Atomic reactors? Electricity is but the fleeting byproduct; the actual product is forever deadly high-level radioactive waste!

At the first anti-nuclear power event Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps ever attended, in March 1993, Michael Keegan of Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes and Don't Waste Michigan pointed out that "Electricity is but the fleeting byproduct from atomic reactors. The actual product is forever deadly radioactive waste."

An environmental coalition of nearly three dozen groups, including Beyond Nuclear and Don't Waste Michigan, has said just as much to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regarding its "Nuclear Waste Confidence" Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement. So too has Beyond Nuclear directly itself.

A key conclusion of such public comments? The safety risks alone associated with generating, storing, and "disposing of" high-level radioactive wastes, mean that NRC approving license extensions at old reactors is a non-starter, as is NRC approving proposed new reactor construction and operating license applications. This should have been revealed by the "hard look" required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) during NRC's court-ordered EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) undertaking.

The image to the left is the cover of the Beyond Nuclear pamphlet published for the Dec. 2, 2012 conference held at the U. of Chicago entitled "A Mountain of Radioactive Waste 70 Years High." Sponsored by Beyond Nuclear, FOE, and NEIS, it marked the 70th year, to the day, since Enrico Fermi fired up the first self-sustaining chain reaction in an atomic reactor, creating the world's first high-level radioactive waste, as part of the Manhattan Project's race to create atomic weapons, culminating in the annihilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan in August, 1945.

Truth to Power (Arnie & Maggie Gundersen, Nuclear Whistleblowers)

Arnie GundersenMaggie GundersenThis just out from Fairewinds Energy Education:

"This video is a presentation Arnie and Maggie Gundersen gave at Clarkson University to a Business Ethics course on October 22, 2013. The Gundersens discuss their experience as whistleblowers in the nuclear industry and the importance of the internet in reporting malfeasance."

11 Democratic U.S. Senators protest NRC's restrictions on transparency and accountability to Congress

U.S. Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA)U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)On Nov. 21st, a group of ten Democratic U.S. Senators wrote U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Chairwoman Allison Macfarlane regarding their concerns about new agency policies restricting transparency, even to Members of Congress. (Actually, to set the record straight, Bernie Sanders is an Independent -- a Socialist, to be exact -- from Vermont. He caucuses with the Democrats.)

One of signatories, U.S. Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA, photo left), a press release, stating, that the new NRC policy restricts congressional oversight and undermines transparency.

“This change in policy is clearly inconsistent with your stated commitment, is contrary to principles of government accountability, and in conflict with Congress’s constitutionally-authorized oversight authorities,” the Senators wrote in the letter to NRC Chief Macfarlane.

The other nine signatories on the letter are: Senators Menendez (NJ), Leahy (VT), Wyden (OR), Sanders (VT), Warren (MA), Gillibrand (NY), Blumenthal (CT), Baldwin (WI) and Whitehouse (RI).

Separately, a tenth U.S. Senate Democrat, Barbara Boxer of California (photo, above left), the Chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, also wrote NRC Chairwoman Macfarlane. Boxer stated that "Any effort to obstruct or impede my oversight activities is unacceptable," and demanded NRC explain why certain documents concerning safety concerns at the San Onofre nuclear power plant were evidently removed prior to delivery of boxes to Chairwoman Boxer's committee staff. Boxer also issued a press release.

Reporting on an EPW oversight hearing on NRC that took place this week, a blog in The Hill entitled "Boxer slams nuke regulator's 'intimidation,'" reported:

Boxer said the policy was evidenced earlier this week when NRC personnel sought to restrict her staff’s review of records related to an ongoing probe of safety issues at the San Onofre plant in Southern California. Boxer’s staffers were told that they could be physically searched for stolen documents after they had finished reviewing them, she said.

“Let me be clear — no form of agency intimidation or obstruction will be tolerated in this committee’s investigation or its Constitutional oversight responsibilities,” Boxer said. “Action will be taken if you do not reverse your policy.”

The EPW website has information about the hearing of the Clean Air and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee, including a link to the archived webcast. However, the hearing included only opening statements by the full Committee, as well as the Subcommittee, Chairs and Ranking Members. After about a half hour, the Subcommittee hearing was interrupted by the Senate floor vote -- dubbed "the Nuclear Option," ironically enough -- on ending filibusters on confirmations of presidential judicial and agency appointments. The hearing has yet to be re-scheduled.

Environmental coalition challenges NRC on risk of HLRW pool fires yet again

IPS senior scholar Robert AlvarezIt's déjà vu all over again! After announcing a public meeting on August 22nd -- supposedly intended for technical dialogue -- the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) attemped to change the rules, and unabashedly refused to respond to watchdogs' challenges to its biased analysis regarding high-level radioactive waste (HLRW) storage pool fire risks. The strong backlash by representatives of an environmental coalition, inlcuding Beyond Nuclear, has forced NRC to try again. NRC has issued a public notice, as well as slides, for its Sept. 18th public meeting.

The coalition's attorney, Diane Curran, has re-issued talking points first developed for public use in the lead up to the previous meeting. They are more relevant than ever. Curran urges concerned members of the public to register to speak by emailing kevin.witt@nrc.gov. You can phone into the meeting at (888) 324-8193 [enter passcode 4345562], and can watch the webcast at http://video.nrc.gov or https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/984626536.

On August 1st, Curran, and one of the environmental coalition's expert witnesses, Dr. Gordon Thompson of the Institute for Resource and Security Studies (IRSS), submitted a "devastating critique" regarding NRC's "Draft Consequence Study" on the risks of fire in HLRW storage pools. Curran and Thompson called for the study to be withdraw, due to its lack of basic scientific integrity and credibility.

Now Robert Alvarez (photo, above left), senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), has weighed in on the coalition's behalf. Alvarez previously served as a senior advisor to the U.S. Secretary of Energy during the Clintion administration. After the 3/11/11 nuclear catastrophe began in Japan, he published a report on the potentially catastrophic risks in U.S. commercial nuclear power plant HLRW storage pools--the largest concentrations of hazardous artificial radioactivity in the entire country.

As U.S. Senator Ed Markey has pointed out in a letter to NRC Chairwoman Allison Macfarlane, a 2003 study written by none other than Macfarlane herself (along with co-authors Alvarez, Thompson, and several others) starkly contradicts NRC's current "Draft Consequence Study" regarding pool fire risks. Astoundingly, and at catastrophic risk, NRC staff is relying on the "Draft Consequence Study" as the basis to recommend that no expedited transfer of irradiated nuclear fuel should be required as a "lesson learned" in the aftermath of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear catastrophe. Beyond Nuclear and hundreds of environmental groups representing all 50 states have called for pools to be emptied into "Hardened On-Site Storage" (HOSS) for well over a decade, but their calls have fallen on deaf ears at NRC.

U.S. Sen. Markey slams NRC for biased study of HLRW storage pool risks

U.S. Senator Ed Markey (D-MA)On the eve of a public meeting at the agency's HQ in Rockville, Maryland, U.S. Senator Ed Markey (D-MA, photo left), a long-time congressional watchdog on the nuclear power industry and its supposed regulators at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has written a blistering letter to NRC Chairwoman Allison Macfarlane regarding NRC staff's "Draft Consequence Study" of the radiological risks of high-level radioactive waste (HLRW) storage pool fires.

Markey's letter references a "devastating critique" of NRC's "Draft Consequence Study" submitted on August 1st by Dr. Gordon Thompson, expert witness on behalf of an environmental coalition including Beyond Nuclear.

Markey points out the irony of NRC's current flip disregard of pool fire risks, given NRC Chairwoman Macfarlane's co-authorship of a 2003 study, along with several others, including Thompson, as well as IPS Senior scholar Bob Alvarez, that clearly exposed the potentially catastrophic fire risks of pool storage.