March, 16 2009, 02:18pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tom Clements, 803-834-3084
Nick Berning, 202-222-0748
DOE's Plans to Use Plutonium Fuel (MOX) Jolted by Duke Energy's Withdrawal From Program
Future of MOX Program Again in Doubt as DOE Now Has No Nuclear Reactors to Use the Controversial Fuel
COLUMBIA, S.C.
The troubled plan by the Department of Energy (DOE) to use nuclear
fuel made from surplus plutonium was recently dealt a grave blow with
the loss of all reactors that had been expected to use the fuel.
Duke Energy Corporation has allowed its contract to use the
controversial mixed oxide fuel (MOX) in four Duke reactors in North and
South Carolina to lapse, throwing into question the survivability of a
program that has stumbled from one problem to another over the last
decade.
In its annual filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) on February 27, 2009, Duke revealed that the contract to use MOX
had "automatically terminated on December 1, 2008" after a failed
attempt to renegotiate the contract with Shaw AREVA MOX Services (MOX
Services), contracted by DOE to carry out the MOX program. Duke has
said it "is interested in receiving a future proposal from MOX Services
for the use of MOX fuel," but right now the planned use in the Catawba
and McGuire reactors has been terminated.
Due to this negative turn of events for the misguided and costly MOX
program, the public interest organization Friends of the Earth is again
calling for the program to be terminated once and for all.
"Given the lack of reactors to use the plutonium fuel and ongoing
problems over the last decade with this program, it's past time for
Congress to pull the plug and halt construction of the MOX plant at the
Savannah River Site," said Tom Clements, Southeastern Nuclear Campaign
Coordinator with Friends of the Earth in Columbia, South Carolina.
A DOE official has informed Friends of the Earth that DOE is
speaking with three utilities about possible MOX use and that Duke may
reenter into negotiations. It is believed that the Tennessee Valley
Authority could be interested, though, like other utilities, it would
have to conduct a lengthy MOX test to validate use of the fuel.
"The events around the loss of the Duke reactors should serve as a
red flag to other utilities that their participation in the troubled
plutonium program will be fraught with risks and obstacles," Clements
said.
Friends of the Earth and the Union of Concerned Scientists revealed
in August 2008 that a test of MOX fuel in Duke's Catawba-1 reactor had
failed due to abnormal fuel assembly performance and the that the "lead
test assemblies" (LTAs) were pulled from the reactor after only two of
the necessary three 18-month irradiation cycles. The failure of this
test, the groups claimed, left DOE without the required information
necessary to certify with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the
performance of the fuel, being tested for the first time with weapons
plutonium.
It is unknown what impact the failed LTA test has had on Duke's
decision to withdraw from the MOX program but DOE's lack of
guaranteeing a reliable schedule for MOX delivery, due to the failed
MOX test and continuous delays in the project, have likely caused Duke
to reconsider use of the fuel. Such fuel made from high-quality weapons
plutonium has never been used before.
The test MOX fuel had been manufactured with U.S. weapons plutonium
shipped from the Los Alamos National Laboratory via Charleston, S.C. to
a now-closed French MOX plant (Cadarche), making a repeat of the
54-month irradiation test difficult. Irradiated fuel pins were
evidently removed from failed MOX test assembles stored in the Catawba
spent fuel pool and shipped to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory for
testing. Information on analysis of the test fuel is not available. No
matter which reactors use MOX, the test will have to be repeated for
three 18-month cycles, causing further uncertainty, delays, and cost
escalation.
Despite the lack of reactors to use the plutonium fuel, MOX Services
is continuing to use taxpayer dollars to construct a $5-billion factory
at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina to make the fuel
from 34 metric tons of "surplus" weapons-grade plutonium.
On March 4, 2009, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) release
a report entitled Department of Energy: Contract and Project Management
Concerns at the National Nuclear Security Administration and Office of
Environmental Management (https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-406T),
which underscores potential problems in reliably delivering MOX fuel to
a utility. Concerning the MOX plant at SRS, GAO stated that "the
project's schedule, in addition to other problems, does not adhere to a
key practice that is fundamental to having a sufficiently reliable
schedule-specifically, MFFF project staff have not conducted a risk
analysis on their current schedule using statistical techniques. ...
Consequently, NNSA cannot adequately state its level of confidence in
meeting the MFFF project's completion date, and NNSA's schedule for the
project therefore may not be reliable." Thus, utilities are nervous if
their need for a reliable schedule for fuel delivery can be met.
Friends of the Earth has also been informed by a DOE official that
DOE offered Duke conventional enriched uranium (LEU) fuel if it could
not meet a MOX delivery schedule but negotiations for that LEU fuel did
not produce positive results before the Duke MOX contract expired on
December 1.
Notes:
Duke Energy Corporation "Form 10-K" annual report filed with the SEC, Feb. 27, 2009
https://idea.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326160/000119312509041096/d10k.htm
"In 1999, Duke Energy Carolinas entered into a contract with Shaw
AREVA MOX Services (MOX Services; formerly Duke COGEMA Stone &
Webster, LLC) to purchase mixed-oxide fuel for use in the McGuire and
Catawba nuclear reactors. Under this contract, beginning in 2007, MOX
Services would fabricate batches of mixed-oxide fuel from stockpiles of
plutonium derived from surplus weapons at a facility under construction
at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Savannah River site in Aiken,
South Carolina. Mixed oxide fuel is similar to conventional uranium
fuel. Following review and approval by the NRC, four MOX fuel lead
assemblies, fabricated in France, were irradiated for two fuel cycles
(approximately three years) in Unit 1 of the Catawba Nuclear Station.
In 2008, Duke Energy Carolinas and MOX Services engaged in discussions
to renegotiate the terms of the contract prior to its expiration on
December 1, 2008. The parties were unable to reach agreement and the
contract automatically terminated on December 1, 2008. Duke Energy
Carolinas has communicated to MOX Services that it continues to support
the objectives of the surplus weapons disposition program and is
interested in receiving a future proposal from MOX Services for the use
of MOX fuel." (page 14)
FOE-UCS news release on Failed MOX test in Dukes Catawba Reactor, August 4, 2008:
https://www.foe.org/nuclear-fuel-test-failure-raises-concerns
and
https://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/nuclear-fuel-test-failure-0140....
UCS-FOE 4-page Backgrounder of August 4, 2008 on Failed MOX Test in
Duke's Catawba Reactor - "AREVA Fuel Assembly Problems Doom DOE
Plutonium Fuel Test" - available on request
For Duke's June 10, 2008 report to the NRC, with first public
mention of failed MOX test, go to the NRC's ADAMS digital library and
search for "ML081650181" at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html.
For an April 2008 AREVA presentation that discusses the abnormal
fuel assembly growth problem, go to NRC's ADAMS digital library and
search for "ML081300390."
Shaw Areva MOX Services October 18, 2008 solicitation "To All
Nuclear Utilities in the USA" for more reactors to use MOX available on
request.
Friends of the Earth fights for a more healthy and just world. Together we speak truth to power and expose those who endanger the health of people and the planet for corporate profit. We organize to build long-term political power and campaign to change the rules of our economic and political systems that create injustice and destroy nature.
(202) 783-7400LATEST NEWS
To Push for Bold Treaty, Greenpeace Unveils Biden's Plastic Legacy Monument
"He can be the president who put an end to the plastic pollution crisis, or he can be the one who let it spiral out of control."
Mar 28, 2024
Inspired by Atlas, who in Greek mythology carried the heavens on his shoulders, Greenpeace installed a 15-foot monument outside the U.S. Capitol on Thursday to pressure the Biden administration to support an ambitious global plastics treaty.
President Joe Biden "has the chance to cement a lasting legacy: He can be the president who put an end to the plastic pollution crisis, or he can be the one who let it spiral out of control," Greenpeace oceans director John Hocevar said in a statement. "We're calling on him to stand up to plastic polluters like Exxon and Dow and put us on a greener and healthier path."
The third round of treaty talks ended in Kenya late last year with little progress—largely thanks to fossil fuel and chemical lobbyists along with allied governments. The next round of negotiations is set to be held in Canada next month.
The "Biden's Plastic Legacy" monument features the president kneeling and holding up an Earth full of plastic. The base has a written message: "Biden, the world's in your hands. Is this your plastic legacy?"
"Plastic pollution is everywhere, impacting every aspect of our lives. It affects our health, harms our communities, and fuels the climate crisis."
The statue's unveiling ceremony included remarks from Dr. Leo Trasande, a world-renowned environmental health researcher at New York University, and Jo Banner, who lives in Louisiana's Cancer Alley and co-directs the Descendants Project, an environmental justice group.
"The communities of color that live among the plastic manufacturers are first in line for the toxic mix of pollution they produce," said Banner. "Our health, bodies, and communities matter. We refuse to be treated as a mere checkmark on a list of concerns, and we cannot continue to be sacrificial zones."
"We need President Biden to truly listen to our needs and help create a strong global plastics treaty that protects communities like ours," she added. "We must ensure that Cancer Alley is confined to the past, not a part of the future we gift our children."
Trasande noted that in addition to the public health argument for cleaning up the plastic industry, there's an economic one.
"The chemicals found in plastics cost our economy hundreds of billions of dollars because of increases in disease and disability," the doctor said. "The easiest way to stop these diseases is to address plastic production, and a strong global treaty is essential, for people here in the U.S. and around the world."
Research has repeatedly shown the pervasiveness of plastic pollution. A January study found that there are 240,000 plastic particles in the average liter of bottled water. Last September, researchers discovered microplastics in clouds, potentially "contaminating nearly everything we eat and drink via 'plastic rainfall.'"
A 2022 Greenpeace report revealed that U.S. households "generated an estimated 51 million tons of plastic waste" the previous year, and the vast majority ended up in landfills or as pollution.
"Plastic pollution is everywhere, impacting every aspect of our lives. It affects our health, harms our communities, and fuels the climate crisis," Greenpeace campaigner Kate Melges said Thursday.
"The global plastics treaty is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create a cleaner, safer planet," Melges argued. "President Biden must rise to this moment by supporting a strong plastics treaty that prioritizes human health, cuts production, and ensures a just transition for workers and communities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Justice Is Delayed' as Judges OK Rigged South Carolina Map for Elections
"I'm disappointed it appears 30,000 people lost their political voice and nobody seems to care," said one Democratic congressional candidate from the affected district.
Mar 28, 2024
Voting rights defenders on Thursday decried a federal panel's
decision to let South Carolina use a congressional map the three judges found to be racially gerrymandered in this year's primary and general elections due to the U.S. Supreme Court's delayed resolution of the case.
The three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for South Carolina in Columbia ruled last August that "race was the predominant motivating factor" in the Republican-controlled state Legislature's design of the 1st Congressional District "and that traditional districting principles subordinated to race."
Their ruling, which ordered the redrawing of the map, noted that "Charleston County was racially gerrymandered and over 30,000 African Americans were removed from their home district."
"Make no mistake—these discriminatory maps are a direct attempt to suppress Black voices ahead of a consequential election."
In their new decision, the judges acknowledged the awkward predicament of ordering the use of an unconstitutional map.
"But with the primary election procedures rapidly approaching, the appeal before the Supreme Court still pending, and no remedial plan in place, the ideal must bend to the practical," they asserted.
Brenda Murphy, president of the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, said: "Make no mistake—these discriminatory maps are a direct attempt to suppress Black voices ahead of a consequential election. We will not stand idly by as the rights of thousands of South Carolinians continue to be overlooked."
"The court's ruling today, further delaying these proceedings, continues to tip the scale of justice during a crucial moment in our democracy in an undemocratic attempt to sway the outcome of the upcoming election," Murphy added. "We must strive for a system where every voice is heard and every vote counts, free from the stain of discrimination."
Last October, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case, which was filed in 2021 by the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and voter Taiwan Scott. They are represented by the ACLU, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the ACLU of South Carolina, Boroughs Bryant LLC, Arnold & Porter, and the General Counsel's Office of the NAACP.
As Democracy Docket noted Thursday: "The parties asked the Supreme Court for a decision by January 1, 2024. Nearly three months later, the court still hasn't ruled on the case, creating a dire situation for congressional candidates as the candidate filing period started on March 16 and will end on Monday."
Joshua Douglas, a professor at the University of Kentucky Rosenberg College of Law, said on social media that "someone should write an article about the number of times jurisdictions have been allowed to use an illegal map because there's 'not enough time' to create a fair, legal one."
Douglas noted states where this has occurred, including Alabama, Louisiana, Ohio, North Carolina, "and now South Carolina."
South Carolina primary voters will head to the polls on June 11.
The 1st Congressional District is represented by Congresswoman Nancy Mace, a Republican. On Thursday, she toldThe Post and Courier that the judges' ruling "makes sense."
"It's only fair candidates know what the lines are," Mace said. "For us, I just want to know what constituents I'm serving."
Michael B. Moore, a Democrat running for the seat, called the decision "regrettable."
"I'm disappointed it appears 30,000 people lost their political voice," he said, "and nobody seems to care."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Weak Biden Endangered Species Rules a 'Massive Missed Opportunity'
"Imperiled plants and animals do not have the time for half-measures, since extinction is forever," one expert warned.
Mar 28, 2024
While welcoming efforts by President Joe Biden's administration to undo Trump-era damage to endangered species protections, conservationists warned Thursday that three new federal rules are inadequate, given the world's worsening biodiversity crisis.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, which proposed the rules last June, said that they will "restore important protections for species and their habitats; strengthen the processes for listing species, designating of critical habitat, and consultation with other federal agencies; and ensure a science-based approach that will improve both agencies' ability to fulfill their responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)."
The Center for Biological Diversity—which had blasted the Trump administration for taking a "wrecking ball" to the decades-old law—praised the agencies for removing barriers to designating unoccupied areas as critical habitat as well as for restoring the "blanket rule" for threatened species and the ban on considering economic impacts of listing decisions.
However, the center also pointed out that "of the 31 harmful changes made in 2019 to the act's regulations, only seven are fully addressed and corrected in today's final rules," despite years of work on the new rules and nearly half a million public comments.
"We're mostly still stuck with the disastrous anti-wildlife changes made by the previous administration."
"This was a massive missed opportunity to address the worsening extinction crisis," said Stephanie Kurose, a senior policy specialist at the center. "We needed bold solutions to guide conservation as the climate crisis drives more and more animals and plants to extinction. Instead we're mostly still stuck with the disastrous anti-wildlife changes made by the previous administration."
Jamie Rappaport Clark, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife, similarly said that "while the regulations restore some essential wildlife protections, we were hopeful for far more than the marginal win the Biden administration delivered today."
"Our nation's threatened and endangered species are under constant attack and the Endangered Species Act is the only thing standing between them and extinction," she stressed. "We appreciate the administration's work on this matter, but at the end of the day much work remains to be done to ensure the Endangered Species Act can fulfill its critical lifesaving mission."
Experts at the environmental law organization Earthjustice also expressed disappointment that—as Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans put it—the Biden administration didn't fully seize "the opportunity to fully reverse the damage inflicted upon the Endangered Species Act and the imperiled species it protects."
Writing about former Republican President Donald Trump's gutting of the ESA—which Biden helped pass shortly after joining the U.S. Senate in 1973—Earthjustice president Abigail Dillen explained at The Progressive on Wednesday:
The dismantling of the ESA could not have come at a worse time. Scientists around the world are telling us that we are on track to lose a million or more species in this century. We have already witnessed a staggering drop of more than two-thirds of all plant and animal life on Earth since 1970. In the United States, nearly half of our ecosystems are now at risk of collapse. It is a staggering pace of loss that climate change is only accelerating.
It would have been far worse without the ESA. The law has saved 99% of listed species from extinction, including the bald eagle, Florida manatee, and the gray wolf, one of my first "clients" when I began my career as an environmental lawyer more than two decades ago.
Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles declared Thursday that "we are in the midst of an extinction crisis; it is time for bold action."
"Imperiled plants and animals do not have the time for half-measures," she noted, "since extinction is forever."
The new rules—expected to provoke lawsuits from farmers, ranchers, and right-wing groups—come as Biden and Trump prepare for a rematch in November.
"One of the lingering legacies of Donald Trump is his attempt to undermine the Endangered Species Act, one of the most successful and popular conservation laws in the history of the United States," Sierra Club executive director Ben Jealous said Thursday. "At this moment, we should be listening to scientists and acting urgently to save biodiversity, not letting Donald Trump's gutting of environmental safeguards and sellouts to Big Business stand."
"President Biden has made generational investments in climate action with the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, but we need him to do more to protect imperiled wildlife," he added. "The Biden administration needs to protect more habitat, not less. We need the administration to increase protections for biodiversity, not abandon them. The president has the power, and we need him to use it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular