21 May 2012 Register   Login
Waste & Environmental Cleanup
Featured Environmental Story
CNN interviews residents of Shell Bluff, GA about the lack of monitoring in their community which hosts a nuclear power station and is across the Savannah River from a radioactive superfund site.

Cleanup Sites
Click here to view the Department of Energy's list of Environmental Management sites by state
Print  


 


Past and Present

The Department of Energy (DOE) has produced radioactive materials for nuclear bombs; designed, built, and tested nuclear weapons; and developed reactor and other technologies with little concern for the environmental harm those activities cause. The inevitable result is that all DOE sites are polluted. Nevertheless, DOE remains far more interested in protecting its pollution-causing activities than in correcting the harm they have already done.



DOE is not meeting its legal and ethical responsibility to clean up the legacy of more than 60 years of radioactive and toxic contamination. Instead, DOE is promoting nuclear activities that will create additional pollution and threaten the health of future generations. Currently, water near some DOE facilities, such as Paducah, KY, and Pantex, TX, remains unfit to drink. Some of the nation’s major water sources, including the Columbia River, Snake River Aquifer, and Ogallala Aquifer, are threatened.


After declaring the Yucca Mountain project dead, the Obama Administration called for a "Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future" to determine what should be done with US high level nuclear waste. The Blue Ribbon Commission has issued its draft report. A final report will be issued in January


MOX report to Congress is six months overdue
published Monday, September 12, 2011  1183 Views :: 0 Comments

Sept. 12, 2011

By Rob Pavey
From the Augusta Chronicle

The National Nuclear Security Administration is more than six months late on its annual status report to Congress on the mixed oxide fuel project at Savannah River Site.

The document, mandated under the 2003 National Defense Authorization Act, was due Feb. 15 and was to include updated details on the $4.8 billion project’s construction progress and completion schedule, among other things.

Critics of the project say the delay is another sign the government’s program to dispose of surplus plutonium from dismantled nuclear bombs could be facing more problems.

“Failure to deliver this required report reveals that the Department of Energy does not know if the MOX plant construction will be completed and if the facility will ever operate,” said Tom Clements, Southeastern Nuclear Campaign Coordinator with Friends of the Earth.

The mixed oxide, or MOX plant, is designed to dispose of 34 metric tons of plutonium by blending the material with uranium to make commercial reactor fuel. Efforts to find utilities willing to use the fuel have progressed slowly.

In June, the House Appropriations Committee expressed new concerns about the project’s escalating costs and the quest to find clients for the fuel.

“The costs of this program continue to escalate, with current estimates of as much as $9.7 billion, just to construct the needed facilities,” committee members wrote in the fiscal 2012 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill.

Although the Tennessee Valley Authority is exploring its use in as many as five of its reactors, the recent crisis with Japan’s nuclear program will make such an alliance less likely, and much more difficult, the committee wrote.

Josh McConaha, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration, said officials are diligently working on the report. “The MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility report is currently in progress and will be submitted to Congress as soon as it is completed,” he said


Resources

Public Comments


ANA's statement to the Blue Ribbon Commission at their Denver meeting in September 2011


ANA's comment on the April 2011 Department of Energy Greater than Class C Waste Draft Environmental Impact Statement.


FACT SHEETS

2011 ANA fact sheet on Nuclear reactors and Waste


Greater Than Class C Waste Fact Sheet from the Snake River Alliance


Department of Energy
Environmental Cleanup:�
Underfunded and Inadequate  2007


Yucca Mountain:
Not the Solution to Nuclear Waste
  2007


Spent Fuel Reprocessing and the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership


ANA Water Report: 


DANGER LURKS BELOW
The Threat to Major Water Supplies from US Department of Energy Nuclear Weapons Plants


GTCC Resources
The Department of Energy is seeking comments to determine the scope of the planned Environmental Impact Statement dealing with the "Disposal of Greater-Than-Class-C (GTCC) Low-Level Radioactive Waste." 

Watch this space and this page for resources helpful in composing your own comments.




© 2012 Alliance for Nuclear Accountability   |  Citadel Hosting  |  Terms Of Use  |  Privacy Statement