nuclear-news

Secret transport of highly enriched uranium, from Ontario to South Carolina

How should any public right to know be weighed next conflicting needs of secrecy and security?

Uranium convoy heading your way? North Country Public radio, February 17th, 2013 by Lucy Martin  “….sometime soon an armed convoy of trucks carrying depleted uranium may be trundling down roads between a nuclear facility in Chalk River Ontario and a reprocessing site in South Carolina.

For obvious reasons, specifics about transporting highly-enriched uranium (HEU) are not being publicized. As the crow flies, though, such a journey could easily involve cutting across New York State.

Here’s the story as reported in the Ottawa CItizen this week by Ian MacLeod:

…a 2011 federal government memo says the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) considers it unnecessary to hold public sessions that would allow citizens to ask questions and comment on the HEU repatriations to the U.S. The CNSC declined to comment on the memo Tuesday.

Documents from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission say an “expedited” approval is being sought for transport of the liquid HEU. It is believed to be the first time such a highly radioactive solution has been transported by road in North America and, according to U.S. commission documents, could happen as early as August.

Other U.S. commission documents show March 1 is the U.S. target date for approving transport of the spent fuel rods to the Savannah River Site.

Filing for the National Post Ian MacLeod also reports:

“This does seem to be an unprecedented, cross-border shipment of liquid high-level waste and, for that reason alone, it needs the highest order of environmental review on both sides of the border,” says Tom Clements, a South Carolina campaign co-ordinator for Friends of the Earth and former executive director of the Nuclear Control Institute in Washington.

(More technical information regarding this complex subject is discussed in both articles.)…… The conveyance choices consist of plane, barge, truck or rail. Each has potential problems.

How should any public right to know be weighed next conflicting needs of secrecy and security?

tootightmike says:

One reasonable concern that must be answered is whether our homeowners policies will cover us in a worst case, traffic accident. Another would the concern over a terrorist attack sort of threat, and I’m pretty sure my policy expressly DOES NOT cover such damages.
Do our governments have some sort of policy that would re-locate and re-build an entire town that might be polluted by a random catastrophy? How about a river and all affected parties downstream?
I understand the need for secrecy. Handled properly such a transport will pass by un-noticed like so many other hazardous loads through town. The daily trains that run through Potsdam and Canton carry truly frightening chemicals, every day, and several times per day, and in the event of an accident, dead is dead.
So is there some assurance that we’ll all be safe and happy in the event of a mishap, or are we, along the route, involved in this risk too? http://blogs.northcountrypublicradio.org/inbox/2013/02/17/weapons-grade-uranium-convoy-nimby-on-wheels/

February 21, 2013 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | secrets,lies and civil liberties, Uranium, USA