Archive for the ‘News’ Category

As Historic Flooding Grips Texas, Groups Demand Nuclear Plant Be Shut Down

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Jon Queally, staff writer
Common Dreams

"This storm and flood is absolutely without precedent even before adding the possibility of a nuclear accident that could further imperil millions of people who are already battling for their lives."

STP Nuclear Plant
The South Texas Project nuclear power facility in Bay City, Texas could be under extreme threat from historic flood waters, groups warned on Tuesday. (Photo: STP)

As record-breaking rainfall and unprecedented flooding continue to batter the greater Houston area and along the Gulf coast on Tuesday, energy watchdogs groups are warning of "a credible threat of a severe accident" at two nuclear reactors still operating at full capacity in nearby Bay City, Texas.

Three groups—Beyond Nuclear, South Texas Association for Responsible Energy, and the SEED Coalition—are calling for the immediate shutdown of the South Texas Project (STP) which sits behind an embankment they say could be overwhelmed by the raging flood waters and torrential rains caused by Hurricane Harvey.

"With anticipated flooding of the Colorado River, the nuclear reactors should be shut down now to ensure safety."
—Karen Hadden, SEED Coalition "Both the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the STP operator have previously recognized a credible threat of a severe accident initiated by a breach of the embankment wall that surrounds the 7,000-acre reactor cooling water reservoir," said Paul Gunter, director of the Beyond Nuclear’s Reactor Oversight Project, in a statement by the coalition on Tuesday.

The groups warn that as Harvey—which on Tuesday was declared the most intense rain event in U.S. history—continues to dump water on the area, a breach of the embankment wall surrounding the twin reactors would create "an external flood potentially impacting the electrical supply from the switchyard to the reactor safety systems." In turn, the water has the potential to "cause high-energy electrical fires and other cascading events initiating a severe accident leading to core damage." Even worse, they added, "any significant loss of cooling water inventory in the Main Cooling Reservoir would reduce cooling capacity to the still operating reactors that could result in a meltdown."

With the nearby Colorado River already cresting at extremely high levels and flowing at 70 times the normal rate, Karen Hadden, director of SEED Coalition, warned that the continue rainfall might create flooding that could reach the reactors. "There is plenty of reserve capacity on our electric grid," she said, "so we don’t have to run the reactors in order to keep the lights on. With anticipated flooding of the Colorado River, the nuclear reactors should be shut down now to ensure safety."

Last week, the STP operators said that safety for their workers and local residents was their top concern, but that they would keep the plant operating despite the approaching storm.

Susan Dancer, president of the South Texas Association for Responsible Energy, said that as residents in Bay City—herself included—were being forced to leave their homes under manadatory evacaution orders, it makes no sense to keep the nuclear plant online.

"Our 911 system is down, no emergency services are available, and yet the nuclear reactors are still running. Where is the concern for employees and their families? Where is the concern for public safety? This is an outrageous and irresponsible decision," declared Dancer. "This storm and flood is absolutely without precedent even before adding the possibility of a nuclear accident that could further imperil millions of people who are already battling for their lives."

As Harvey hovers over the coastal region, heavy rains are expected to persist for days even as the storm system creeps toward to Louisiana in the east.

But no matter how remote the possibility, said Gunter, "it’s simply prudent that the operator put this reactor into its safest condition, cold shutdown."

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

Fair Use Notice
This document contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. SEED Coalition is making this article available in our efforts to advance understanding of ecological sustainability, human rights, economic democracy and social justice issues. We believe that this constitutes a "fair use" of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Texas sues feds — including Rick Perry — for failing to license nuclear waste facility

March 16, 2017

JIM MALEWITZ
The Texas Tribune

AUSTIN, Texas (TRIBUNE) – Texas is trying to take the federal government to task for failing to find a permanent disposal site for thousands of metric tons of radioactive waste piling up at nuclear reactor sites across the country.

In a lawsuit filed Tuesday night, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton accuses U.S. agencies of violating federal law by failing to license a nuclear waste repository in Nevada — a plan delayed for decades amid a highly politicized fight.

Paxton’s petition asks the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to force the Nuclear Regulatory Committee to cast an up-or-down vote on the Yucca Mountain plan. It also seeks to prevent the federal Department of Energy from spending billions of dollars in fees collected from utilities on efforts to find another disposal site before such a vote.

“For decades, the federal government has ignored our growing problem of nuclear waste,” Paxton said in a statement Wednesday. “The NRC’s inaction on licensing Yucca Mountain subjects the public and the environment to potential dangerous risks from radioactive waste. We do not intend to sit quietly anymore.”

Paxton filed the lawsuit just two weeks after former Texas Gov. Rick Perry was sworn in as the agency’s leader. And it comes as Texas’ only radioactive waste site — run by Waste Control Specialists in Andrews County — is asking the NRC to let it temporarily store the nation’s spent nuclear fuel.

About 78,000 metric tons of spent uranium rods are stored at operating or closed reactor sites throughout the country, with 2,610 metric tons in Texas. Those sites, mostly meant to be temporary, are filling up.

Though the nuclear energy industry insists that temporary waste disposal — either in pools or sealed in dry casks of metal or concrete — is safe and environmentally sound, it has long agreed that sealing the waste in geologic formations deep underground boosts protection against terrorist attacks and natural disasters, such as the earthquake and tsunami that rocked Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station in 2011.

For more than 20 years, Washington saw Yucca Mountain as the solution, and the federal government spent tens of millions of dollars preparing it to accept the waste. But Nevada’s congressional delegation — led by now-retired U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, a Democrat — has thwarted the project. And, facing significant political pressure, President Barack Obama’s administration abandoned the Yucca Mountain plans by failing to fund an NRC review.

“The NRC was never able to carry out its task to determine whether that site was safe,” said Dale Klein, associate vice chancellor for research at the University of Texas at Austin and a former NRC chairman under George W. Bush and Obama. “It was really frustrating that we were not able to do our job because of political reasons.”

Since 1983, utility ratepayers across the country chipped in billions of dollars to fund a waste repository — including $815 million collected from Texans. With interest, Texans have contributed $1.5 billion to the fund, managed by the Department of Energy.

A 2013 federal appeals court ruling halted the collections, and the fund now has an unspent balance of $40 billion, according to Paxton’s lawsuit, which opens with a comment from Perry during his confirmation hearing as energy secretary:

“My hope of this committee and administration is that we, finally after 35 years of kicking the can for whatever reason, we can start … moving to temporary or permanent siting of this nuclear waste.”

A Perry spokesman did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.

During Perry’s tenure as governor, Texas became home to one of the nation’s few facilities that accept low-level nuclear waste. Since 2012, Waste Control Specialists, a company formerly owned by the late Dallas billionaire and Republican donor Harold Simmons, has disposed of contaminated tools, building materials and protective clothing, among other items, from shuttered reactors and hospitals.

That site in Andrews County grew rapidly during Perry’s final years in office. Over the objection of environmental groups, the company is seeking a licenseto temporarily store spent reactor fuel — high-level nuclear waste.

If Paxton’s suit does not force President Donald Drumpf’s administration to restart the Yucca Mountain plans, some observers say the federal government might more closely eye the Andrews County site — a move that would require Congress to change that 1987 law naming Yucca Mountain as the nation’s repository.

Asked whether Paxton’s lawsuit had anything to do with Waste Control Specialists’ expansion plans, Kayleigh Lovvorn, his spokeswoman, said her office had no comment.

Chuck McDonald, a spokesman for Waste Control Specialists, said the company had not yet read the lawsuit, “therefore, we don’t know if it will have an impact on our project or not.”

But he added: “WCS has always been supportive of a permanent repository, and we believe a consolidated interim storage facility is needed as part of an integrated waste management system in the U.S.”

Karen Hadden, executive director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition, a group fighting the Andrews County site’s expansion, agreed with Paxton’s criticism of the Yucca Mountain process — “a waste of money,” she said. But Hadden worries that the lawsuit could force the government to permit a site ill-equipped to protect public health and safety.

“It’s really important that we get a permanent repository in place that will isolate this waste so we don’t have cancer effects or deaths from contamination today or into the future,” Hadden said. “My concern is that [Paxton] has another Texas permanent disposal site in mind.”

Disclosure: The Harold Simmons Foundation and the University of Texas at Austin have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune. A complete list of Tribune donors and sponsors can be viewed here.

Fair Use Notice
This document contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. SEED Coalition is making this article available in our efforts to advance understanding of ecological sustainability, human rights, economic democracy and social justice issues. We believe that this constitutes a "fair use" of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Public Citizen: Andrews nuke waste site an open target for terrorism

Midland County Dems react to Conaway’s support of storage bill

February 9, 2017

By Trevor Hawes thawes@mrt.com
Midland Reporter-Telegram


Tom "Smitty" Smith, director of PublicCitizen Texas office, speaks Thursday 02-09-17 during a press conference about how citizens can make their voice heard concerning the action of Waste Control Specialists in Andrews County changing to a high level nuclear waste depository. Tim Fischer/Reporter-Telegram

February 9, 2017

A recent letter from Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Conaway about the proposed high-level nuclear waste storage site in Andrews has prompted Midland County Democrats to act in hopes of a better solution, and they’re reaching out for help.

The Midland County Democratic Party held a press conference at the DoubleTree hotel Thursday and brought with them activist heavyweights Tom "Smitty" Smith, longtime director of Public Citizen Texas, and Karen Hadden, president of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition, better known as SEED.

"This is not just a Democratic thing to be concerned about," MCDP Chairman David Rosen said. "We invite our Republican brothers and sisters, as well as the unaffiliated. A waste dump 50 miles from Midland is not a good idea."

Conaway issued a press release on Jan. 12 with comments in support of H.R. 474, the Interim Consolidated Storage Act. The bill seeks to amend the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 "to authorize the Secretary of Energy to enter into contracts for the storage of certain high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, take title to certain high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, and make certain expenditures from the Nuclear Waste Fund," according to the bill’s summary.

A few companies are seeking to house high-level nuclear waste from dozens of decommissioned nuclear power plants that currently sit at reactor sites and from those to be decommissioned in the future. At issue is the Department of Energy’s inaction on taking possession of the waste and putting it into permanent storage, which by law it must do.

One company that seeks to take the waste for temporary storage while the Department of Energy finds a permanent home for the dangerous material is Waste Control Specialists, which already had a low-level radioactive waste storage facility west of Andrews. WCS wants to house the waste above ground while the Department of Energy finds a solution.

H.R. 474 would help move the process along, with the relocation of waste beginning in as little as five years. "This legislation allows the Department of Energy to cut through the red tape and enter into contracts with these licensed facilities, such as the one in Andrews, ensuring that nuclear waste will be properly stored until a permanent site is established," Conaway said in his press release.

WCS initially wants to take 5,000 metric tons of high-level nuclear waste for above-ground storage, according to previous Reporter-Telegram reports. Its facility will have capacity for up to 40,000 metric tons.

Smith said above-ground storage has "risks beyond what any community ought to take." He said that the waste should be buried underground, citing preliminary studies dating back to the 1980s that show perhaps the site with the best and safest geology is Washington, D.C. However, storage at the nation’s capital isn’t "politically feasible," he said.

Smith also said above-ground storage is dangerous because it’s an open target for terrorist attacks.

"We have a lot of concern about the potential of terrorist attacks," he told the Reporter-Telegram before the press conference. "This waste is basically going to be sitting on a big parking lot and visible to anyone who uses Google Maps. This is just putting a big nuclear target on West Texas and eastern New Mexico. Any terrorist worth his salt who wants to take a good shot at the United States would aim a rocket right at those locations."

Smith had no comment when asked during the press conference why waste storage casks shown to survive a battery of tests in the late 1970s, including impacts on a "rocket-powered train," were no longer viable but permanent site storage research from the early 1980s was.

Hadden said the canisters needed to be more robust because they will contain as much plutonium as the bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki, Japan. Codenamed "Fat Man," the bomb was dropped on the city on Aug. 9, 1945. About 22,000 people died on the first day and 17,000 more perished in the four months after, according to the World Nuclear Association.

"Forty-two square miles of land could be uninhabitable from an accident," she said. Hadden said the steel casing for canisters in the U.S. are about a half-inch thick; in Europe, they’re up to 10 inches thick.

Ultimately, Smith and Hadden argued that temporary centralized nuclear waste storage wasn’t necessary. They said the current sites are secure and that what’s really needed is a safe, secure and permanent storage site underground.

Smith also expressed worry that temporary storage sites might wind up as de facto permanent sites because the federal government will no longer have incentive to actively find a forever home for the waste.

"I don’t think (the federal government) will officially name Andrews a permanent disposal site, but it will never move because nobody wants it," he said before the event.

Hadden and Smith are taking their message to Andrews on Saturday and were in Eunice, New Mexico, on Wednesday. The mini tour is setting up for U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission public meetings next week. The first is 7-10 p.m. MST Monday at the Lea County Event Center, 5101 N. Lovington Highway, in Hobbs, New Mexico. The second is 7-10 p.m. Wednesday at the James Roberts Center, 855 State Highway 176, in Andrews.

"One of the opportunities within a democracy is to make your opinions heard," Smith said. "Democracy is a contact sport, and this is your opportunity to have contact with the people who make these decisions and tell them what you think about (putting high-level nuclear waste) in West Texas and the consequences for tens of thousands of years."

Like Trevor on Facebook and follow him on Twitter at @HowdyHawes.

—-BE HEARD

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold two public comment hearings next week, where residents can weigh in on the proposal to store high-level nuclear waste in West Texas and eastern New Mexico. The schedule is as follows:

  • Hobbs, New Mexico.: 7-10 p.m. MST Monday at the Lea County Event Center, 5101 N. Lovington Highway.
  • Andrews: 7-10 p.m. CST Wednesday at the James Roberts Center, 855 State Highway 176.
Fair Use Notice
This document contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. SEED Coalition is making this article available in our efforts to advance understanding of ecological sustainability, human rights, economic democracy and social justice issues. We believe that this constitutes a "fair use" of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Debate held on bringing high-level radioactive waste to west Texas

Feb 10, 2017

CBS7 News

ANDREWS — Could your backyard be the new home to a nuclear waste site? Andrews is waiting to be licensed as a temporary holding site for radioactive waste.

Tom "Smitty" Smith, director of the Public Citizen's Texas office speaking at hearing

Tom "Smitty" Smith, director of the Public Citizen’s Texas office spoke to the concerns of bringing a high-level radioactive site in west Texas in a meeting Thursday.

According to Waste Control Specialist, "it’ll bring in somewhere around 40 or 50 new jobs and normally these are fairly high paying jobs," Vice President, Tom Jones said, "right now there’s already over 100 places around the county that this stuff is already being stored."

While one side argues bringing in a radioactive waste plant will help the economy grow a non-profit environmentalist group disagrees — citing safety over salaries.

"Putting high level radioactive waste out in west Texas is a really bad idea," non-profit group Public Citizen director Tom "Smitty" Smith said.

Both sides are going head-to-head about a proposed nuclear disposal site 30 miles west of Andrews. It’s an idea that lifelong resident of west Texas and mother, Delilah Cantu, is concerned about, "this is my home. This is what I want to protect."

From health concerns to even being worried about falling properly value, Cantu is working with the Public Citizen non-profit group called public citizen, whose most recent purpose is to stop the licensing of a radioactive waste plant in west Texas.

"WCS promises this is going to be a temporary sight but that depends on congress ever being responsible enough to ever create a long term repository," "Smitty" Smith said.

WCS the government will immediately take over the waste project but there’s no telling how many decades the plant will be in west Texas, "I think folks are scared of the unknown. This is material people have been dealing with for the last 50 or 60 years," Jones said, but that doesn’t ease Cantu’s worries her concerns keep growing like this one, "the remapping of the aquifer in Andrews," Cantu said.

According to WCS, Andrews is not on top of an aquifer, "we’ve had 640 borings out there. We’ve got over 400 wells dry. We can prove we are. It over a drinking source."

Other concerns like terroristic threats were posed but WCS said that doesn’t pose a threat.

Public hearing will be next week:

  • Feb. 13 in Hobbs, NM at 7 p.m. at Lea Country Event Center.
  • Feb. 15 in Andrews at 7 p.m. at James Robert Center.

Visit NoNuclearWasteAqui.org and WCSTexas.com for more information.

Fair Use Notice
This document contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. SEED Coalition is making this article available in our efforts to advance understanding of ecological sustainability, human rights, economic democracy and social justice issues. We believe that this constitutes a "fair use" of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Plan to bring high-level nuclear waste to West Texas gains steam

Feds begin formal review, public hearings scheduled

February 3, 2017

By Corey Paul cpaul(at)oaoa.com
Odessa American

Federal regulators will begin a series of public meetings this month after formally accepting Waste Control Specialists‘ application last week to begin storing spent nuclear fuel at a dump in Andrews County.

The approval was expected — WCS notified the Nuclear Regulatory Commission nearly two years ago of the company’s plans before filing the application in April. But the detailed review the NRC will now begin comes at a time when the company is poised to gain an ally in former Gov. Rick Perry, who awaits confirmation as energy secretary.

WCS is seeking to store up to 5,000 metric tons of spent of spent nuclear fuel from commercial reactors throughout the U.S. That would potentially increase to 40,000 metric tons over the 40 year temporary storage permit.

The company’s goal is to break ground in 2020.

The NRC set a target of late 2019 for making a licensing decision. That review will follow two tracks, one focused on safety and the other on environmental issues, according to a statement from the NRC.

The first public meeting in Andrews, where the local government supports the plan, will be Feb. 15.

"It’s all coming together," spokesman Chuck McDonald said, saying the company was encouraged by the NRC’s handling of the license application and a DOE request in the fall for recommendations from private companies wanting to store nuclear waste. The DOE said such private facilities "represent a potentially promising alternative to federal facilities for consolidated interim storage."

"It’s a long process, but those two critical steps are in process now," McDonald said.

The NRC is a licensing authority technically independent of the Department of Energy, which President Drumpf tapped Perry to lead. But the DOE oversees management of nuclear waste storage, and the agency would be the sole customer of WCS if its licensing application is granted. In his new role, Perry could direct utilities to ship the spent nuclear fuel to WCS.

"We are encouraged by the fact that Gov. Perry is familiar with what is taking place in Andrews," McDonald said. "While he was governor, he took steps to address a problem that no one else in the country was able to address. He’s got a record of addressing the issue and we think that’s all positive."

It was during Perry’s tenure that the state passed legislation approving the low-level radioactive waste facility WCS operates. And the late owner of the company, Harold Simmons, was one of Perry’s top donors.

The project is driven by a lack of a permanent disposal site after Congress in 2010 nixed funding for the proposed site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Today, spent fuel is kept at nuclear reactors, while the federal government continues to take in money from utilities into a multi-billion dollar fund for a permanent disposal site.

Several environmental groups oppose the plan to store the high-level waste in Andrews, instead arguing it should remain stored at nuclear reactors.

"Rather than store this radioactive waste on an exposed parking lot in West Texas, it should remain at the power plant where it was generated or nearby until a scientifically viable isolation system for permanent disposal can be designed and built," said Karen Hadden, the director of the the Sustainable Energy & Economic Development Coalition.

Hadden argued storing high level waste in Andrews County would threaten the underlying aquifer.

But even before WCS notified the NRC of the company’s intent to apply to store high-level nuclear waste, Andrews County commissioners passed a resolution in support of the plan.

In 2009, Andrews County voters approved by a razor-thin margin a $75 million bond to help WCS build the low-level radioactive waste disposal site. But the proposal to store the high-level waste would not require such a vote with WCS not seeking financial help from the county.

To date, the county has received more than $ 8 million in direct payments from disposal fees for the low-level waste that WCS buried at the site in the rural county since opening in 2012, according to figures provided by the company.

But WCS still operates at a loss.

"We are not receiving the amount of shipments that we have anticipated," McDonald said. "It’s showing steady improvement, but it’s not profitable yet."

Winning approval to build an interim disposal site for high-level nuclear waste could mean a windfall of billions of dollars. Andrews County and the State of Texas would share in that windfall.

A WCS competitor has also filed a letter of intent to open an interim storage facility in Lea County, N.M.

Tom "Smitty" Smith of Public Citizen’s Texas office argued that transporting high-level nuclear was by rail is dangerous.

The waste would be shipped by train because of its heavy weight. The spent fuel would already be sealed in canisters before it is shipped, limiting handling to moving canisters from transportation to storage casks, according to the NRC.

"Radioactive waste has been safely transported in the United States for 50 years now, quite often by rail," McDonald said. "And there has never been a single accident that resulted in the release of any radioactive materials.”

Before making a licensing decision, the NRC will produce a report evaluating safety and an environmental impact study. And interested parties can challenge the commission’s findings.

"If the application meets our regulations, we’re legally bound to issue a license," Mark Lombard, the NRC’s director of the division of spent fuel management wrote in an April blog post. "We don’t consider whether there’s a need for the facility or whether we think it’s a good idea."

Contact Corey Paul on Twitter @OAcrude on Facebook at OA Corey Paul or call 432-333-7768.

Fair Use Notice
This document contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. SEED Coalition is making this article available in our efforts to advance understanding of ecological sustainability, human rights, economic democracy and social justice issues. We believe that this constitutes a "fair use" of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
REPORTS