From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #291 Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest Sender: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk abolition-usa-digest Friday, April 14 2000 Volume 01 : Number 291 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 14:35:26 -0500 From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: (abolition-usa) RE: [abolition-caucus] MOX is NOT dead in U.S.! The DOE is paying the Russians to ship about 5 ounces of weapons grade Plutonium to Canada as part of a MOX Program. During our hearing last Friday in Federal District Court in Kalamazoo, we produced a scientist who under oath and subject to cross-examination testified that this could kill about 1 million people in the event of an accident. The DOE did not dispute that number. They just argued that an accident was not going to happen. Despite Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, etc. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Avenue Champaign, Ill. 61820 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu - -----Original Message----- From: Hisham Zerriffi [mailto:hisham@ieer.org] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 2:30 PM To: Boyle, Francis; 'abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com'; NucNews@onelist.com Cc: Boyle, Francis; ''du-list@egroups.com' '; ''abolition-caucus@egroups.com' '; ''abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com' '; ''a-days@motherearth.org' '; ''NUKENET@envirolink.org' '; ''TP2000' '; ''Scottish CND' '; ''JUSTWATCH-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU' ' Subject: [abolition-caucus] MOX is NOT dead in U.S.! MOX is not dead!!!! These are two entirely separate programs. One is dealing with spent reactor fuel from research reactors and the other is dealing with plutonium from weapons. This decision not to reprocess the spent research reactor fuel containing highly enriched URANIUM has nothing to do with whether surplus weapons PLUTONIUM is used in a reactor or not. This is not a decision to forgo MOX (a mixture of uranium and plutonium fuel) in US reactors or to forego MOX in Russian reactors. Please do not lead people to think that the efforts to change the direction of the disposition program can be slackened. Hisham Zerriffi Senior Scientist p.s. One more point of clarification. The DOE is paying for a test of Russian plutonium in CANDU reactors in Canada. The program is nowhere near the stage of making a decision to proceed with full scale MOX use in Canada. This is not to minimize the implications and impact of the Russian and American Pu tests in Canada (FYI, I grew up mostly in Canada and am outraged at their actions), I think it important to be absolutely clear as to what is going on or we risk doing a disservice to ourselves. At 11:54 AM 4/13/2000 -0500, Boyle, Francis wrote: >Yes, but Richardson and the DOE are still paying Russia to ship weapons >grade plutonium to Canada for use in a MOX Program there. fab. > >Francis A. Boyle >Law Building >504 E. Pennsylvania Avenue >Champaign, Ill. 61820 >217-333-7954 (voice) >217-244-1478 (fax) >fboyle@law.uiuc.edu > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ellen Thomas [mailto:prop1@prop1.org] >Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:35 AM >To: NucNews@onelist.com >Subject: (abolition-usa) MOX is dead in U.S.! > > >Energy Department Opts Against Reusing Spent Nuclear Fuel > >By Cat Lazaroff, Environment News Service, April 12, 2000 >http://ens.lycos.com/ens/apr2000/2000L-04-12-06.html > > >WASHINGTON, DC, April 12, 2000 (ENS) - The Department of Energy has decided >that spent nuclear fuel should be melted down for permanent disposal, rather >than reprocessed for reuse as fuel or other products. The decision, which >environmentalists say will prove safer than reuse of the fuel, is also being >hailed as a victory for nuclear non-proliferation efforts. > >Energy Secretary Bill Richardson (All photos courtesy DOE) > >The policy was established in a report being issued publicly by the >Department of Energy (DOE) this week. The "Savannah River Site Spent Fuel >Management Final Environmental Impact Statement" evaluates alternatives for >the safe and efficient management of spent nuclear fuel from power plants >that is stored at or scheduled to be received by the DOE's Savannah River >Site in South Carolina. > >The DOE had been considering a process in which the spent fuel would be >reprocessed, separating the wastes into highly enriched uranium and a large >volume of liquid radioactive waste. Critics feared the uranium could be used >to build nuclear weapons, hindering U.S. and international moves toward >disarmament and nonproliferation. In addition, the disposal of radioactive >liquid waste is considered more hazardous and difficult than disposal of >solid wastes. > >Instead, the DOE is leaning toward melting down the wastes and mixing them >with nonreactive substances, forming metal ingots that the agency says can >be safely stored in permanent repositories. The process also makes the >uranium in the wastes unsuitable for making bombs. > >"The melt-and-dilute technology under development at SRS will further our >efforts to reduce the danger from weapons of mass destruction," Richardson >said in a statement. "Also, it will reduce waste generation and provide a >cost effective, long term way to manage aluminum based spent fuel." > >The DOE's choice of a new technology which does not reprocess the spent fuel >avoids adding to the stockpile of nuclear weapons material, said the Nuclear >Control Institute (NCI) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). > >"Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson deserves congratulations for making >sure that this important new policy was actively pursued and approved," said >NCI Executive Director Tom Clements. "Now he must act decisively to make >sure there is an adequate budget to implement the policy and get the job >done." > > Spent fuel rods underwater at a receiving basin for off-site fuels at the >Savannah River Site > > The decision covers highly enriched uranium spent fuels from research >reactors in the U.S. and similar wastes imported from other countries for >disposal. Other forms of spent fuel covered in the Environmental Impact >Statement will be reprocessed, but both NCI and NRDC view the decision on >the highly enriched uranium spent fuel as an essential step in hastening the >end of reprocessing in the U.S. and an important example for other nations. > >"This decision sends a positive non-proliferation signal internationally and >is a critical step toward the closing of reprocessing facilities at SRS," >said NRDC Staff Attorney David Adelman. "These plants were built as an >integral part of fissile material production for weapons during the Cold >War, and they are no longer needed. Long term funding for melt-and-dilute >must still be assured to keep the shutdown of these plants on track." > >Of the 68 tonnes of fuel covered in the Environmental Impact Statement, >about 48 tonnes - 60 percent of the mass, 97 percent of the volume of the >wastes - would be subjected to the melt and dilute treatment. The processed >ingots would be destined for eventual shipment to the planned permanent >repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. > >Melt-and-dilute involves the melting in an oven of the aluminum-clad highly >enriched uranium research reactor spent fuel assemblies, with conversion of >the melted material into low-enriched uranium ingots. In order to >demonstrate the new technology, the DOE plans to melt highly enriched >uranium spent fuel in an oven soon to be installed in the old L-Reactor >building at the Savannah River Site. > >The full-scale treatment facility is expected to be operational in the >L-Reactor building at Savannah in fiscal year 2008. L-Reactor was >permanently closed in the late 1980's after decades of plutonium and tritium >production for weapons. > >Spent nuclear fuel pools like this hold tons of reactor wastes at Savannah >River Site > >DOE's Savannah River Site, located near Aiken, South Carolina, currently >stores a large quantity of foreign and domestic spent fuel in pools and is >scheduled to continue receiving such material from numerous research >reactors around the world until 2009. The United States originally supplied >the bomb-grade uranium fuel to reactors in over 30 countries and numerous >U.S. universities, but after realizing the proliferation risks of such >supply began a program to convert the wastes into forms incapable of being >used for weapons. > >DOE's concerted effort to convert research reactors to low enriched uranium >ingots, known as the Reduced Enrichment in Research and Test Reactors >(RERTR), has proved to be one of the U.S. government's most successful >non-proliferation initiatives. Under the RERTR program, DOE agreed to accept >spent highly enriched uranium fuel for disposition in the U.S. in order to >reduce risks of its diversion overseas for weapons. > >NCI and NRDC praised Secretary Richardson for fulfilling a commitment made >in the 1996 by one of his predecessors, Hazel O'Leary, to develop >non-reprocessing technologies for management of the returning spent fuel for >environmental and non-proliferation reasons. > >"We congratulate Secretary Richardson for honoring DOE's earlier commitment >to the American people to pursue non-reprocessing disposal options for this >bomb-grade spent fuel," said Clements. "As the U.S. moves to treat >weapons-grade nuclear material as waste rather than as a valuable commodity >to be introduced into commerce, foreign states will be encouraged to do the >same." > > The H-Canyon corridor at the Savannah River Site - one of the two remaining >DOE reprocessing facilities > > The U.S. terminated commercial reprocessing of spent fuel in 1972 but has >yet to present a firm timetable for closing the two remaining DOE >reprocessing facilities, F- and H-Canyons, both located at the Savannah >River Site. > >"From an environmental perspective, the people of South Carolina and Georgia >should welcome this decision by DOE, but they deserve to be presented a >timetable for closure of the dirty and dangerous reprocessing facilities," >said Clements. > >The DOE will issue a record of decision sometime after the end of a 30 day >public comment period beginning Friday. The final Environmental Impact >Statement will be published in the Federal Register on Friday. > > ___________________________________________________ > >NucNews Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm > >Today's Newspapers: http://prop1.org/nucnews/links.htm > >Submit Letter/Notice/Article: mailto:prop1@prop1.org > (NucNews-Editor) >About NucNews: http://prop1.org/nucnews/nucnews.htm > >E-Mail Archive: http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews > >Subscribe: mailto:prop1@prop1.org >(NucNews-Subscribe) > >Here are excellent e-mail news resources (free, by subscription, for >educational purposes, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.): > >DOE Watch - doewatch@onelist.com | >http://members.aol.com/doewatch >Downwinders - downwinders@onelist.com | >http://downwinders@onelist.com >EnviroNews - environews@envirolink.org|http://www.envirolink.org/environews >Planet Ark - mailto:anna@planetark.org| > > >http://www.planetark.org/news/ >Radbull (Radiation Bulletin for Activists) - mailto:rogerh@energy-net.org > > > Distributed without payment for research and educational > purposes only, by subscription, and archived for the use of all, > in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107. > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >25% Off All Prints! >Buy one today at Corbis.com >http://click.egroups.com/1/3357/1/_/91925/_/955644853/ >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >To subscribe to the Abolition Global Caucus, send an email from the account you wish to be subscribed to: "abolition-caucus-subscribe@egroups.com" > > >Do not include a subject line or any text in the body of the message. > ***************************************************************** Hisham Zerriffi Senior Scientist Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) 6935 Laurel Ave. Suite 204, Takoma Park, MD 20912 Phone: (301) 270-5500 Fax: (301) 270-3029 E-mail: hisham@ieer.org Web: http://www.ieer.org ***************************************************************** - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1.6 Million Digital Images! Download one Today from Corbis.com http://click.egroups.com/1/3356/1/_/91925/_/955654277/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To subscribe to the Abolition Global Caucus, send an email from the account you wish to be subscribed to: "abolition-caucus-subscribe@egroups.com" Do not include a subject line or any text in the body of the message. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 13:31:14 -0700 From: "David Crockett Williams" Subject: (abolition-usa) DOE Strategic Plan Apr24 extension, deadline for public comments A boon for "Clean Energy Now!" Campaign?: To my surprise, my request for extension of deadline for submission of public comments on DOE Strategic Plan draft has been granted via below email this morning from DOE extending public comments deadline to April 24, 2000. This is a unique window of opportunity to submit to DOE, and via plan below for the public record accessible via internet to anyone including media and political candidates, your suggestions for changes in DOE strategy in the 21st Century regarding energy policies and priorities; nuclear power, weapons, and waste, National security considerations, DOE research in forefront sciences of many kinds, etc. The Strategic Plan draft may be viewed at http://www.doe.gov/strategic_plan and your public comments submissions to Strategic_Plan@hq.doe.gov should also be copied for the public record and referencing in this writer's final public comments submission of April 24, 2000, per deadline extension offered in below post, to ensure best DOE and public consideration of your input. Although this extension seems to be specifically directed to me (perhaps due to my complaint that as a commenter on DOE Comprehensive National Energy Strategy (CNES) of 1998 I was not notified of prior 31Mar deadline for comments on Strategic Plan except by coincidental receipt of third party forwarding on Apr7 about deadline's prior extension to Apr 10), I will reference/include in my Apr 24 submission all postings copied (cc) to strategic-plan@egroups.com which list archive I set up this morning so submissions copied to it may also be viewed by the public on an ongoing basis at http://www.egroups.com/group/strategic-plan If you have already copied to me re: public comments submissions on DOE Strategic Plan emailed before today, I have forwarded them to list above where my submissions of Apr7 and Apr 10 are also already posted. This additional time until April 24th may offer chance for additional significant and valuable ideas/inputs. David Crockett Williams Science in Society and Public Policy list http://www.egroups.com/group/dcwilliams (my DOE Strategic Plan submissions* to date are also at this url) From: "Bob Emond" To: Cc: Subject: Re: *by10Apr!! Comment on DOE Energy Strategic Plan2000 Date: Thursday, April 13, 2000 9:07 AM Thank you for your [*]note. We agree to extend the comment period for your comments to April 24, 2000. In pursuit of our goal to seek public comment we issued a press release February 24, 2000; notified our key stakeholders and other key interest groups (approximately 1400) by mail; placed a notice on the DOE homepage for the duration of the comment period; and used other public forums (for example the newsletter you received). The success of our outreach is measured in part by the several thousand downloads of the draft plan on our web-site. In this number are several hundred visits by the public which were simply not possible until the recent availability of this technology. The Comprehensive National Energy Strategy of 1998 is fully integrated into the draft plan. Anyone who contributed to that public process has already made significant contributions to the draft plan. We have a continuing interest in your comments and look forward to your response by April 24. Thanks Bob =================== David Crockett Williams gear2000@lightspeed.net GLOBAL EMERGENCY ALERT RESPONSE http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000 Global Peace Walk 2000 http://www.globalpeacenow.org http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/gpw.html Updates 415-267-1877 -- Voicemail 415-863-2084 http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/schedule.html SCHEDULE & contacts USCampaign: Williams-Peltier for US Pres/VP gear2000@onemain.com http://www.egroups.com/group/williams-peltier The Vision of Paradise on Earth http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/vision.html **Support HR 2545: Global Nuclear Disarmament & Economic Conversion Act Details & Email: http://prop1.org/prop1/letter.htm Sign letters to senators http://prop1.org/prop1/letter.htm#senate and Representatives http://prop1.org/prop1/letter.htm#letter Easy index to email Congress & Media http://congress.nw.dc.us/wnd (copy & paste email letters to media and Congress) An Agenda for Peace http://www.angelfire.com/on/GEAR2000/agenda.html - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 15:57:21 -0500 From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: But Quintupled In Canada: (abolition-usa) MOX is dead in U.S.! In a typical bait-and-switch operation, US DOE just announced that they are quintupling the amount of weapons grade plutonium shipped from Russia to Canada at the behest of the United States. Anyone for five million dead people? fab. This piece was broadcast this morning at 8:00AM. Available at http://cbc.ca/clips/ram-audio/mclauchlin_wr000413.ram - --------------------------------- CBC Radio News Canada may accept more plutonium than initially agreed to WebPosted Thu Apr 13 13:25:41 2000 MONTREAL - An American official says there is more plutonium from Russia on its way to Canada - five times more than originally expected. The weapons-grade plutonium is to be processed at AECL's nuclear reactor in Chalk River, Ontario. It's part of an experiment involving Canada, the United States and Russia. The U.S. department of energy is paying Canada to take in plutonium that would have been destined for American or Russian nuclear weapons to see if it can be disposed of as reactor fuel. The American shipment arrived in January, 120 grams of plutonium. The terms of the agreement call for the same amount to be shipped in by the Russians, 120 grams. Now the head of the American office in charge of the program, Laura Holgate, says Russia will ship not 120 grams, but five times that amount. "I don't have the total figures but it's roughly 600 grams of plutonium," Holgate said. But that's not the figure Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. is using. Company spokesperson David Lyle says, "It's not going to be significantly different from the shipment that occurred from the U.S." But it is a significant difference, according to the Canadian Environmental Law Association. Theresa McClennahan is legal counsel for the association. She says the increase in the amount of plutonium is illegal. "We would say no, it's not legal to amend the plan in this way. And this decision to take so much more fuel is also an extremely significant change to the original plan." McClennahan says the changes to the plan should be the subject of public discussion, or at least parliamentary debate. She says this apparent increase in the amount of fuel increases the hazard to which Canadians will be exposed and she expects some interested group will want to challenge it in court. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Avenue Champaign, Ill. 61820 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu - -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:54 AM To: 'abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com'; NucNews@onelist.com Cc: Boyle, Francis; ''du-list@egroups.com' '; ''abolition-caucus@egroups.com' '; ''abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com' '; ''a-days@motherearth.org' '; ''NUKENET@envirolink.org' '; ''TP2000' '; ''Scottish CND' '; ''JUSTWATCH-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU' ' Subject: RE: (abolition-usa) MOX is dead in U.S.! Yes, but Richardson and the DOE are still paying Russia to ship weapons grade plutonium to Canada for use in a MOX Program there. fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Avenue Champaign, Ill. 61820 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu - -----Original Message----- From: Ellen Thomas [mailto:prop1@prop1.org] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:35 AM To: NucNews@onelist.com Subject: (abolition-usa) MOX is dead in U.S.! Energy Department Opts Against Reusing Spent Nuclear Fuel By Cat Lazaroff, Environment News Service, April 12, 2000 http://ens.lycos.com/ens/apr2000/2000L-04-12-06.html WASHINGTON, DC, April 12, 2000 (ENS) - The Department of Energy has decided that spent nuclear fuel should be melted down for permanent disposal, rather than reprocessed for reuse as fuel or other products. The decision, which environmentalists say will prove safer than reuse of the fuel, is also being hailed as a victory for nuclear non-proliferation efforts. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson (All photos courtesy DOE) The policy was established in a report being issued publicly by the Department of Energy (DOE) this week. The "Savannah River Site Spent Fuel Management Final Environmental Impact Statement" evaluates alternatives for the safe and efficient management of spent nuclear fuel from power plants that is stored at or scheduled to be received by the DOE's Savannah River Site in South Carolina. The DOE had been considering a process in which the spent fuel would be reprocessed, separating the wastes into highly enriched uranium and a large volume of liquid radioactive waste. Critics feared the uranium could be used to build nuclear weapons, hindering U.S. and international moves toward disarmament and nonproliferation. In addition, the disposal of radioactive liquid waste is considered more hazardous and difficult than disposal of solid wastes. Instead, the DOE is leaning toward melting down the wastes and mixing them with nonreactive substances, forming metal ingots that the agency says can be safely stored in permanent repositories. The process also makes the uranium in the wastes unsuitable for making bombs. "The melt-and-dilute technology under development at SRS will further our efforts to reduce the danger from weapons of mass destruction," Richardson said in a statement. "Also, it will reduce waste generation and provide a cost effective, long term way to manage aluminum based spent fuel." The DOE's choice of a new technology which does not reprocess the spent fuel avoids adding to the stockpile of nuclear weapons material, said the Nuclear Control Institute (NCI) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson deserves congratulations for making sure that this important new policy was actively pursued and approved," said NCI Executive Director Tom Clements. "Now he must act decisively to make sure there is an adequate budget to implement the policy and get the job done." Spent fuel rods underwater at a receiving basin for off-site fuels at the Savannah River Site The decision covers highly enriched uranium spent fuels from research reactors in the U.S. and similar wastes imported from other countries for disposal. Other forms of spent fuel covered in the Environmental Impact Statement will be reprocessed, but both NCI and NRDC view the decision on the highly enriched uranium spent fuel as an essential step in hastening the end of reprocessing in the U.S. and an important example for other nations. "This decision sends a positive non-proliferation signal internationally and is a critical step toward the closing of reprocessing facilities at SRS," said NRDC Staff Attorney David Adelman. "These plants were built as an integral part of fissile material production for weapons during the Cold War, and they are no longer needed. Long term funding for melt-and-dilute must still be assured to keep the shutdown of these plants on track." Of the 68 tonnes of fuel covered in the Environmental Impact Statement, about 48 tonnes - 60 percent of the mass, 97 percent of the volume of the wastes - would be subjected to the melt and dilute treatment. The processed ingots would be destined for eventual shipment to the planned permanent repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Melt-and-dilute involves the melting in an oven of the aluminum-clad highly enriched uranium research reactor spent fuel assemblies, with conversion of the melted material into low-enriched uranium ingots. In order to demonstrate the new technology, the DOE plans to melt highly enriched uranium spent fuel in an oven soon to be installed in the old L-Reactor building at the Savannah River Site. The full-scale treatment facility is expected to be operational in the L-Reactor building at Savannah in fiscal year 2008. L-Reactor was permanently closed in the late 1980's after decades of plutonium and tritium production for weapons. Spent nuclear fuel pools like this hold tons of reactor wastes at Savannah River Site DOE's Savannah River Site, located near Aiken, South Carolina, currently stores a large quantity of foreign and domestic spent fuel in pools and is scheduled to continue receiving such material from numerous research reactors around the world until 2009. The United States originally supplied the bomb-grade uranium fuel to reactors in over 30 countries and numerous U.S. universities, but after realizing the proliferation risks of such supply began a program to convert the wastes into forms incapable of being used for weapons. DOE's concerted effort to convert research reactors to low enriched uranium ingots, known as the Reduced Enrichment in Research and Test Reactors (RERTR), has proved to be one of the U.S. government's most successful non-proliferation initiatives. Under the RERTR program, DOE agreed to accept spent highly enriched uranium fuel for disposition in the U.S. in order to reduce risks of its diversion overseas for weapons. NCI and NRDC praised Secretary Richardson for fulfilling a commitment made in the 1996 by one of his predecessors, Hazel O'Leary, to develop non-reprocessing technologies for management of the returning spent fuel for environmental and non-proliferation reasons. "We congratulate Secretary Richardson for honoring DOE's earlier commitment to the American people to pursue non-reprocessing disposal options for this bomb-grade spent fuel," said Clements. "As the U.S. moves to treat weapons-grade nuclear material as waste rather than as a valuable commodity to be introduced into commerce, foreign states will be encouraged to do the same." The H-Canyon corridor at the Savannah River Site - one of the two remaining DOE reprocessing facilities The U.S. terminated commercial reprocessing of spent fuel in 1972 but has yet to present a firm timetable for closing the two remaining DOE reprocessing facilities, F- and H-Canyons, both located at the Savannah River Site. "From an environmental perspective, the people of South Carolina and Georgia should welcome this decision by DOE, but they deserve to be presented a timetable for closure of the dirty and dangerous reprocessing facilities," said Clements. The DOE will issue a record of decision sometime after the end of a 30 day public comment period beginning Friday. The final Environmental Impact Statement will be published in the Federal Register on Friday. ___________________________________________________ NucNews Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm Today's Newspapers: http://prop1.org/nucnews/links.htm Submit Letter/Notice/Article: mailto:prop1@prop1.org (NucNews-Editor) About NucNews: http://prop1.org/nucnews/nucnews.htm E-Mail Archive: http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews Subscribe: mailto:prop1@prop1.org (NucNews-Subscribe) Here are excellent e-mail news resources (free, by subscription, for educational purposes, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.): DOE Watch - doewatch@onelist.com | http://members.aol.com/doewatch Downwinders - downwinders@onelist.com | http://downwinders@onelist.com EnviroNews - environews@envirolink.org|http://www.envirolink.org/environews Planet Ark - mailto:anna@planetark.org| http://www.planetark.org/news/ Radbull (Radiation Bulletin for Activists) - mailto:rogerh@energy-net.org Distributed without payment for research and educational purposes only, by subscription, and archived for the use of all, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 19:14:20 -0400 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fail Safe op-ed Dear Friends, Here's an op-ed piece I've sent in to USA Today. NOTHING'S CHANGED SINCE “FAIL SAFE” by Alice Slater This week an estimated 20 million Americans watched “Fail Safe”, the first live-performance TV drama in 39 years based on a 1964 best-seller, which painted a horrifying tale of accidental nuclear war. Broadcast in old-fashioned black and white, and using a rusty Cold War scenario of the 1950’s, modern viewers could hardly be faulted for perceiving the harrowing spectacle as a quaint period piece. Computer failure transmitting faulty information causes a fleet of United States bombers to proceed on a mission to obliterate Moscow. To prevent the destruction of the world, the US President, on the hotline to Moscow, devises a plan with the Soviet President to destroy New York City in a tit-for-tat response, which then allowed both nations to refrain from massive retaliation and the incineration of the planet and all life on earth. Yet today, the world is just as insecure as in those bygone days of “Fail Safe”, when the US and Soviet Union practiced “mutual assured destruction” during the height of East-West confrontation. Indeed, as recently as 1995, President Yeltsin actually unpacked the Russian nuclear “suitcase”, when his military could not readily determine that the launch of a Norwegian weather satellite was not a US nuclear attack. Yeltsin had only five minutes to decide on a response. While the “Fail Safe” airborne bombardiers had several hours to be recalled in 1950’s time, in today’s hi-tech world, a long-range strategic missile, accidentally launched, would be impervious to a changed command, should an error be discovered. There are 36,000 nuclear weapons on the planet with 5,000 of them poised at hair-trigger alert, ready to be fired in minutes. Although the nuclear weapons states pledged, in the 1970 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), to get rid of their nuclear weapons, in return for a promise by non-nuclear weapons states not to acquire them, there is no evidence that they are willing to “pursue negotiations in good faith” for nuclear disarmament” as promised in the treaty. The NPT 2000 millennial review will take place at the UN later this month Since the treaty was extended in 1995, India and Pakistan went overtly nuclear, and Israel moved a step closer to being a declared nuclear power as it openly debated nuclear weapons policy in the Knesset. In the wake of NATO expansion, the Kosovo bombing, and US plans to abrogate the ABM treaty and build the “son of Star Wars”, both China and Russia have been rattling their nuclear sabers. Russian President Vladimir Putin announced he will modernize Russia’s nuclear arsenal and has rescinded Russia's no first use policy. China is also upgrading its nuclear weapons. In the midst of these dangerous developments, the US Senate rejected the Comprehensive Test Ban treaty (CTBT) The US rejection of the CTBT particularly undermines the NPT. In 1995, the 1970 NPT’s 25-year term was up, and with little progress towards disarmament, its extension was in doubt. The US prevailed upon the signatories to renew the treaty, promising to champion a test ban as evidence of its good faith commitment to disarmament--a measure which the US Senate refused to take. Now, after 30 years with no effective nuclear disarmament in place, a growing number of non-nuclear states--including 36 with nuclear power capability but no overt weapons programs--are asking why they should not go the route of India and Pakistan. “The objective of nuclear non-proliferation is not helped by the fact that the nuclear weapons states continue to insist that those weapons in their hands enhance security while in the hands of others they are a threat to world peace,” said UN Secretary General Kofi Annan earlier this month. “If we were making steady progress towards disarmament, this situation would be less alarming. Unfortunately the reverse is true.” With the growing crisis in US relations with Russia and China, it would be grievously misleading for the public to view the rain of destruction and terror in “Fail Safe” as merely a closed chapter in history. Unfortunately, the “launch-on-warning” status of 5,000 US and Russian nuclear weapons, mounted on missiles that, once fired, cannot be recalled, demonstrates that we must do much more to insure the safety of our planet from nuclear destruction. The NPT conference this month will be an opportunity for the world to reduce the nuclear peril and begin earnest negotiations for a nuclear-free-world. Alice Slater is President of the Global Resource Action Center and a founder of Abolition 2000, a global network working for a treaty to eliminate nuclear weapons. Alice Slater Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE) 15 East 26th Street, Room 915 New York, NY 10010 tel: (212) 726-9161 fax: (212) 726-9160 email: aslater@gracelinks.org http://www.gracelinks.org GRACE is a member of Abolition 2000, a global network for the elimination nuclear weapons. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:54:01 -0500 From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: RE: But Quintupled In Canada: (abolition-usa) MOX is dead in U.S .! Draft Articles on the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, as revised by the International Law Commission through 1991, U.N. Doc. A/46/405 (1991), 30 ILM 1554(1991):" Article 26: Wilful and Severe Damage to the Environment. An individual who willfully causes or orders the causing of widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment shall, on conviction thereof, be sentenced {to...}." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Avenue Champaign, Ill. 61820 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu - -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 3:57 PM To: Boyle, Francis; 'abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com'; 'NucNews@onelist.com' Cc: ''du-list@egroups.com' '; ''abolition-caucus@egroups.com' '; ''abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com' '; ''a-days@motherearth.org' '; ''NUKENET@envirolink.org' '; ''TP2000' '; ''Scottish CND' '; ''JUSTWATCH-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU' ' Subject: But Quintupled In Canada: (abolition-usa) MOX is dead in U.S.! In a typical bait-and-switch operation, US DOE just announced that they are quintupling the amount of weapons grade plutonium shipped from Russia to Canada at the behest of the United States. Anyone for five million dead people? fab. This piece was broadcast this morning at 8:00AM. Available at http://cbc.ca/clips/ram-audio/mclauchlin_wr000413.ram - --------------------------------- CBC Radio News Canada may accept more plutonium than initially agreed to WebPosted Thu Apr 13 13:25:41 2000 MONTREAL - An American official says there is more plutonium from Russia on its way to Canada - five times more than originally expected. The weapons-grade plutonium is to be processed at AECL's nuclear reactor in Chalk River, Ontario. It's part of an experiment involving Canada, the United States and Russia. The U.S. department of energy is paying Canada to take in plutonium that would have been destined for American or Russian nuclear weapons to see if it can be disposed of as reactor fuel. The American shipment arrived in January, 120 grams of plutonium. The terms of the agreement call for the same amount to be shipped in by the Russians, 120 grams. Now the head of the American office in charge of the program, Laura Holgate, says Russia will ship not 120 grams, but five times that amount. "I don't have the total figures but it's roughly 600 grams of plutonium," Holgate said. But that's not the figure Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. is using. Company spokesperson David Lyle says, "It's not going to be significantly different from the shipment that occurred from the U.S." But it is a significant difference, according to the Canadian Environmental Law Association. Theresa McClennahan is legal counsel for the association. She says the increase in the amount of plutonium is illegal. "We would say no, it's not legal to amend the plan in this way. And this decision to take so much more fuel is also an extremely significant change to the original plan." McClennahan says the changes to the plan should be the subject of public discussion, or at least parliamentary debate. She says this apparent increase in the amount of fuel increases the hazard to which Canadians will be exposed and she expects some interested group will want to challenge it in court. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Avenue Champaign, Ill. 61820 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu - -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:54 AM To: 'abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com'; NucNews@onelist.com Cc: Boyle, Francis; ''du-list@egroups.com' '; ''abolition-caucus@egroups.com' '; ''abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com' '; ''a-days@motherearth.org' '; ''NUKENET@envirolink.org' '; ''TP2000' '; ''Scottish CND' '; ''JUSTWATCH-L@LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU' ' Subject: RE: (abolition-usa) MOX is dead in U.S.! Yes, but Richardson and the DOE are still paying Russia to ship weapons grade plutonium to Canada for use in a MOX Program there. fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Avenue Champaign, Ill. 61820 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu - -----Original Message----- From: Ellen Thomas [mailto:prop1@prop1.org] Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2000 11:35 AM To: NucNews@onelist.com Subject: (abolition-usa) MOX is dead in U.S.! Energy Department Opts Against Reusing Spent Nuclear Fuel By Cat Lazaroff, Environment News Service, April 12, 2000 http://ens.lycos.com/ens/apr2000/2000L-04-12-06.html WASHINGTON, DC, April 12, 2000 (ENS) - The Department of Energy has decided that spent nuclear fuel should be melted down for permanent disposal, rather than reprocessed for reuse as fuel or other products. The decision, which environmentalists say will prove safer than reuse of the fuel, is also being hailed as a victory for nuclear non-proliferation efforts. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson (All photos courtesy DOE) The policy was established in a report being issued publicly by the Department of Energy (DOE) this week. The "Savannah River Site Spent Fuel Management Final Environmental Impact Statement" evaluates alternatives for the safe and efficient management of spent nuclear fuel from power plants that is stored at or scheduled to be received by the DOE's Savannah River Site in South Carolina. The DOE had been considering a process in which the spent fuel would be reprocessed, separating the wastes into highly enriched uranium and a large volume of liquid radioactive waste. Critics feared the uranium could be used to build nuclear weapons, hindering U.S. and international moves toward disarmament and nonproliferation. In addition, the disposal of radioactive liquid waste is considered more hazardous and difficult than disposal of solid wastes. Instead, the DOE is leaning toward melting down the wastes and mixing them with nonreactive substances, forming metal ingots that the agency says can be safely stored in permanent repositories. The process also makes the uranium in the wastes unsuitable for making bombs. "The melt-and-dilute technology under development at SRS will further our efforts to reduce the danger from weapons of mass destruction," Richardson said in a statement. "Also, it will reduce waste generation and provide a cost effective, long term way to manage aluminum based spent fuel." The DOE's choice of a new technology which does not reprocess the spent fuel avoids adding to the stockpile of nuclear weapons material, said the Nuclear Control Institute (NCI) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson deserves congratulations for making sure that this important new policy was actively pursued and approved," said NCI Executive Director Tom Clements. "Now he must act decisively to make sure there is an adequate budget to implement the policy and get the job done." Spent fuel rods underwater at a receiving basin for off-site fuels at the Savannah River Site The decision covers highly enriched uranium spent fuels from research reactors in the U.S. and similar wastes imported from other countries for disposal. Other forms of spent fuel covered in the Environmental Impact Statement will be reprocessed, but both NCI and NRDC view the decision on the highly enriched uranium spent fuel as an essential step in hastening the end of reprocessing in the U.S. and an important example for other nations. "This decision sends a positive non-proliferation signal internationally and is a critical step toward the closing of reprocessing facilities at SRS," said NRDC Staff Attorney David Adelman. "These plants were built as an integral part of fissile material production for weapons during the Cold War, and they are no longer needed. Long term funding for melt-and-dilute must still be assured to keep the shutdown of these plants on track." Of the 68 tonnes of fuel covered in the Environmental Impact Statement, about 48 tonnes - 60 percent of the mass, 97 percent of the volume of the wastes - would be subjected to the melt and dilute treatment. The processed ingots would be destined for eventual shipment to the planned permanent repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Melt-and-dilute involves the melting in an oven of the aluminum-clad highly enriched uranium research reactor spent fuel assemblies, with conversion of the melted material into low-enriched uranium ingots. In order to demonstrate the new technology, the DOE plans to melt highly enriched uranium spent fuel in an oven soon to be installed in the old L-Reactor building at the Savannah River Site. The full-scale treatment facility is expected to be operational in the L-Reactor building at Savannah in fiscal year 2008. L-Reactor was permanently closed in the late 1980's after decades of plutonium and tritium production for weapons. Spent nuclear fuel pools like this hold tons of reactor wastes at Savannah River Site DOE's Savannah River Site, located near Aiken, South Carolina, currently stores a large quantity of foreign and domestic spent fuel in pools and is scheduled to continue receiving such material from numerous research reactors around the world until 2009. The United States originally supplied the bomb-grade uranium fuel to reactors in over 30 countries and numerous U.S. universities, but after realizing the proliferation risks of such supply began a program to convert the wastes into forms incapable of being used for weapons. DOE's concerted effort to convert research reactors to low enriched uranium ingots, known as the Reduced Enrichment in Research and Test Reactors (RERTR), has proved to be one of the U.S. government's most successful non-proliferation initiatives. Under the RERTR program, DOE agreed to accept spent highly enriched uranium fuel for disposition in the U.S. in order to reduce risks of its diversion overseas for weapons. NCI and NRDC praised Secretary Richardson for fulfilling a commitment made in the 1996 by one of his predecessors, Hazel O'Leary, to develop non-reprocessing technologies for management of the returning spent fuel for environmental and non-proliferation reasons. "We congratulate Secretary Richardson for honoring DOE's earlier commitment to the American people to pursue non-reprocessing disposal options for this bomb-grade spent fuel," said Clements. "As the U.S. moves to treat weapons-grade nuclear material as waste rather than as a valuable commodity to be introduced into commerce, foreign states will be encouraged to do the same." The H-Canyon corridor at the Savannah River Site - one of the two remaining DOE reprocessing facilities The U.S. terminated commercial reprocessing of spent fuel in 1972 but has yet to present a firm timetable for closing the two remaining DOE reprocessing facilities, F- and H-Canyons, both located at the Savannah River Site. "From an environmental perspective, the people of South Carolina and Georgia should welcome this decision by DOE, but they deserve to be presented a timetable for closure of the dirty and dangerous reprocessing facilities," said Clements. The DOE will issue a record of decision sometime after the end of a 30 day public comment period beginning Friday. The final Environmental Impact Statement will be published in the Federal Register on Friday. ___________________________________________________ NucNews Archives: http://prop1.org/nucnews/briefslv.htm Today's Newspapers: http://prop1.org/nucnews/links.htm Submit Letter/Notice/Article: mailto:prop1@prop1.org (NucNews-Editor) About NucNews: http://prop1.org/nucnews/nucnews.htm E-Mail Archive: http://www.onelist.com/archive/NucNews Subscribe: mailto:prop1@prop1.org (NucNews-Subscribe) Here are excellent e-mail news resources (free, by subscription, for educational purposes, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107.): DOE Watch - doewatch@onelist.com | http://members.aol.com/doewatch Downwinders - downwinders@onelist.com | http://downwinders@onelist.com EnviroNews - environews@envirolink.org|http://www.envirolink.org/environews Planet Ark - mailto:anna@planetark.org| http://www.planetark.org/news/ Radbull (Radiation Bulletin for Activists) - mailto:rogerh@energy-net.org Distributed without payment for research and educational purposes only, by subscription, and archived for the use of all, in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ End of abolition-usa-digest V1 #291 *********************************** - To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe $LIST" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.