This site will close end of May,2008 NEW BLOG AT: http://todays-nuclear-news.blogspot.com/

Entries from February 10, 2008 - February 16, 2008

County report details risks from uranium mining


County report details risks from uranium mining

A report on uranium mining from a Larimer County-appointed advisory board does not take a stand on how officials should react to a mining operation proposed for Weld County.

The report from the Environmental Advisory Board details the risk from uranium mining in general - including the potential for contamination to the water, land and air.

But it does not recommend a stance for the county commissioners on the controversial Centennial project proposed by Powertech Uranium Corp.

That was not the advisory board's charge, said member David Gilkey, an assistant professor in the Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences at Colorado State University.

The board did not have enough information specific to the Centennial project to determine whether it would adversely affect Larimer County, he said. But the report offers detailed background on uranium mining and its environmental risks.

"There is a lot of good information in there that I think people will find useful," Gilkey said.

Powertech has proposed using an in-situ recovery process, which uses treated water to dissolve and extract uranium from sandstone deep beneath the prairie surface, in an area between Wellington and Nunn.

The company owns mineral rights on more than 5,700 acres and an estimated 4,700 tons of uranium ore. Powertech expects to apply for permits to mine the ore from local, state and federal regulators by the end of the year.

Commissioner Randy Eubanks said he found the report to be thorough and well sourced but hoped it would offer a clear "thumbs up or thumbs down" on the project.

The commissioners need solid information when deciding their position on the Centennial proposal, he said.

"I'd like to see the commissioners take a stance one way or the other and be a voice for Larimer County before the permitting authorities," he said.

The commissioners also should be prepared for the possibility that uranium mining could come to Larimer County, he said.

"We have to have an understanding of the risks," he said.

The report notes the quality of groundwater around the mining site could be adversely affected by the in-situ process, but local municipal water supplies are not likely to be impacted because they draw from watersheds to the west.

It also notes that risks from mining go beyond environmental concerns. Public health and economic factors also must be weighed, according to the report.

The commissioners have scheduled a public hearing on the Centennial project Feb. 25. Powertech and a group organized to fight the proposed mine - Coloradoans Against Resource Destruction, or CARD - will be given time to make presentations, Eubanks said. Members of the public also will be allowed to speak.

Larimer County does not have the authority to block the project.

Posted on Friday, February 15, 2008 at 11:06AM by Registered CommenterGregor Gable in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail | PrintPrint

Nuclear reactors scrutinized

Nuclear reactors scrutinized

Government report claims research facilities not secure; regulatory commission questions findings

Members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission expressed dissatisfaction after the Government Accountability Office released an audit report claiming that the commission has underestimated the risk of terrorist attacks on its licensed nuclear research reactors.

The report said research reactors, though less powerful than commercial nuclear reactors, may be targeted by terrorists who could use the reactors’ fuel to create nuclear weapons or disperse radioactive materials.

The GAO report pointed out that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s security measures are largely based on regulations it had in place before Sept. 11 and places doubt on the commission’s assessments in reflecting the full range of security risks and potential consequences of attacks on research reactors. It recommends that the commission reassess the security of its licensed research reactors.

There are 37 research reactors in the U.S., 27 of which are located on university campuses. UC Davis and UC Irvine are the two UC campuses which have a research reactor.

Members of the NRC said they are not pleased with the message of the report. In a letter addressed to the director of the GAO, the commission launched a series of complaints about what they described as the report’s unbalanced assessment of the commission’s effort to enhance security after Sept. 11,

In the letter, the commission said that much of the report hinges on a sample document prepared by Idaho National Laboratory which did not receive credible technical review. The commission also said the report lacks a sound technical basis or credible intelligence information in support of its recommendations.

Eliot Brenner, director of Public Affairs for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said the report’s credibility is questionable at best.

“It is unbalanced, misrepresents and excludes facts, and fails to acknowledge experts who disagree,” Brenner said.

Brenner emphasizes that the NRC takes security of all nuclear material very seriously, whether a power reactor or research reactor.

“The security for each research reactor is customized on the threat and on the risk. If we sense a change of threat, we would not hesitate to order increased security for the research reactor,” Brenner said.

He said that both the NRC and the labs have made it clear that they are not happy with the report. He called the GAO “fallible.”

“In this case they fail and they know it,” Brenner said. “This is a poor effort and they ought to be embarrassed.”

While UC Irvine also has a research reactor on its campus, George Miller, the UCI nuclear reactor facility director, said the school has enforced sufficient security measures around its reactor.

“We are fully compliant to the NRC’s rules ... and we believe it’s a sensible assessment at this time,” Miller said.

Miller said he believed that the commission has properly assessed the risk situation.

He maintained that his department has substantially raised security measures in the last 10 years as well as after Sept. 11.

“We see this as a battle between GAO and NRC over whose experts make most sense,” Miller said.

David Rapoport, professor emeritus of political science, said terrorists would rarely target nuclear materials.

He said terrorists tend to target places where there are crowds and access is easy, such as a stadium during a football game, an airport or landmarks. They also tend to go for the simplest kind of weapon for maximum mobility.

“It seems that this argument (of the audit report) is largely based on some evidence that terrorists have increased their interest in capacity in gaining access to nuclear materials,” Rapoport said. “Most people who know anything about terrorist activities would not agree with that. It’s not the sort of weapons they normally use or concern (themselves) with.”

Bethany Lyles, a nuclear engineering postdoctoral scholar at UC Berkeley, also said she did not see a high possibility of a terrorist attack on nuclear reactors on university campuses.

“The biggest risk would be someone who has access to the reactor to try to convert the material to useful material,” Lyles said. “It has to be someone who has access, knows what he’s doing. ... This has to be a sophisticated inside job.”

She said while it is possible that terrorists could receive such sophisticated training, she did not think it would be easy for them to enter a lab and convert the material without people noticing since the process is very complex and requires advanced equipment.

Rapoport said it is hard to tell whether the audit report’s warning is valid. He said he attributes any anxiety to what he feels is the government’s excessive concern with weapons of mass destruction.

“Sept. 11 is the result of our obsession with weapons of mass destruction,” he said, saying that the government overlooked other terrorist methods, such as hi-jacking airplanes.

“Before Sept. 11 we were obsessed with the fact that the attack that would occur would be to do with WMD. In all the conferences in Washington, that’s all they talk about.”

Posted on Friday, February 15, 2008 at 11:05AM by Registered CommenterGregor Gable in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail | PrintPrint

Why Has It Taken So Long?

Why Has It Taken So Long?

February 11th, 2008 by Max Lindberg

sproat1.jpgThat’s the question I posed to Ward Sproat, the DOE’s manager of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. His agency is in charge of the Yucca Mountain waste repository project in Nevada.

This is the classic “Not in my back yard” battle, even more understandable since Nevada was the site of nuclear weapons testing beginning in 1951. There were 100 atmospheric tests until they went underground in 1962, when 828 devices were exploded. Testing ceased in 1992, although the Nevada Test Site is still an active research area.

It’s easy to see why Nevadans are tired of the word, “nuclear” and object to the storage of thousands of tons of highly radioactive materials just 100 miles from the state’s major tourist attraction, Las Vegas.

Here is Mr. Sproat with his answer to that question, and other observations about Yucca Mountain and the future.

sproat.mp3

You may recall my interview with Bob Loux about Yucca Mountain and the Nevada point of view. It is available in three parts, listed below.


Yucca Mountain: The Nevada Case Podcast, Part One

Yucca Mountain: The Nevada Case Podcast, Part Two

Yucca Mountain: The Nevada Case Podcast, Part Three

Posted on Friday, February 15, 2008 at 11:03AM by Registered CommenterGregor Gable in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail | PrintPrint

Tumors kill ex-Flats worker before compensation arrives

Tumors kill ex-Flats worker before compensation arrives

Originally published 12:30 a.m., February 15, 2008
Updated 07:08 a.m., February 15, 2008

Douglas DelForge, 46, of Northglenn, takes part in a rally in Lakewood last summer. DelForge, who worked at Rocky Flats for 21 years, died of disfiguring brain tumors on Sunday.

Barry Gutierrez / The Rocky

Douglas DelForge, 46, of Northglenn, takes part in a rally in Lakewood last summer. DelForge, who worked at Rocky Flats for 21 years, died of disfiguring brain tumors on Sunday.

Former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons builder Douglas DelForge died Sunday of disfiguring brain tumors - six years after applying for federal aid and 14 months after being approved, but before being paid for his lost wages.

Under rules for atom bomb makers sickened on the job, the government's delay in paying DelForge, 46, until after his death means the government will never cut that check.

His parents are not eligible for survivor payments, and his wife had long since divorced him, unable to handle his illness.

The Department of Labor did pay another significant part of DelForge's compensation - for permanent disability. That check arrived six days before he died.

Born April 10, 1961, DelForge started working at Rocky Flats at age 20, and stayed 21 years. He worked on radioactive materials through glove boxes and later on decontamination at the site.

He underwent his first surgery for brain tumors at 31 but continued to work at the plant.

His father, Cliff, who worked at Rocky Flats as a radiation monitor for 35 years, suggested to his son that he work there, too. "In retrospect, I couldn't be sorrier," he said.

Doug DelForge loved playing golf. Once, when a distracting comment by his father led to a disastrous score of 17 on one hole, DelForge followed up by hitting four pars and a birdie on the remaining five holes.

When DelForge came down with aggressive meningioma, the brain tumors displaced parts of his brain. He was denied federal aid, however, because they were not considered cancer.

His face twisted and one eyelid fell shut. "His face was animated on one side, and not on the other," said his mother, Sharon. He could smile, but only on one side of his face.

Double vision distorted his golf game and then balance problems robbed him of his swing, his father said.

DelForge continued to work at Rocky Flats until he finally became too disabled in 2003, after his brain swelled and blood clots appeared in his lungs.

"He was a kind man and a quiet fighter," remembered colleague Jennifer Thompson, a leader in the fight for federal aid for sick Rocky Flats workers. "He never gave up and remained positive, warm and caring" despite his struggle, she said.

Cliff DelForge said the government repeatedly refused his son's application for aid for five years, saying his illness was not caused by his job.

"This panel of doctors said there is no evidence radiation has anything to do with meningioma," Cliff DelForge said.

The father finally went on the Internet himself. "It took me less than 30 minutes to find a site that said it was caused by radiation," he said.

He and his wife are not happy that government officials could not manage to pay for their son's lost wages.

"They drag their feet and drag their feet until people die, and they don't have to pay them," Cliff DelForge said.

Shelby Hallmark, head of the Department of Labor aid program, said his Denver office did make a deliberate decision in October to defer payment of DelForge's lost wages. But Hallmark could not immediately determine why.

But he said the law states that only a living worker can be paid for lost wages. Delay in payment until after the worker dies means no payment at all, he confirmed.

"That's very clear, and in this case, sad," Hallmark said.

In December, DelForge's doctor said another tumor had grown to the size of a golf ball. It was impinging on his brain stem - and the doctor didn't know whether to recommend surgery or not.

On the way out of the doctor's office, DelForge, who never complained, who never blamed anyone, let out a deep sigh, his father said. That was the only time his father can remember his son expressing an emotion about his situation.

After having the surgery, DelForge went downhill. He was sent home with his parents, who tried to feed him through a tube in his stomach. Thick liquids clogged in the tube. Diluting the liquid food doubled its volume, and that was too much.

"We were doing all this stuff we had not a clue about," said his mother.

Fluids backed up Doug's esophagus into his lungs, and he could not breathe.

Back in the hospital, this occurred several times, until DelForge's brain died on Sunday.

Doug DelForge had always wanted to donate his organs. "Somebody got his liver and his eyes," his mother said proudly.

DelForge is survived by his parents of Northglenn and his sister, Terri Shaver, of St. George, Utah.

A memorial service is scheduled for 2 p.m. Friday at the Northwest Church of Christ, 5255 West 98th Ave., Westminster, followed by a reception at the Blue Parrot Restaurant, 640 Main St., Louisville.

In lieu of flowers, the family is requesting donations in his name be sent to The Donor Alliance Inc., 720 S. Colorado Blvd., Suite 800N, Denver, CO 80246- 9987.

Posted on Friday, February 15, 2008 at 10:54AM by Registered CommenterGregor Gable in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail | PrintPrint

Nine Mile Point site confirmed by UniStar for potential reactor

Washington (Platts)--12Feb2008
UniStar officially told NRC that Nine Mile Point will be the site for a
potential new reactor in a combined construction permit-operating license, or
COL, application that the Constellation Energy-EDF Group joint venture plans
to submit in the fourth quarter of this year.
In the February 8 letter and a February 12 press release, UniStar Nuclear
Energy reaffirmed that the reactor, if built, would be a US Evolutionary Power
Reactor. The "reference" plant for that Areva design is Calvert Cliffs-3;
UniStar submitted part of the Calvert Cliffs COL application last year and
plans to turn in the rest next month, the press release said.
Posted on Thursday, February 14, 2008 at 11:30AM by Registered CommenterGregor Gable in | CommentsPost a Comment | EmailEmail | PrintPrint
Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next 5 Entries