Stop the shipment of dangerous nuclear waste

[Oscar]

Stop the shipment of dangerous nuclear waste

TELL THE CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION NOT TO RISK THE HEALTH OF CANADIAN COMMUNITIES

Sierra Club Canada has learned Bruce Power plans to ship 16 radioactive steam generators out of Owen Sound, ON. The radioactive generators from a faulty reactor are slated to travel via the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River to a recycling facility in Sweden.

Click here to learn about the problems with the plan and demand that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) put it on hold:

[ http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/565 ... n_KEY=3737 ]

The shipment of radioactive waste presents a risk to public safety and the environment through the emission of gamma radiation and the possible release of radioactive contaminants. First, the 16 hundred-tonne generators will be loaded onto massive trailers and driven from Tiverton to Owen Sound. Each generator contains miles of contaminated tubing, and will be driven straight through communities like Saugeen Shores, Port Elgin, Southampton, Chippawa Hill and Allenford. When the radioactive waste arrives at Owen Sound it will then be shipped past cities like Toronto and Montreal where millions more Canadians live. Worse, if Bruce Power's unprecedented proposal is approved by the CNSC, more shipments could follow this dangerous path in the future.

Bruce Power is rushing ahead with its proposal while serious questions remain unanswered about the procedure. For example, why is the waste being shipped to Sweden when, according to the original environmental assessment, it was to be stored on-site?

(Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX1KJNKL3vA)

Sierra Club Canada is calling for a stay in shipping until a full environmental impact assessment is conducted and all questions are answered.

Bruce Power's application to ship the steam generators is currently before the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). The time to stop it is now. Please take a moment to submit a letter to the CNSC.
You can find a draft here:

[ http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/565 ... n_KEY=3737 ]

This nuclear campaign is part of Sierra Club Canada's ongoing effort to empower people to protect, restore and enjoy a healthy and safe planet. Please consider supporting us with a donation today:

[ https://secure.sierraclub.ca/en/civicrm ... et=1&id=20 ]

- - - - - - -

===================

Questions about shipment of Steam Generators based on Official EA-related documents

----- Original Message -----
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 7:10 PM
Subject: Questions about shipment of Steam Generators based on Official EA-related documents

For your information:

A number of questions have arisen about Bruce Power's plan to ship 16 radioactive waste steam generators arising from the Bruce A refurbishment project from Owen Sound to Sweden.

It appears that this plan contravenes previous undertakings and commitments made by Bruce Power and accepted by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) as part of theEnvironmental Assessment process for the refurbishment of the Bruce A nuclear reactors.

First Example

On pages 3-31 and 3-32 of the December 2005 Bruce A Refurbishment EA Study Report (Volume 1): [ http://www.brucepower.com/uc/GetDocumen ... docid=2199 ]
which was approved by the CNSC following the May 2006 staff recommendation to that effect: [ http://www.brucepower.com/uc/GetDocumen ... docid=2225 ]

Bruce Power promises to transfer all radioactive waste from the refurbishment project to the Western Waste Management Facility on the Bruce site, without using any public roads for this purpose.

The following paragraph is from page 3-31 of the EA:

"3.4.5 Refurbishment Waste Management

"As noted, refurbishment activities are expected to generate LLL [Low Level Wastes] and ILW [Intermediate Level Wastes] including pressure tubes and calandria tubes, the old steam generators, and miscellaneous components. All radioactive wastes will be transferred to OPG's WWMF following assurance that they meet OPG's acceptance criteris. Transfer to the WWMF will occur entirely within the Bruce Power site and not require
the use of public roads."

The following paragraph is from page 3-32 of the EA:
"The old steam generators will be placed on the defined temporary lay-down area, where they will be prepared and then loaded onto a multi-wheeled transporter for transferring to the WWMF."

=============

Question 1:

When was the decision taken by Bruce Power to transport radioactive wastes in the form of the old steam generators on public roads to Owen Sound, and then to ship them through Georgian Bay, Lake Huron, Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, the St. Lawrence River, and the Atlantic Ocean to Sweden? How was that decision arrived at and who was involved in the decision-making process? When was the CNSC notified that Bruce Power was going to deviate from the procedure clearly laid down in the Environmental Assessment? When did CNSC or the Department of the Environment authorize Bruce Power to deviate from that procedure as laid down in the EA?

=============

Second Example:

In Bruce Power's Presentation to the Joint Council of the Saugeen Ojibway Nations, in April 2005, page 4, we read on page 11-21:

[ http://www.brucepower.com/uc/GetDocumen ... docid=2176 ]

"Bruce Power is committed to reducing, reusing and recycling wastes produced at the Bruce Power site to the extent possible. For example scrap metals which are proven not to be radioactive are recycled.

However much of the waste, and particularly low and intermediate level waste containing radioactivity cannot be recycled for safety and environmental reasons. This waste is transferred to OPG's Western Waste Management Facility where it is processed to reduce its volume prior to be placed in storage."

Here we see a firm commitment to peoples of the Saugeen Ojibway Nations not to recycle any material which is radioactive, including low and intermediate level waste. There is also a commitment to see that any volume reduction of radioactive waste will take place at the Western Waste Management Facility.

Yet now Bruce Power wants to ship these corroded and radioactively contaminated steam generators to Sweden, where Studsvik will partially decontaminate and recycle up to 90 percent of the radioactive metal, selling it as scrap metal for unrestricted use, even if it still contains measurable levels of plutonium-239, cesium-137, cobalt-60, and other man-made radioactive contaminants.

-----------------------

The information in the table below is copied from the Studsvik web site (page 12 of 35):

[ http://www.winsverige.se/arsmotet_2009/ ... atment.pdf ]

excerpt from table 3.1 of the European Union Recommendation RP 89
for Free Release of Metal (for unrestricted use in commercial products)

Nuclides(radioactive elements) Before re-melt at foundry (Bq/g) Metal entering open market (Bq/g)
H 3 (tritium = hydrogen) 1 000 100
C 14 (carbon) 100 10
Mn 54 (manganese) 1 0.1
Fe 55 (iron) 10 000 1 000
Ni 53,54 (nickel) 10 000 1 000
Co 58, 60 (cobalt) 1 0.1
Cs 137 (cesium) 1 0.1
Ra 226 (radium) 1 0.1
U 235, 238 (uranium) 1 0.1
Am 241 (americium) 1 0.1
Pu 238, 239, 240 (plutonium) 1 0.1
-----------------------

Which leads to a second question about Bruce Power's plans:

=============

Question 2.

Where and when did Bruce Power decide to abandon the principle that low
and intermediate level waste containing radioactivity cannot be recycled for safety and environmental reasons? Where and when did OPG give its assent to the abandonment of this principle? Where and when did CNSC give its assent, and where and when did the Department of Environment give its assent? More particularly, where and when was the Joint Council of the Saugeen Ojibway Nation informed that Bruce Power's principle against recycling radioactive materials has been abandoned?

=============

Third Example:

As recently as September 2007, in the "Proposed Work Plan / Bruce A
Refurbishment / Follow-Up Monitoring Program / September 2007"

[ http://www.brucepower.com/uc/GetDocumen ... docid=2497 ]

there is no mention whatsoever of the steam generators being sent to
Sweden. Instead we read, on page 11-21:
"Does the EA consider long-term storage of the wastes?"
(Sections 3.4.5. and 3.5.9)

"The EA for the project considers the production of the wastes and transfer of the wastes to the WWMF until 2043. OPG is currently undertaking a separate EA to expand the WWMF for interim storage of low and intermediate level wastes. For more information refer to their project website at www.opg.com/wwmf.asp . The long-term management of these wastes is an aspect of the Deep Geological Repository Proposal that is under study by OPG and the Municipality of Kincardine."

and on page 11-22 of the same September 2007 document:

"Is there room at the WWMF for the refurbishment wastes now, or will Bruce Power need to wait for the expansion?
(Sections 3.4.5 and 3.5.9)
"The WWMF is a licensed facility for the storage of nuclear wastes from Ontario nuclear generating stations. The WWMF is planning to build additional storage structures within its licensed boundary to accommodate the waste from the Project, along with the wastes from other nuclear generating station refurbishment projects in the future."

And on OPG's current web site, in a document whose lead-in line is
"Learn more about our Western Waste Management Facility", [ http://www.opg.com/power/nuclear/waste/pdf/
WasteBrochure10.pdf ] we read that

"Storage for refurbishment waste (fuel channel waste and steam generators) from the Bruce reactors is also provided at the WWMF."

=============

Question 3.

Where and when did OPG authorize Bruce Power to ship the old steam
generators to Sweden instead of to the Western Waste Management
Facility? Who at OPG was responsible for that decision, and where and
when was CNSC notified of OPG's change of position in this regard? More
particularly, where and when did the CNSC formally accept this change
of position on the part of OPG?

=============

Gordon Edwards, Ph.D., President,
Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility

= = = = = = =

CNSC Announces Decision on Environmental Assessment Track Report Regarding Ontario Power Generation Inc.’s Proposal to Construct and Operate a Deep Geologic Repository

[ http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/medi ... ase_id=250 ]

06-30

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 21, 2006

Following a public hearing held on October 23, 2006, in Kincardine, Ontario, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) announced today its decision to recommend to the federal Minister of the Environment that Ontario Power Generation Inc.’s (OPG) proposed project to construct and operate a deep geologic repository within the Bruce Nuclear Site in Kincardine, Ontario, be referred to a review panel. The Minister of the Environment must now decide on this recommendation. An environmental assessment (EA) is required pursuant to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA).

In carrying out its responsibilities under the CEAA, the Commission also decided to approve the Scoping Document (EA Guidelines), modified to require the establishment of a baseline for monitoring environmental effects resulting from this project.

The Record of Proceedings, including Reasons for Decision, refers to a number of factors that led to the Commission’s recommendation to the Minister of the Environment, including uncertainties as to the nature of the wastes to be managed and the proposed site, as well as the first of kind nature of a deep geologic repository project in Canada.The Record of Proceedings, including Reasons for Decision, is available on the CNSC Web site at www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca, or by contacting the CNSC.

During the public hearing, the Commission considered written submissions and oral presentations from CNSC staff, OPG and 57 intervenors.

The CNSC regulates the use of nuclear energy and materials to protect health, safety, security and the environment and to respect Canada's international commitments on the peaceful use of nuclear energy. -30-

Contact:
Pascale Bourassa
Commission Secretariat
(613) 947-0247
1-800-668-5284

[Oscar]

CNSC, BPEA and Shipment of Radioactive Waste?

----- Original Message -----
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 3:33 AM
Subject: Shipment of radioactive steam generators?

Re: Bruce Power's plans to ship radioactive steam generators through the Great Lakes and across the Atlantic Ocean to Sweden.

To whom it may concern:

Bruce Power spokesmen are obscuring the fact that in all of the Environmental Assessment documents cited on their own web site,

(http://www.brucepower.com/pagecontentU1 ... avuid=3041)

the old steam generators (which have become corroded and radioactively contaminated through use) are clearly described as radioactive waste which will not be shipped off-site, but will be transported along on-site roads to the Western Waste Management Facility for perpetual storage as radwaste.

I have taken the trouble to document these facts through specific references to the Environmental Assessment documents in question.

Bruce Power spokesmen are also obscuring the fact that the exact inventory of radioactive material inside the old steam generators is unknown, and that some of this material can be easily released into the environment in the form of radioactive gases or fine radioactive dusts, and that some of these releasable materials have half-lives measured in centuries or millennia.

Bruce Power should not be allowed to go against the plans which were examined and approved during the environmental assessment process. If there is to be a new environmental assessment process to examine these new plans for the old steam generators, namely to ship them through the Great Lakes and across the ocean to Sweden, where up to 90 percent of the metal will be released as scrap metal for unrestricted use, then it is imperative that the environmental assessment include ALL of the environmental impacts, including the entire transportation route and the Studsvik operation in Sweden which has been contributing radioactive pollution to the Baltic Sea through its "laundering" operations on behalf of the nuclear industry.

Gordon Edwards, Ph.D., President,
Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

= = = = =

Verbatim Quotations from Official Environmental Assessment Documents About Old Steam Generators from Bruce A Nuclear Reactors

The initials CNSC and BPEA will refer to the following documents respectively.
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Screening Report on Environmental Assessment of the Bruce A Refurbishment March 2006

Available at
http://www.brucepower.com/uc/GetDocumen ... docid=2226

Bruce Power Environmental Assessment Study Report, Bruce A Refurbishment – Volume 1: Main Report December 2005

Available at
http://www.brucepower.com/uc/GetDocumen ... docid=2199

Point #1: Old steam generators are a form of radioactive waste.
CNSC Page 24
Both phases of the Project will produce radioactive waste. For the purposes of the assessment, “low level waste (LLW)“ consists of industrial items that have become slightly contaminated with radioactivity and are of no further use, but also include the steam generators, feeder pipes and insulation wastes.
BPEA Page 3-31
As noted, refurbishment activities are expected to generate LLW [low level waste] and ILW [intermediate level waste] including pressure tubes and calandria tubes, the old steam generators and miscellaneous components.
BPEA Page 3-29
The steam generator replacement will generate LLW [low level waste] and ILW [intermediate level waste], including the steam generators themselves….
CNSC Page 101
Issue: At what point during the refurbishment will the steam generators be removed?
Response: The steam generators will be removed about halfway through the refurbishment activities. These are considered low level waste.
Verbatim Quotations from Official Environmental Assessment Documents
About Old Steam Generators from Bruce A Nuclear Reactors

Point #2: Old steam generators are to be stored on-site at WWMF.

NOTE: The exact same wording appears in both of the documents cited above….
BPEA Page 3-17 CNSC Page 25
[box 2 in middle column] [box 2 in right column]
The steam generators will be processed and prepared to meet OPG’s requirements for acceptance at the WWMF.
BPEA Page 3-17 CNSC Page 25
[box 4 in middle column] [box 4 in right column]
The steam generators will be sealed and transferred to the WWMF….
BPEA Pages 3-28 & 3-29
Following removal, the steam generators will be temporarily stored on-site, prepared to ensure that they meet OPG’s requirements for acceptance at the WWMF, lifted onto transporters with a temporary gantry system and then transferred to the OPG’s WWMF.…

BPEA page 3-30
Waste Handling: This includes preparation of removed steam generators for transportation . . . loading of old steam generators onto multi-wheeled
transporters; and transportation of steam generators to OPG’s WWMF. There will be 16 old steam generators in total from Units 1 and 2 refurbishment and another 16 from Units 3 and 4 refurbishment. These will be transported and stored at the WWMF following removal….

Point #3: Old steam generators are potential sources of exposure.

From CNSC Page 31
Radiological Malfunctions and Accidents, which are events that involve radioactive components (i.e. processing, handling and storing nuclear wastes; removal and preparation of steam generators for transportation) and the potential for release of radioactivity.

BPEA Page 3-37
Accident Scenario: A transportation-related accident during the transfer of . . . the old steam generators between Bruce A and the WWMF may occur leading to a radiological contamination that could reach on-site workers and members of the public…. Materials present as a gas or as very fine powders are more likely to escape….
BPEA Page 3-38
Screening of Postulated Radiological Malfunctions and Accidents
Steam generators will not be moved over sensitive buildings/equipment. Activities will not be carried out during inclement weather (i.e. gusty wind conditions)….
Although the steam generator is a potential source for release of some
radioactivity due to a seal rupture, several factors limit the amount of radioactivity that would be released. Since there will be no volume reduction step, the majority of radioactivity will remain in a tightly sealed adherent film, which is spread out over the internal surfaces. Therefore, the size of the steam generator will limit the amount of radioactivity that would be released if a seal fails.
CNSC Page 101
Issue: How will you minimize the amount of contamination released to the
environment when the steam generators are removed?
Response: … the removal of steam generators will be completely segregated from the ongoing operations…..
BPEA Page 3-18 CNSC Page 25
[box 3 in middle column] [box 6 in right column]
Based on the screening of possible conventional malfunction and accident scenarios, it was determined that two events are credible, namely a steam generator drop and a refurbishment waste container drop, both during loading/uploading operations…. Other postulated potential accidents are found to have very limited potential to result in radiological consequences….
[from CNSC page 32 : containers “are designed to survive a 4 metre drop with minimal loss of contents”]
[from CNSC page 65 : these are the ONLY two malfunctions or accident scenarios “involving nuclear materials” that are credible during the refurbishment phase}

Point #4: Old steam generators cannot be recycled.

BPEA Page 3-17
Non-radioactive wastes will be re-used or recycled to the degree possible…. The steam generators will be sealed and transferred to the WWMF.
BPEA Page 4-55
Radioactive wastes from Bruce A are transferred to WWMF….. All nonradioactive, non-hazardous solid waste is transported to the on-site conventional waste landfill for disposal or off-site for recycling, processing and/or disposal at facilities licensed to handle such materials.
CNSC Page 75
Some of the waste is directly recyclable; however, the largest waste quantities are associated with the pressure-tube/calandria-tube replacement and steam generator replacement, since the replaced components cannot be recycled and must be disposed of at the WWMF….
Statement: July 25 2010 I have examined the above-cited documents by searching for each and every occurrence of the phrase “steam generator.
Nowhere in these documents is there the slightest indication that the old
steam generators will ever be transported off-site. On the contrary, both
Bruce Power and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission repeatedly
state that the old steam generators are a form of radioactive waste, which
will be transported to the Western Waste Management Facility, on-site.
Nowhere in these documents is there the slightest indication that the
contaminated metal of the old steam generators will be considered suitable for recycling as scrap metal intended for unrestricted use.

Gordon Edwards, Ph.D., President,
Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.
http://www.ccnr.org/

[Oscar]

CNSC PUBLIC HEARING: Transport steam generators through Great Lakes - Sept. 29, 2010

http://www.emmajane.net/
public-hearing-and-canadian-environmental-assessment-act

July 29, 2010
Ref. 2010-H-09
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) will hold a one-day public hearing to consider the application by Bruce Power Inc. (Bruce Power) for a transport licence for the shipment of 16 steam generators by ship through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway to Sweden for recycling in the fall of 2010, from Bruce Power’s site located in Kincardine, Ontario.

Hearing: September 29, 2010
Place: CNSC Public Hearing Room, 14th floor, 280 Slater Street, Ottawa, Ontario
Time: as set by the agenda published prior to the hearing date

The public hearing will be webcasted live on the Internet via the CNSC Web site and archived for a period of 90 days.

The CNSC received a transport licence application from Bruce Power on April 1, 2010. The company proposes to transport 16 steam generators to Sweden for recycling. Since receipt of the application, Bruce Power’s proposal has been the subject of formal technical reviews by CNSC staff. No recommendation for the issuance of a transport licence will be made unless the Commission is convinced that the shipment will be completed safely, without risk to the health, safety or security of Canadians and the environment.

A low risk licence application like this one would normally be decided by a Designated Officer (DO). CNSC staff has concluded that there is no safety significance issues associated with the proposed shipment. However, in light of the public concern and the value to ensuring both a proper understanding of the scope of the undertaking and the presentation of accurate information relating to the health, safety and risk, the DO has asked that the Commission review the application at a one-day public hearing. The application has been added to a previously scheduled Commission hearing day on September 29, 2010. The public is invited to comment on Bruce Power’s application. Requests to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission by September 13, 2010
directly on line at

http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/comm ... ervention/
index.cfm or at the address below.

The request must include the following information, as per the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

Rules of Procedure:
A written submission of the comments to be presented to the Commission;
A statement setting out whether the requester wishes to intervene by way of written submission only or by way of written submission and oral presentation; and
Name, address and telephone number of the requester.

Personal information, such as address and telephone numbers, is essential for linking the submission to its author. Please submit your personal information on a separate page if you wish to ensure its confidentiality. It should be noted that all submissions are available to the public upon request to the Secretariat.

Bruce Power’s submissions and CNSC’s staff recommendations to be considered at the Hearing will be available after August 20, 2010. These documents are not available on-line and must be requested through the Secretariat at the address below. Agendas, hearing transcripts and information on the hearing process are available at the CNSC Web site: nuclearsafety.gc.ca.

c/o Louise Levert
Secretariat
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
280 Slater St., P.O. Box 1046
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5S9
Tel.: 613-996-9063 or 1-800-668-5284
Fax: 613-995-5086

[Oscar]

Inside the Steam Generators: Why does Bruce Power want to send them to Sweden?

From: "Gordon Edwards" <ccnr@web.ca>

Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 12:21 AM

Background:

Bruce Power plans to ship 16 radioactive steam generators through the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River, and across the Atlantic Ocean to Sweden, where 90 percent of the 1600 tonnes of radioactively contaminated metal will be melted down and sold as scrap for unrestricted use. In this way, some of the radioactivity will be dispersed into the air (atmospheric emissions), some will be dispersed into the Baltic Sea (liquid effluents), and some will be incorporated into consumer products of all kinds -- razor blades, hair dryers, paper clips, you name it. The remaining 10 percent will be shipped back to Bruce Power for storage as radioactive waste.
The chart below gives you some idea of what the steam generators are, and how much radioactive contamination they contain.

Two questions are paramount:

(1) Should radioactive debris from decrepit nuclear reactors be allowed on the Great Lakes and the Saint Lawrence River? The steam generator shipments will be the first of many....
(2) Should radioactive contaminants from nuclear power plants be allowed to be disseminated into consumer goods? Does anyone actually want plutonium- contaminated metal?
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission says these shipments pose no risk to anyone and it is therefore poised to grant a licence authorizing them. Due to public concern, CNSC has now agreed to hold a one-day hearing on September 29 in Ottawa -- actually, they tacked the steam generator transport issue onto the agenda of another meeting already scheduled for the same day.
Anyone can write to the CNSC with their comments at , but since this is primarily a political issue, be sure to send a copy of your comments to the Premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, to the Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, and to your local media.
Tell them not to allow these shipments. Tell them to make Bruce Power abide by its promises (in a 2005 Environmental Assessment) to keep the steam generators on site as radioactive waste which must be stored as such in perpetuity.
Gordon Edwards.

- - - - - -

Radioactive contaminants in decommissioned nuclear steam generators

http://www.nwmo.ca/uploads_managed/MediaFiles/
539_ReferenceLowandIntermediateWasteInventoryfortheDGR.pdf
(p. 50)

Here is a partial list of radioactive contaminants inside a used steam generator from one of the Bruce reactors. The amount of radioactivity is expressed in becquerels per cubic metre; one becquerel corresponds to one radioactive disintegration every second. (Source: OPG)

For Scientists/Engineers For Citizens/ Decision Makers

Symbol Half-Life Amount Name Half-Life Amount

Ag 108 1.3E+02 2.3E+02 Silver-108 130 y 230

Am-241 4.3E+02 5.9E+07 Americium-241 430 y 59 000 000

Am-243 7.4E+03 3.8E+04 Americium-243 7 400 y 38 000

C-14 5.7E+03 7.6E+07 Carbon-14 5 700 y 76 000 000

Cl-36 3.0E+05 1.4E+04 Chlorine-36 300 000 y 14 000

Cm-244 1.8E+01 1.4E+07 Curium-244 18 y 14 000 000

Co-60 5.3E+00 1.2E+09 Cobalt-60 5.3 y 1 200 000 000

Cs-134 2.1E+00 1.9E+06 Cesium-134 2.1 y 1 900 000

Cs-135 2.3E+06 2.2E+01 Cesium-135 2 300 000 y 22

Cs-137 3.0E+01 2.2E+07 Cesium-137 30 y 22 000 000

Eu-152 1.3E+01 1.8E+06 Europium-152 13 y 1 800 000

Eu-154 8.8E+00 1.6E+07 Europium-154 8.8 y 16 000 000

Eu-155 5.0E+00 3.0E+07 Europium-156 5 y 30 000 000

Fe-55 2.7E+00 5.8E+09 Iron-55 2.7 y 5 800 000 000

I-129 1.6E+07 6.3E+00 Iodine-129 16 000 000 y 6.3

Nb-94 2.0E+04 2.9E+05 Niobium-94 20 000 y 290 000

Ni-59 7.5E+04 2.0E+05 Nickel-59 75 000 y 200 000

Ni-63 9.6E+01 2.9E+07 Nickel-63 96 y 29 000 000

Np-237 2.1E+06 1.8E+03 Neptunium-237 2 100 000 y 1 800

Pu-238 8.8E+01 1.0E+07 Plutonium-238 88 y 10 000 000

Pu-239 2.4E+04 1.2E+07 Plutonium-239 24 000 y 12 000 000

Pu-240 6.5E+03 1.7E+07 Plutonium-240 6 500 y 17 000 000

Pu-241 1.4E+01 5.5E+08 Plutonium-241 14 y 550 000 000

Pu-242 3.8E+05 1.7E+04 Plutonium-242 380 000 y 17 000

Ru-106 1.0E+00 8.4E+08 Ruthenium-106 1 y 840 000 000

Sb-125 2.8E+00 2.1E+07 Antimony-125 2.8 y 21 000 000

Se-79 1.1E+06 7.6E+01 Selenium-79 1 100 000 y 76

Sm-151 1 9E+01 7.6E+01 Samarium-151 19 y 76

Sn-126 2.1E+05 1.2E+02 Tin-126 210 000 y 120

Sr-90 2.9E+01 1.8E+07 Strontium-90 29 y 18 000 000

Tc-99 2.1E+05 2.8E+03 Technetium-99 210 000 y 2 800

U-234 2.5E+05 1.9E+04 Uranium-234 250 000 y 19 000

U-235 7.0E+08 3.2E+02 Uranium-235 700 000 000 y 320

U-236 2.3E+07 3.6E+03 Uranium-236 23 000 000 y 24 000

U-238 4.5E+09 2.4E+04 Uranium-238 4 500 000 000 y 24 000

Zr-93 1.5E+06 3.8E+02 Zirconium-93 1 500 000 y 380

TOTALS

Long half-lives only 8.7E+09 (long-lived) 8 700 000 000

Including short half-lives 1.6E+10 (all radionuclides) 16 000 000 000

According to this OPG document (last 2 lines), in each cubic metre there are over eight BILLION radioactive disintegrations taking place every second. Each disintegration releases an alpha ray, a beta ray, or a gamma ray; so there are more than eight billion of these rays emitted every second. That’s more than 28 trillion rays per hour – over 245 quintillion (245 000 000 000 000 000) rays per year!

As one striking example: there are five plutonium isotopes found in the steam generators. In each cubic metre there are about 580 million alpha rays given off each second just from these plutonium isotopes alone. One thousand years in the future, if the steam generators were just stored on-site as radioactive waste for that entire period, these plutonium isotopes would still be giving off about 30 million alpha particles per second, per cubic metre.

Gordon Edwards, Ph.D.

[NWMO = Nuclear Waste Management Organization; OPG = Ontario Power Generation]

[Oscar]

Radioactive Waste Gradually Disseminated into Everyday Items

From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 9:47 AM
Subject: Radioactive Waste Gradually Disseminated into Everyday Items

Background:

During the early decades of the nuclear age, people were told (and are still being told) that all nuclear waste will undergo "disposal" -- a word with no scientific definition, for humans have never successfully "disposed" of anything.

But in recent years, the nuclear industry has significantly altered its previous doctrine. The new buzz-word is "recycling". The industry, it seems, wants some of the "good vibes" associated with Environmentalism's "3 Rs" -- Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle.

But recycling is a deceptive word to use, for the nuclear industry wants to gradually disseminate brand new highly dangerous waste materials -- radioactive species which never existed before -- into general circulation, as invisible contaminants.

These wastes, previously intended for permanent storage, are now intended to be shipped across lakes, oceans, and continents so that the companies who created them can lower their storage costs. They want to reduce the volume of waste by spreading it around, and "decontaminating" it as they go.

But decontaminating is by no means perfect. Radioactivity has to go somewhere -- into the air, into the water, into the soil . . . and increasingly, into ordinary items of commerce.

Thus everyone on earth will soon be receiving their own personal allotment of radioactive plutonium, cesium-137, cobalt-60, iron-55, nickel-63, and many other radioactive waste materials in their household purchases -- a gift from the nuclear industry.

The following text deals with a radioactive metal "recycling" facility in Northern England (Cumbria) that was licensed in February 2008 against the wishes of many local inhabitants.

The plant is operated by Studsvik of Sweden.

Bruce Power's current plan to ship 16 radioactive steam generators, each the size of a school bus, through the Great Lakes, along the St. Lawrence River, and across the Atlantic Ocean to Sweden, is for the express purpose of having Studsvik make 90 percent of the contaminated metal available for "unrestricted use".

Gordon Edwards.

==========================================

QUOTES: “To call the process 'recycling' is disingenuous and most people understand that the radioactivity is merely redistributed over a wider area on the one hand and concentrated on the other."

“At an international conference in Stockholm in 2007 'Coping with Nuclear Waste' Studsvik’s 'solution' to the 'recycling of nuclear waste' was universally criticized with the resolution from conference delegates
– all experts in their fields."

“We call on the nuclear industry to keep radioactive waste materials isolated from humans and from the biosphere, and keep it out of commerce – so that it does not end up in our water, or in toys, cars,
buildings, roads, zippers, tableware, etc."

“We call on Studsvik (Sweden) and Ecomet-S (Russia) to halt all nuclear melting and mixing of radioactive metals for release into the open metal market.”

= = = = = =

Appeal to Nuclear Installations Inspectorate over Studsvik Lillyhall site
http://www.getnoticedonline.co.uk/news/general-news/
appeal-to-inspector-over-studsvik-lillyhall-site.html

Friday, 05 June 2009

Radiation Free Lakeland has appealed to the Nuclear Installations
Inspectorate not to grant final consent to Studsvik UK for their Lillyhall
site.

Radiation Free Lakeland can be found here:

http://web.mac.com/mariannebirkby1/
iWeb/Radiation%20Free%20Lakeland/Radiation%20Free%20Lakeland%20.html

A letter has gone to Mike Weightman, Director and HM Chief Inspector,
Nuclear Safety Directorate and HM Nuclear Installations Inspectorate.

RFL say they understood that the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate will
be requested to give final consent for the receipt of contaminated
metals onto the Lillyhall site – the first of its kind in Europe.

The latter says: “The plant, which will create only 30 jobs at the most,
was first granted a Nuclear Site License by the UK Health & Safety
Executive in 2008.

“The final consent to contaminate the Lillyhall site will be detrimental to
yet another part of Cumbria previously clear of the nuclear industry and
an area which has a growing diversity of businesses.

“The diversity of businesses has however already been affected by the
presence of Studsvik despite a vigorous PR campaign by the company
involving Cumbria Wildlife Trust and Red Squirrels.

“To call the process 'recycling' is disingenuous and most people
understand that the radioactivity is merely redistributed over a wider
area on the one hand and concentrated on the other.

“This concern was reflected in the vocal but ignored opposition from
local residents, businesses and councillors.

“The rush to be seen to be ‘decommissioning’ in order to pave the way
for new build has resulted in an undemocratic process that has carried
Studsvik along this far.

“At an international conference in Stockholm in 2007 'Coping with
Nuclear Waste' Studsvik’s 'solution' to the 'recycling of nuclear waste'
was universally criticized with the resolution from conference delegates
– all experts in their fields.

“We call on the nuclear industry to keep radioactive waste materials
isolated from humans and from the biosphere, and keep it out of
commerce – so that it does not end up in our water, or in toys, cars,
buildings, roads, zippers, tableware, etc.

“We call on Studsvik (Sweden) and Ecomet-S (Russia) to halt all
nuclear melting and mixing of radioactive metals for release into the
open metal market.”

“Studviks own literature boasts:

'Studsvik has sold 15000 tonnes to the free release scrap metal market worldwide'.

http://www.studsvik.se/files/product/St ... UK-MRF.pdf

“This is not acceptable to the rest of Europe and should not be
acceptable here in Cumbria. Radiation Free Lakeland urges the Nuclear
Installations Inspectorate not to grant final consent for the contamination
of this site.”

Studsvik UK say the site will process materials and waste contaminated
with low levels of radioactivity, which will be brought to the site in specially designed transport containers of similar appearance to normal industrial shipping containers.

Their website explains that typically, around two or three containers will
be transported to and from the site each week....

[Oscar]

Aboriginal coalition joins anti-shipping protest

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2010/07/27/
14847431.html

POWER: International chorus pipes up against moving radioactive nuclear generators through the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River
By CHIP MARTIN, The London Free Press, Aug 19 2010
Aboriginal voices have joined the growing international chorus opposing plans to ship radioactive nuclear generators along the Great Lakes.
The Ontario Coalition of Aboriginal People, representing 7,000 status, non-status Indians and Metis, opposes the plan by Bruce Power and is demanding consultation and accommodation from the provincial and federal governments.
“This is a big concern for all Canadians,” Brad Maggrah, president of the organization, said Tuesday.
Despite appealing to Premier Dalton McGuinty, his Environment Ministry and Prime Minister Stephen Harper, “we haven’t heard anything,” he said.
Bruce Power is looking for a licence from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to truck 16 decommissioned generators the size of school buses to Owen Sound harbour. They would be loaded onto vessels that would travel through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River to a recycling facility in Sweden.
The plan is to ship the 100-tonne steam generators that have low-level radioactivity during a three-week period in September.

MORE:
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2010 ... 47431.html

[Oscar]

Nuclear regulator accused of prejudice

http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/
ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2718855

By Denis Langlois, Owen Sound Sun Times, Wed. Aug. 18 2010

A high-profile environmental group says Canada's nuclear regulator has "prejudiced" its public hearing by already concluding that Bruce Power's plan to ship steam generators through the Great Lakes doesn't pose a significant safety risk.

Derek Stack, executive director of the Canadian-American group Great Lakes United, said the low-level radioactive waste shipments should be halted until the plan is subjected to full community consultation.

"They're basically circumventing the regulatory framework for the shipment of nuclear waste," he said in an interview.

Great Lakes United, a 25-year-old coalition of 150 environmental groups, has written a letter to American, Canadian and Aboriginal leaders, asking them to "use their authority to stop these shipments."

The leaders include United States President Barack Obama, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Premier Dalton McGuinty and Quebec Premier Jean Charest. Letters were also sent to the Chiefs of Ontario office and the National Congress of American Indians.

More than 60 non-governmental organizations have signed a petition to oppose the shipments.

Bruce Power has submitted an application to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for a transport licence to ship 16 decommissioned, 100-tonne steam generators out of the Owen Sound Harbour and to a recycling facility across the Atlantic Ocean in Sweden.

In response to public demand, the CNSC has scheduled a public hearing on the plan for Sept. 29 in Ottawa.

In a statement, issued in late July, the agency said CNSC staff have concluded there are "no safety significant issues" associated with the proposed shipment.

"However, in light of the public concern and the value to ensuring both a proper understanding of the scope of the undertaking and the presentation of accurate information relating to the health, safety and risk, the DO (designated officer) has asked that the commission review the application at a one-day public hearing," the statement says.

Opponents of Bruce Power's plan are calling on the province to conduct a full environmental assessment on the proposed shipments.

Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility president Gordon Edwards, for one, said the CNSC public hearing is nothing more than "window dressing" to pacify the public.

MORE:
http://www.owensoundsuntimes.com/
ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2718855

[Oscar]

Groups Warn of Radioactive Waste Shipping Risks on Great Lakes

Demand U.S. Dept. of Transportation Address Potential Accident Before Approving Canadian “Recycling” Plan

http://enviromich.blogspot.com/2010/09/
em-fw-media-release-groups-warn-of.html

News from Beyond Nuclear For Immediate Release: September 16, 2010
Contacts:
Terry Lodge, Attorney, Toledo, Ohio, (419) 205-7084
Michael Keegan, Don’t Waste Michigan, Monroe, Michigan, (734) 770-1441
Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear, Takoma Park, Maryland, (240) 462-3216

Washington, D.C. –A coalition of U.S. and Canadian environmental organizations have petitioned the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to perform a federally-required environmental impact statement to analyze the risks of a Canadian proposal to ship 16 giant radioactive steam generators on the waters of the Great Lakes. Later this month the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) will hold a hearing to collect public comments and concerns about the proposal by Bruce Power of Ontario to ship the radioactive wastes via the Great Lakes and Atlantic Ocean to Sweden, where they will be melted down and mixed into the consumer product metal recycling stream.

The Sierra Club’s Michigan Chapter, U.S.-Canadian environmental coalition Great Lakes United, the Canadian Physicians for Global Survival, U.S. national environmental watchdogs Beyond Nuclear and Nuclear Information and Resource Service, and Michigan-based groups Don’t Waste Michigan and Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, have written to the DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), demanding an official National Environmental Policy Act review of the shipping plans before U.S. federal approval of the major action is granted formal approval. The groups’ letter to PHMSA is posted at www.beyondnuclear.org.

[The letter can be easily downloaded at
http://ccnr.org/PHMSA_ltr.pdf ]

Although the CNSC staff has already admitted that the shipment exceeds International Atomic Energy Agency safety regulations for the amount of radioactivity allowed on board a single ship, the environmental coalition has revealed that the hazardous radioactive inventory within the steam generators, and thus the amount that could be released into the waters of the Great Lakes during an accidental sinking, is actually four times larger than CNSC staff have reported, and 50 times more radioactive than International Atomic Energy Agency standards. In fact, the groups argue the steam generators should be treated as trans-uranic wastes, given the large quantities of plutonium contamination and other alpha-particle emitting radionuclides involved. Plutonium-239, for example, remains hazardous for 240,000 years.

The Bruce Nuclear Generating Station is owned by Ontario Power Generation and operated by Bruce Power. With eight reactors, six still operational, and an additional permanently shut down prototype reactor, Bruce has the most atomic reactors of any nuclear power plant in the Western Hemisphere, and the second most of any nuclear power plant in the world. In addition to its reactors, Bruce has storage, incineration, and disposal facilities for the so-called “low” and “intermediate” level radioactive wastes from 20 reactors across Ontario. It is located on the shore of Lake Huron, just 50 miles across from Michigan.

“Our review of Bruce Power’s and CNSC’s documents have revealed that this hasty, ill-considered proposal has involved little to no planning whatsoever to deal with an emergency involving the sinking of this shipment, containing as it would over 1,400 tons of radioactive steam generators,” said Terry Lodge, Toledo-based attorney representing the environmental coalition. “We demand that PHMSA do its legal duty under NEPA, and examine the risks, and the less dangerous alternative of a longstanding Canadian plan simply to store the steam generators indefinitely onsite, before granting a U.S. DOT permit for the shipment of these radioactive wastes through U.S. waters on the Great Lakes.”

“The Great Lakes are 20% of the surface fresh water on Earth,” said Michael Keegan of Don’t Waste Michigan. “The shipment of any radioactive wastes on the vital, irreplaceable Great Lakes is an unacceptable risk that could contaminate the drinking water for tens of millions downstream.”

“This proposal would set a dangerous precedent for many more radioactive waste shipments, as well as adding to the contamination of the world’s scrap metal market with hazardous radioactivity,” said Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear. “In addition, the stigma of a radioactive waste transport accident on the Great Lakes would harm many economic sectors, such as tourism, recreation, fisheries, and property values.”

Links to additional information and documents about this issue are posted at the top of Beyond Nuclear’s homepage, www.beyondnuclear.org. -30-

Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic. The Beyond Nuclear team works with diverse partners and allies to provide the public, government officials, and the media with the critical information necessary to move humanity toward a world beyond nuclear.

Contact information
Beyond Nuclear, 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 400, Takoma Park, MD 20912
Tel: 301.270.2209 Fax: 301.270.4000
Email: info@beyondnuclear.org
Web site: www.beyondnuclear.org

[Oscar]

Calls Continue To Block Shipments of Radioactive Waste Through The Welland Canal And Great Lakes

http://niagaraatlarge.com/2010/09/23/
calls-continue-to-block-shipments-of-radioactive-waste-through-the-welland-canal-and-great-lakes/

Posted on September 23, 2010 by dougdraper|

Niagara At Large is posting the following for readers in our greater Niagara region who may have concerns about plans to ship radioactive waste through the Great Lakes and Welland Canal.
The call from Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath to the province’s premier, Dalton McGuinty to halt these shipments is just the latest of many calls of concern around this from bodies on the Canadian and American sides of our Great Lakes region.
Following the posting of Horwath’s open message to Ontario’s premier, Niagara At Large is posting a recent piece by Great Lakes United, a U.S./Canada coalition of lakes conservationists with a head office in Buffalo, N.Y., raising concerns about these planned shipments of radioactive waste.

Don’t float nuke boat: Horwath to McGuinty

QUEEN’S PARK – NDP Leader Andrea Horwath is calling on the McGuinty government to halt planned shipments of radioactive waste through the Great Lakes.Bruce Power is proposing to ship 16 radioactive nuclear steam generators from Owen Sound to Sweden for dismantling and recycling.
“Seventy Great Lakes mayors, dozens of environmental groups, and First Nations communities oppose this plan, which was not part of Bruce Power’s initial proposal and exceeds by 50 times international limits for radioactivity on a single ship,” said Horwath, citing the growing grassroots opposition.
“Why isn’t the McGuinty government taking action to prevent this unprecedented and unnecessary threat?” she asked Premier Dalton McGuinty during this morning’s Question Period.
McGuinty passed the question to his Energy Minister Brad Duguid who in turn passed the concern to the Federal government, saying it’s under their jurisdiction.
“The McGuinty government needs to stop passing the buck and show some leadership,” said Horwath. “The Ontario government is responsible for protecting the Great Lakes. And the provincial government owns Ontario Power Generation (OPG) which owns and operates the radioactive waste site where the generators are stored.”
She implored McGuinty to stop ignoring the obvious danger to Ontarians. “The Premier should order OPG to slam the brakes on this hare-brained plan to ship radioactive nuclear waste through our Great Lakes,” said Horwath.

From the Canada/U.S. citizen coalition Great Lakes United

Action Alert: Act now and sign a petition to stop the shipment of nuclear steam generators on the Great Lakes. A member group of Great Lakes United (Nuclear-Free Green Energy Task Force) is calling for your help.
They are asking for signatures on a petition to stop the shipment of nuclear steam generators on the Great Lakes.

This is petition is being taken to the Owen Sound, (Ontario) City Council on Monday night, September 13th.

The petition from Citizens Against Radioactive Generators in Owen Sound (CARGO) can be signed here:

http://www.gopetition.com/petition/38935.html

CARGO will continue taking online signatures until September 30, but they need as many signatures as possible this morning (Monday, September 13).
This petition is in opposition to the transport of 16 radioactive steam generators by road from the Bruce nuclear complex to Owen Sound and by ship from Owen Sound to Studsvik in Sweden on the Baltic Sea. The shipping of radioactive material poses an unacceptable risk to the Great Lakes ecosystem, and allowing this shipment to take place sets a dangerous precedent for the future health of the lakes.

For more information on this issue, please visit

http://www.glu.org/en/campaigns/energy/nuclear/
steam-generators

Please take action and sign this petition today
(at http://www.gopetition.com/petition/38935.html).

[Oscar]

Resources on the transport of radioactive steam generators through Great Lakes

http://ccnr.org/index.html#SG

Radioactive Steam Generators

All Links are at:
http://ccnr.org/index.html#SG

[ Press Conference: International Opposition to Radioactive Waste Shipment (September 27 2010) ]

[ Nuclear Intestines: Looking Inside a Radioactive Steam Generator ]

[ List of Radioactive Contaminants Inside a Nuclear Steam Generator ]

[ Resolution to Stop Shipment of Radioactive Steam Generators on Great Lakes ]

[ Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) who have endorsed the resolution against the transport ]

[ Quebec municipalities that have passed the resolution against the transport ]

[ Great Lakes and Saint Lawrence Cities Against the Planned Shipment ]

[ Shipping 1600 metric tonnes of radioactive waste from Canada to Sweden: The Route ]

[ Returning 400 metric tonnes of concentrated radwaste from Sweden to Canada (through Halifax): Possible Routes ]

[ Radio interview on the transport of steam generators to Swedenl ]

[ Critique of CNSC Presentation to Owen Sound City Council ]

[ CCNR Submission to the CNSC: Do Not Grant a Licence! ]

[ Steel Manufacturers Association Report on Radioactive Scrap Metal (EXCERPT 2009-2010) ]

[ UN Report on Radioactive Contamination of Scrap Metal (2006) ]

[Oscar]

Seven Great Lakes States' U.S. Senators object to radioactive waste shipment from Canada to Sweden via the Great Lakes

http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2010/10/1/
7-great-lakes-states-us-senators-object-to-radioactive-steam.html

Media Advisory, October 1, 2010

Contact: Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear,
kevin@beyondnuclear.org, cell 240-462-3216

Washington, D.C.--Citing transportation risks of radiological releases during shipment of radioactive wastes on the irreplaceable Great Lakes, and questioning the wisdom of "recyling" radioactive metals into the
consumer product scrap metal recycling stream, seven U.S. Senators from Great Lakes States [Russell Feingold (D-WI), Robert Casey Jr. (D-PA), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Carl Levin (D-MI), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Richard Durbin (D-IL, Assistant Senate Majority Leader), and Charles Schumer (D-NY)] have sent letters to the U.S. Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA), as well as the Canadian federal government (Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and Ministry of Environment), urging that full environmental analyses be carried out before permits are issued for this risky shipment of radioactive Canadian nuclear steam generators to commence. PHMSA has recently come under fire due to its close ties to the industries which it is supposed to regulate, as well as for high profile and even deadly oil pipeline leaks and natural gas pipeline explosions.

For more information, see:

http://www.beyondnuclear.org/home/2010/10/1/
7-great-lakes-states-us-senators-object-to-radioactive-steam.html

For additional background, see:

http://www.beyondnuclear.org/canada/

--End--

--
Kevin Kamps
Radioactive Waste Watchdog
Beyond Nuclear
6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 400
Takoma Park, Maryland 20912
Office: (301) 270-2209 ext. 1
Cell: (240) 462-3216
Fax: (301) 270-4000
kevin@beyondnuclear.org
www.beyondnuclear.org

Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic.

[Oscar]

Steam Generators: Radioactive Cargo is Mostly Plutonium

Media Release November 15 2010 For Immediate Release

Several prominent non-governmental organizations are accusing Bruce Power (BP) of misleading the public, the media and decision-makers about the kind of contamination inside the cargo of 16 radioactive steam generators it plans to ship to Sweden, by neglecting to state that it is mainly plutonium.
BP has applied to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) for a licence to transport the radioactive cargo through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway en route to Sweden. CNSC staff has acknowledged that the proposed shipment exceeds by at least 6 times the maximum amount of radioactivity normally allowed on a single vessel.
BP has trivialized the danger of this proposed shipment by referring to the cargo as ‘low level radioactivity. But according to BP’s own figures, about 90 percent of the mass of radioactive material inside the steam generators is plutonium -- a highly toxic, long-lived radioactive poison. On its web site, Studsvik, the Swedish company that plans to melt down most of the radioactive metal and sell it as scrap for use in any number of commercial products, calls the innards of the steam generators ‘highy radioactive’
“Each steam generator contains five plutonium isotopes with an admixture of at least eighteen other man-made radioactive materials. To imply that this radiotoxic cocktail poses only a low-level of risk is misleading,” said Dr. Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility. “It is extraordinarily dangerous stuff, and will remain toxic for thousands of years.”
The plutonium inside the steam generators gives off very little highly penetrating radiation, and therefore cannot be detected from the outside. But it gives off alpha radiation, which is 20 times more biologically damaging than beta or gamma radiation per unit of energy when deposited in living tissue. Any accidental spill will pose a serious long-lived contamination problem.
“Simple arithmetic shows that the amount of plutonium-239 inside the 16 steam generators is enough, in principle, to give more than 52 million atomic workers their maximum permissible ‘body burden’ of 0.7 micrograms,” said Dr. Marvin Resnikoff of Radioactive Waste Management Associates in Vermont.
“And if the other plutonium isotopes inside the steam generator (plutonium-238, plutonium-240, plutonium-241 and plutonium-242) are factored in, the number of workers that could be overdosed is doubled,” added Dr. Edwards.
BP’s planned shipment of 1600 tonnes of radioactive waste through the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence has been met with concerted opposition from over 100 municipalities and aboriginal communities along the route, as well as from more than 70 NGOs. In response to this public outcry, CNSC held a public hearing in September with 79 intervenors. The outpouring of concern at that hearing led CNSC to extend the comment period for intervenors to give added input until November 22 -- an unexpected and unprecedented development.
Most of the intervenors want Bruce Power to cancel the shipment and return to the original plan as laid down in a 2006 Environmental Assessment : to store the steam generators on site indefinitely as radioactive waste along with all the other radioactive waste materials produced by the Bruce reactors. “Radioactive waste should be isolated from the human environment, not transported halfway around the world, and certainly not dispersed into consumer products,” said Kevin Kamps of Beyond Nuclear.
But if BP insists on pushing forward with its proposal, intervenors feel strongly that there must be an environmental assessment of the entire project, including not only the initial transport to Sweden but the recycling of the radioactive metal and the return back to Canada of up to 90 percent of the original waste.
“The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River constitute a priceless natural resource, providing drinking water for 40 million people, and supporting a multibillion dollar fishery. If that does not trigger an environmental assessment, then something is wrong with the system,” said Kay Cumbow of Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination in Michigan.

Contacts:
Dr. Gordon Edwards, (514) 489 2665 [home] (514) 839 7214 [cell] ccnr@web.ca
President, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, Montreal.

Dr. Marvin Resnikoff, (802) 732 8008 [work]
radwaste@rwma.com
Radioactive Waste Management Associates (Bellows Falls, Vermont),

Kevin Kamps, (240) 462-3216 [cell]
kevin@beyondnuclear.org
Beyond Nuclear (Takoma Park, Maryland)

Kay Cumbow, (810) 346 4513
kcumbow@greatlakes.net
Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination (Michigan),

[Oscar]

Groups call on safety regulator to reject radioactive shipment

http://www.thestar.com/article/
894544--groups-call-on-safety-regulator-to-reject-radioactive-shipment

Brendan Kennedy, Staff Reporter, The Toronto Star, Sun Nov 21, 2010

An international coalition of environmental groups and community leaders will make its final pleas to Canada�s nuclear safety regulator Monday in a last-ditch attempt to stop a controversial plan to ship radiation-laced steel through the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence Seaway.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is deciding whether to grant Bruce Power Inc. a licence to transport 16 decommissioned steam generators weighing 1,760 tonnes by ship from the shores of Georgian Bay, through Lakes Huron, Erie and Ontario and along the St. Lawrence River to Sweden, where they are to be recycled.
It would be the first time a licence has been issued by the commission to ship nuclear waste through the Great Lakes.
Monday marks the beginning of the commission's final deliberations following two days of public hearings - called to satisfy a swelling public outrage - in Ottawa in September.
But critics of the plan - including environmental groups, aboriginal leaders and the mayors of more than 100 Great Lakes communities - aren't holding out hope they will be successful.
"This decision was made by [Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission] staff long before the public was even aware of the issue," said John Bennett, executive director for the Sierra Club of Canada, which accused the commission of merely 'putting on a show' of public consultation.
"The public is at a total disadvantage with this kind of process," he said, adding that non-profit agencies like his can't compete with the resources of large corporations to produce technical research.
Both Bruce Power and commission staff who reviewed the private company's application say the radioactive contamination inside the generators is minuscule and poses no risk to human or environmental health.
The company, which has accused opposition groups of using 'scare tactics, launched a website to defend the plan at www.rightthingtodo.ca, where it argues that recycling the generators will reduce their environmental footprint.
The generators, which were decommissioned in the 1990, are to be sent to Studsvik, a Swedish company that can reprocess the generator metal and reduce the amount of waste that would need to be stored.
Bruce Power is paying Studsvik about $1 million per shipped generator.
The Sierra Club of Canada is one of the many groups calling for a full environmental assessment of the plan to determine any potential safety hazards.
Commission staff said there was no assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act because it didn't
meet the criteria as a 'project,' and the nuclear activity was far below the assessment threshold.
Bennett warned that the commission's decision could set a precedent.
"This may be about 16 steam generators now, but really what's happening is that Bruce Power is trying to wedge open a crack so they can create a flood of transportation of nuclear waste."

MORE:

http://www.thestar.com/article/
894544--groups-call-on-safety-regulator-to-reject-radioactive-shipment

- - - - - -

Green groups take final shot to block Great Lakes nuclear shipment

http://www.leaderpost.com/technology/
Green+groups+take+final+shot+block+Great+Lakes+nuclear+shipment/3862847/story.html

By Carmen Chai, Postmedia News, November 21, 2010
Environmental groups have one last chance to convince Canada's nuclear-energy watchdog to reject a plan to haul 16 decommissioned radioactive steam generators across the Great Lakes on their way to Sweden for recycling.
About 80 organizations from across Canada, the United States and Sweden are submitting their final pleas Monday to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, insisting its panel should reject a plan by Bruce Power to ship about 1,600 tonnes of radioactive waste through Canada's Great Lakes.
The commission gave environmentalists 30 days to file final comments.
Critics say the route would set a "dangerous" North American precedent as the largest shipment to travel on the Great Lakes. The generators would then move through the St. Lawrence Seaway and across the Atlantic Ocean.
Most are asking that Bruce Power provide more time and resources so they can conduct their own environmental-risk assessments.
"They absolutely refused to do any of these things. All we have now is an opportunity to say our piece and get criticized and cross-examined by the proponent," said John Bennett of the Sierra Club Foundation.
"They're trying to establish that they can ship this stuff out of the country and once they get the first shipment into Sweden, then the Great Lakes (are) open and there's hundreds of thousands of tonnes of stuff going down Canadian waters. This is not about 16 steam generators," he said.
The destination for the radiation-laced steel is a recycling plant in Studsvik, Sweden, that is meant to safely break down 90 per cent of the metals and return 30 per cent of the steel to Canada, where it will be used to produce commercial products.
"This material would be sold on the open market without any indication that it's radioactive at all. It'd be in any kind of commercial products that require scrap metals, from tables to silverware or kids' toys," Gordon Edwards, president of the Montreal-based Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, warned consumers.

MORE:

http://www.thestar.com/article/
894544--groups-call-on-safety-regulator-to-reject-radioactive-shipment

[Oscar]

CNSC approves radioactive shipments on the GreatLakes :(

From: <bpatterson@canadians.org>
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 5:28 PM

The Canadian Press reports late today that, "Bruce Power has been given the go-ahead to transport 16 decommissioned steam generators from southwestern Ontario (across the Great Lakes and then on) to Sweden for recycling."
"On Friday, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission issued Bruce Power a transport licence that will be valid until Feb. 3, 2012. ...The commission says it's satisfied that Bruce Power's application meets Canadian and international regulations for the transport of nuclear substances."
The Council of Canadians has consistently opposed the application for these shipments on the Great Lakes and will be responding with an action plan shortly.

The Canadian Press report is at
http://www.trurodaily.com/News/Canada%20-%20World/
Society/2011-02-04/article-2200041/Bruce-Power-gets-OK-to-ship-16-radioactive-generators-through-Great-Lakes/1.

[Oscar]

Critics of Bruce Power say fight is 'not over'

b]Background:[/b]

On Friday afternoon, February 4, 2011, at 4:41 pm, we received notice from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission that they have granted a licence to Bruce Power to ship 16 radioactive steam generators to Sweden, where much of the radioactive metal will be melted down and blended with non-radioactive metal (In the ratio of 1 to 10) to be sold as scrap metal for unrestricted use in the world's metal supply.

For more information on this subject see
http://ccnr.org.

Gordon Edwards.
= = = = = = =
Critics of Bruce Power say fight is 'not over'

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/
934026--critics-of-bruce-power-say-fight-is-not-over

Dan Robson, Staff Reporter, Toronto Star, Feb. 5, 2011
A controversial decision to allow Bruce Power to ship 16 radioactive, school-bus sized generators through the Great Lakes will be met with protests and appeals to the Harper government, critics say.
“This is not over,” said Mike Bradley, mayor of Sarnia. “There are a couple more chapters to go in this play.”
On Friday, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission announced its decision to grant a licence to Bruce Power to move the decommissioned steam generators to Sweden, where they will be recycled.
A timeline for the move is yet to be set. A licence still has to be granted by Transport Canada and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Bruce Power must also receive permission from the United Kingdom, Norway and Demark to move the generators through their waters.
Seven U.S. Senators have written letters to Washington, looking to stop the generators from being shipped through the Great Lakes, Bradley said. First Nations representatives have also raised concerns about the lack of consultation with them through the process.
The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities initiative — representing 73 cities, on both sides of the borders, from Thunder Bay to Rimouski, Que. — says its own analysis of the proposed shipment shows that it violates safety regulations.
Bradley said he is calling on the Harper government to challenge the commission’s ruling, as it has with the CRTC’s plan for usage-based billing for the Internet.
“They have the same opportunity here,” he said. “Except this impacts 14 million people who live on both sides of the border.”
Bruce Power says the project is “the right thing to do” — but critics say moving the generators, in which the radioactive waste is already secure, creates unnecessary risks to the environment, could contaminate drinking water, and sets a dangerous precedent for shipping hazardous materials through the Great Lakes.

MORE:
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/
934026--critics-of-bruce-power-say-fight-is-not-over