock Spill a Symbol for Uranium Dangers”, Navajo Times article by Marley Shebala (July 23, 2009)
https://navajotimes.com/news/2009/0709/072309uranium.php

Filed Under: Environmental Justice, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Uranium Mining

October 11, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nuclear Weapons Workers Die Waiting for Care and Compensation

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2020
By Kelly Lundeen

This year marks the milestone commemorations of the devastating Trinity bomb test and the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By contrast, an anniversary to be celebrated is the 20 years since enactment of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA) of 2000.

This is the program that has helped 126,000 nuclear and uranium workers access $18 billion to date in much-deserved medical benefits and compensation for deaths and illnesses related to exposures to radiation and toxic substances while at work building the US nuclear arsenal.

The EEOICPA was brought into effect after nuclear workers at a uranium enrichment facility, the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, in Kentucky, filed a $10 billion class-action lawsuit against federal government contractors. This is only one of the 350 nuclear weapons production, research and development sites and thousands of uranium mines and mills that have had former workers lining up to access the program.

Applying for benefits and compensation under EEOICPA is a complicated and long process. Today nearly 13,000 claims have been filed and are awaiting a decision while 96,000 claims have been denied.

Have you ever heard of this guy? “My name is Joe Harding,” he starts in a 1980 audio cassette memoir. “I am 58 years old. I have a story that I think everyone in America should know about. I heard about the atomic energy [Union Carbide] plant that was being built at Paducah, Kentucky…[it] seemed to be important and patriotic…I was 31 years old…I was strong and healthy and tough.”

Meet Clara Harding. “He began to have mutations from his joints, his fingers, toes, his angles, his elbows, his shoulder blades…Bone was actually growing through the flesh.”

Joe described the mutations “like a piece of finger nail sticking through…I would trim it off … and it would come back again.” That wasn’t all that was happening to him. He died of stomach cancer related to his 18 years at the plant.

Al Puckett was a union shop steward at the Paducah site. “They told us that stuff won’t hurt you … if you ate it.” In 1999 a document was released proving that Union Carbide plant officials knew what was happening because they were tracking worker cancers and deaths. Puckett lamented, “A lot of my friends I know died from what they did. It was just like people was expendable.” Over $1 billion has been paid to former Paducah workers through EEOICPA.

These days fewer workers are taking advantage of EEOICPA. Those working in uranium mining, milling and transport are only eligible if their exposure was prior to 1971, although groups like the Post-71 Uranium Workers Committee are working to change that.

The nuclear production, research and development workforce has decreased, although some effects of radiation exposure don’t usually appear until years later. Work site safety standards have improved as worker illness and death have cut into the bottom line of the corporations profiting from them.

Professional Case Management (PCM) is an organization that helps nuclear workers apply for benefits. PCM spokesperson Tim Lerew says some workers die waiting and that’s “not just an occasional occurrence, because a typical claim can be just a few months…but sometimes can drag into years.” Instead of covering medical costs when due, EEOICPA is only taking responsibility for compensation which Lerew translates into, “health care delayed is health care denied.”

PCM will mark the 20th anniversary on October 30, as it does every year, with a remembrance for those who paid with their health and sometimes their life working in the nuclear weapons complex.

See more at coldwarpatriots.org.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Uranium Mining

January 10, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

On Navajo Nation, Uranium Poisoning Found Generations After Mine Closures

Nukewatch Winter Quarterly 2019-2020
By Kelly Lundeen

One of the field researchers for the Navajo Birth Cohort Study was told by a mother that she uses tap water to mix her baby’s formula, a harmless routine for most parents.

This is not the case in the Navajo Nation where uranium was mined to build bombs beginning in 1944, leaving behind mountains of radioactive waste material that is still impacting newborn babies today, 75 years since mining started and over 20 years after the last uranium mine was shuttered.

One-quarter to one-third of Diné (also known as Navajo) women and men and some infants have radioactive uranium levels “that exceed those found in the highest 5% of the US population.” That is the finding of Dr. Loretta Christensen, Chief Medical Officer of the Navajo Area Indian Health Service, who gave preliminary results of an ongoing study at a Congressional hearing Oct. 7 in Albuquerque, New Mexico called “America’s Nuclear Past: Examining the Effects of Radiation in Indian Country.”

In a November 7 interview with KUNM radio, Dr. Christensen discussed some of the study’s early findings. “Obviously we’re very concerned about looking at environmental contamination in moms and babies, because we’re saying, ‘Is this passing on? Is it now showing up in our babies?’ And, unfortunately … it appears it is.”

Uranium mimics the hormone estrogen, which is elevated during pregnancy, and calcium, replacing nourishing calcium with radioactive uranium. It can take years for inhaled uranium to leave the lungs. Ingested uranium will end up in the bone, kidneys and liver, but can be absorbed faster in a newborn’s digestive system. Iron deficiency, which is more common during pregnancy, increases the rate of uranium absorption.
—Graphic is by the Radiation Monitoring Project, and the data is courtesy of Cindy Folkers of Beyond Nuclear.

Health impacts potentially related to radiation exposure in children and identified by the Navajo Birth Cohort Study, included delayed brain development especially around 10 months of age; elevated or increasing levels of uranium contamination through age five; language development delays for children ages three to five; and higher rates of autism spectrum disorder.

Radioactive uranium contamination is not only present, but impacting newborns who are one or two generations away from the time of active uranium mining operations. Dr. Christensen said, “Our hope is that we can mitigate the effects of that by keeping them healthy, by checking kidney function, by helping with childhood development, [and] by screening for cancer so that if it does occur we catch it very early. We do know now we can help in some ways to mitigate worsening of disease by being very proactive.”

Radiation-related health impacts come as no surprise to those living near the more than 500 abandoned uranium mines or the 1,100 uranium contaminated sites on the Navajo Nation alone. Cancer rates doubled in the Navajo Nation between the 1970s and the 1990s. Even the United States Public Health Service conducted an infamous and illegal study in 1950, without consent of Diné uranium miner subjects, that linked the radioactive radon gas in mines to lung cancer. The scandal was described in the 1996 book The Human Radiation Experiments: Final Report of the President’s Advisory Committee. Yet, it wasn’t until 2009 that Congress required a health investigation resulting in the Navajo Birth Cohort Study.

The ongoing study is being conducted simultaneously with the Environmental Protection Agency’s current “Five Year Plan.” The EPA is carrying out its third “Five-Year Plan,” which began in 2008, to investigate and cleanup abandoned uranium mines. But one-third of the mining companies have closed or gone bankrupt, leaving taxpayers holding the bill.

“In Navajo communities the perspective of cleanup of uranium mining is more holistic than the government’s focus on containment. It includes: general community wellness, human health, the health of plants and animals, water quality, and the whole ecosystem that was impacted. That is what we are talking about when we say cleanup,” said Leona Morgan, who works with Diné No Nukes and Nuclear Issues Study Group.

The results of cleanup efforts may be questionable due to revelations highlighted by private investigator Susie Nielson who reported in High Country News October 17. The EPA’s choice for a major $85 million mine contamination assessment contract is TetraTech EC’s parent company. Two of TetraTech EC’s former company supervisors were each sentenced to eight months in prison for falsifying records of clean up at Hunters Point Shipyard in San Francisco after they’d asked subcontractors to submit clean soil samples, replacing potentially radioactive samples.

The Navajo Nation is one of many targets of environmental injustice where the production of nuclear weapons, not to mention the fallout from bomb test detonations, has caused death and disease for generations. Meanwhile, the Navajo Birth Cohort Study continues, and the Navajo Nation has built its first cancer clinic which opened in September.

—KUNM radio, Nov. 7; High Country News, Oct. 17; Dr. Loretta Christensen Indian Health Service Testimony on Radiation in Indian Country, Oct. 7, 2019; Final Report of the President’s Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, Oxford Univ. Press, 1996, p. 358

Filed Under: Environmental Justice, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Uranium Mining

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 5
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Facebook

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
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • 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

© 2023 · Nukewatch