Legal « nuclear-news

Lawsuit challenges NRC on SMR regulation

Friday, 10 January 2025, https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/lawsuit-challenges-nrc-on-smr-regulation

The States of Texas and Utah and microreactor developer Last Energy Inc are challenging the US regulator over its application of a rule it adopted in 1956 to small modular reactors and research and test reactors.

Under the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Utilization Facility Rule, all US reactors are required to obtain NRC construction and operating licences regardless of their size, the amount of nuclear material they use or the risks associated with their operation. The plaintiffs say this imposes “complicated, costly, and time-intensive requirements that even the smallest and safest SMRs and microreactors – down to those not strong enough to power an LED lightbulb” must satisfy to secure the necessary licences. This does not only affect microreactors: existing research and test reactors such as those at the universities in both Texas and Utah face “significant costs” to maintain their NRC operating licences, the plaintiffs say.

In the filing, Last Energy – developer of the PWR-20 microreactor – says it has invested “tens of millions of dollars” in developing small nuclear reactor technology, including USD2 million on manufacturing efforts in Texas alone, and has agreements to develop more than 50 nuclear reactor facilities across Europe. But although it has a “preference” to build in the USA, “Last Energy nonetheless has concluded it is only feasible to develop its projects abroad in order to access alternative regulatory frameworks that incorporate a de minimis standard for nuclear power permitting”.

Noting that only three new commercial reactors have been built in the USA over the past 28 years, the plaintiffs say building a new commercial reactor of any size in the country has become “virtually impossible” due to the rule, which it says is a “misreading” of the NRC’s own scope of authority.

They are asking the court to set aside the rule, “at least as applied to certain small, non-hazardous reactors”, and exempt their research reactors and Last Energy’s small modular reactors (SMRs) from the commission’s licensing requirements.

Houston, Texas-based law firm King & Spalding said the lawsuit, if it is successful, would “mark a turning point” in the US nuclear regulatory framework – but warns that it could also create greater uncertainty as advanced nuclear technologies get closer to commercial readiness.

“Regardless the outcome, the Plaintiffs’ lawsuit highlights the challenges in applying the Utilization Facility Rule to the advanced nuclear reactors now under development in the US,” the company said in in analysis released on 9 January.

But the NRC is already addressing the issue: in 2023, it began the rulemaking process to establish an optional technology-inclusive regulatory framework for new commercial advanced nuclear reactors, which would include risk-informed and performance-based methods “flexible and practicable for application to a variety of advanced reactor technologies”. SECY-23-0021: Proposed Rule: Risk-Informed, Technology-Inclusive Regulatory Framework for Advanced Reactors is currently open for public comment until 28 February, and the NRC has said it expects to issue a final rule “no later than the end of 2027”.

The lawsuit has been filed with the US District Court in the Eastern District of Texas.

January 13, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Ireland formally joins ICJ genocide case against Israel

Ireland is the latest country to join South Africa in attempting to hold Israel accountable at the International Court of Justice in the Hague

News Desk, JAN 7, 2025, https://thecradle.co/articles/ireland-formally-joins-icj-genocide-case-against-israel

Ireland has submitted a declaration to join South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accusing Israel of genocide.

“Ireland, invoking Article 63 of the Statute of the Court, filed in the Registry of the Court a declaration of intervention in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip,” or South Africa versus Israel, the ICJ said in a statement on 7 January.

Under Article 63, any state party to a convention that is under judicial consideration has the right to intervene, making the ICJ’s interpretation of that convention binding on them as well.

Irish Foreign Minister Micheal Martin announced in December his government would join the ICJ case.

Israel closed its embassy in Dublin in response, while the Israeli Foreign Minister, Gideon Saar, described Ireland’s Prime Minister, Simon Harris, as antisemitic.

Harris responded by saying, “You know what I think is reprehensible? Killing children, I think that’s reprehensible. You know what I think is reprehensible? Seeing the scale of civilian deaths that we’ve seen in Gaza. You know what I think is reprehensible? People are being left to starve, and humanitarian aid is not flowing.”

US-Palestinian entrepreneur and art curator Faisal Saleh said he has begun efforts to lease the closed Israeli embassy building and convert it into a Palestinian museum.

“This will be a very powerful symbolic move where Palestinian art replaces the genocidal entity representation in Ireland,” Saleh told Anadolu Ajansi on 3 January.

Israel began its war on Gaza in October 2023, placing the strip under total siege and unleashing a horrific bombing campaign targeting Palestinian civilians and Hamas fighters alike.

In December of that year, South Africa filed an application instituting proceedings against Israel, claiming its actions in Gaza were in violation of the Genocide Convention.

Several countries have since joined the case, including Nicaragua, Colombia, Libya, Mexico, Palestine, Spain, and Turkiye.

In fifteen months of war, Israeli forces have killed over 46,000 Palestinians in Gaza, mostly women and children, while injuring over 105,000.

The campaign has laid waste to much of the enclave, including homes, mosques, schools, hospitals, universities, agricultural land, and water infrastructure, making Gaza largely unlivable.

Israeli soldiers and politicians have declared it their goal to forcibly expel all 2.3 million Palestinians from Gaza and to build Jewish settlements on the ruins of the destroyed Palestinian cities and refugee camps.

January 12, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Ireland, Israel, Legal | Leave a comment

Japanese yakuza leader pleads guilty to trafficking nuclear materials from Myanmar

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/09/takeshi-ebisawa-yakuza-leader-nuclear-materials-myanmar

US authorities charged Takeshi Ebisawa with conspiring to traffic nuclear materials from Myanmar for expected use by Iran in nuclear weapons, handling nuclear material sourced from Myanmar and seeking to sell it to fund an illicit arms deal, US authorities have said.

Yakuza leader Takeshi Ebisawa and a co-defendant had previously been charged in April 2022 with drug trafficking and firearms offences, and both were remanded.

He was then additionally charged in February 2024 with conspiring to sell weapons-grade nuclear material and lethal narcotics from Myanmar, and to purchase military weaponry on behalf of an armed insurgent group, prosecutors said.

The military weaponry to be part of the arms deal included surface-to-air missiles, the indictment alleged.

“As he admitted in federal court today, Takeshi Ebisawa brazenly trafficked nuclear material, including weapons-grade plutonium, out of Burma,” acting US attorney Edward Kim said on Wednesday, using another name for Myanmar.

“At the same time, he worked to send massive quantities of heroin and methamphetamine to the United States in exchange for heavy-duty weaponry such as surface-to-air missiles to be used on battlefields in Burma.”

Prosecutors alleged that Ebisawa, 60, “brazenly” moved material containing uranium and weapons-grade plutonium, alongside drugs, from Myanmar.

From 2020, Ebisawa boasted to an undercover officer he had access to large quantities of nuclear materials that he sought to sell, providing photographs of materials alongside Geiger counters registering radiation.

During a sting operation including undercover agents, Thai authorities assisted US investigators in seizing two powdery yellow substances that the defendant described as “yellowcake.”

“The (US) laboratory determined that the isotope composition of the plutonium found in the Nuclear Samples is weapons-grade, meaning that the plutonium, if produced in sufficient quantities, would be suitable for use in a nuclear weapon,” the Justice Department said in its statement at the time.

One of Ebisawa’s co-conspirators claimed they “had available more than 2,000 kilograms (4,400 pounds) of Thorium-232 and more than 100 kilograms of uranium in the compound U3O8 – referring to a compound of uranium commonly found in the uranium concentrate powder known as ’yellowcake’.”

The indictment claimed Ebisawa had suggested using the proceeds of the sale of nuclear material to fund weapons purchases on behalf of an unnamed ethnic insurgent group in Myanmar.

Ebisawa faces up to 20 years’ imprisonment for the trafficking of nuclear materials internationally.

Prosecutors describe Ebisawa as a “leader of the Yakuza organised crime syndicate, a highly organised, transnational Japanese criminal network that operates around the world (and whose) criminal activities have included large-scale narcotics and weapons trafficking.”

Sentencing will be determined by the judge in the case at a later date, prosecutors said.

January 10, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Japan, Legal, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

Japanese crime boss admits to conspiring to sell nuclear material to Iran

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/1/9/japanese-crime-boss-admits-to-conspiring-to-sell-nuclear-material-to-iran

Takeshi Ebisawa faces a maximum punishment of life in prison after pleading guilty to six counts in a Manhattan court.

A Japanese crime boss has pleaded guilty to conspiring to sell nuclear material from Myanmar to Iran along with drug trafficking and weapons offences, authorities in the United States have said.

Takeshi Ebisawa, 60, a member of the yakuza, entered a guilty plea to six counts in federal court in Manhattan on Wednesday, the US Department of Justice said in a statement.

He is set to be sentenced on April 9.

According to prosecutors, Ebisawa in 2020 told an undercover agent for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and a DEA source that he had acquitted a large quantity of thorium and uranium that he wished to sell.

In response to Ebisawa’s repeated inquiries, the undercover agent agreed to help Ebisawa broker the sale of the nuclear materials to an associate who was posing as an Iranian general, prosecutors said.

Ebisawa then offered to supply the undercover associate with plutonium that would be even “better” and more “powerful” than uranium for making nuclear weapons, according to prosecutors.

A powdery yellow substance that Ebisawa’s co-conspirators showed to undercover agents was later determined in a laboratory analysis to contain detectable quantities of uranium, thorium and plutonium, the Justice Department said.

Ebisawa also conspired to broker the purchase of US-made surface-to-air missiles and heavy-duty weaponry to arm multiple ethnic armed groups in Myanmar, and to accept large quantities of heroin and methamphetamine as partial payment for the arms, according to prosecutors.

US officials said they conducted Ebisawa’s arrest and prosecution in cooperation with law enforcement partners in Indonesia, Japan and Thailand.

“Today’s plea should serve as a stark reminder to those who imperil our national security by trafficking weapons-grade plutonium and other dangerous materials on behalf of organized criminal syndicates that the Department of Justice will hold you accountable to the fullest extent of the law,” said Assistant Attorney General Matthew G Olsen of the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

Ebisawa, who was previously charged in 2022 with international drug trafficking and firearms offences, faces possible life imprisonment for the most serious of the charges.

January 9, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Japan, Legal, USA | Leave a comment

An overlooked Supreme Court case could decide the future of nuclear power

Miles Mogulescu, 6 Dec 24, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2025/01/05/a-double-edged-sword-of-damocles/

Although barely mentioned in the mainstream media, in granting cert to Interim Storage Partners, LLC v. Texas, a case about the storage of spent radioactive fuel from nuclear power plants, the U.S. Supreme Court may have taken on potentially the most consequential case of its new term.

SCOTUS will decide whether or not to uphold a Fifth Circuit decision that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) does not have the legal power to license a private corporation to construct an off-site storage facility to hold deadly radioactive waste from nuclear power plants.

Depending on the legal rationale for SCOTUS’ decision, it could further enhance the power of courts to overturn decisions of regulatory agencies.

The case could determine whether artificial intelligence companies like Microsoft and Google can build a new generation of nuclear power plants to service the voracious hunger of artificial intelligence for electricity. Depending on its rationale, it could also impact the ability of regulatory agencies to function efficiently without being second guessed by courts.

The issues in the case have brought together an unlikely coalition of environmentalists, Texas Republicans, New Mexico Democrats, and the oil and gas industry against an equally unlikely grouping of the Biden administration, the nuclear power industry, and AI tech companies like Microsoft and Google.

The Legal Substance Issues

The environmental and legal issues in the case have a long history. The nuclear power industry has accumulated nearly 100,000 metric tons of radioactive waste that need to be deposited in a place that could be safe for millions of years. Most of the waste is now stored in temporary facilities adjacent to the power plants that create them, but such sites are running out of space and may not be safe long-term. During the 1980s Congress passed and amended the Nuclear Waste Policy Act providing for a permanent waste site and then designating Yucca Mountain, Nevada as the sole site. But plans for the site were abandoned due to environmental and political opposition, leaving no permanent site for disposable nuclear waste.

In response, for the first time the Nuclear Regulatory Commission began to grant licenses for “interim” storage facilities which were off-site (and often hundreds of miles away) from the power plants which generated the waste, claiming authority under the Atomic Energy Act. One such license was for an off-site storage facility in the Permian Basin, Texas. Texas Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton and a private oil and gas company sued, claiming that the federal government lacked the statutory authority to issue a license for interim off-site storage.

The conservative Fifth Circuit agreed with the plaintiffs, opining “Texas is correct. The Atomic Energy Act does not confer on the commission the broad authority it claims to issue licenses for private parties to store spent nuclear fuel away-from-the-reactor. And the Nuclear Waste Policy Act establishes a comprehensive statutory scheme for dealing with nuclear waste generated from commercial nuclear power generation, thereby foreclosing the commission’s claim of authority.”

The Fifth Circuit vacated the license. The U.S. Supreme Court just granted cert and will hear the case this term. Its decision will likely be highly consequential, both for environmental and AI development reasons, and for legal reasons.

Environmentally, the building of new nuclear power plants has been stalled for decades, both because of cost and because of environmental catastrophes like Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima and anti-nuclear films like Mike Nichols’ Silkwood starring Meryl Streep.

The Role of High-Tech Companies in Expanding Nuclear for AI

But largely under the radar, the voracious demand for electricity to power AI is leading top high-tech companies like Microsoft and Google to reinvigorate nuclear energy. Goldman Sachs analysts say it takes nearly 10 times the energy to power a ChatGPT than a Google search—data center power center demand will grow by 160% in the next five years. Morgan Stanley projects global data center emissions to accumulate 2.5 billion metric tons carbon-dioxide equivalent by then.

Microsoft has contracted for the currently mothballed Three Mile Island plant to reopen and access its entire output for Microsoft’s data centers. The operator is seeking hundreds of millions in tax breaks from the federal government under President Joe Bidens’s Inflation Reduction Act, which it says are necessary to make the reopening economically feasible. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm has said in the past that federal subsidies could cut the cost of bringing a new plant online by as much as half.

In March an Amazon affiliate purchased a nuclear-powered data center in Pennsylvania for $650 million.

Google has already announced that it will support building seven small nuclear-power reactors in the U.S., to help power its growing appetite for electricity for AI and jump-start a U.S. nuclear revival.

The tech companies claim that reviving nuclear power will decrease CO2 emissions and help with global climate change. But they ignore the long-standing warnings of environmentalists of the potentially catastrophic dangers of nuclear power.

If SCOTUS upholds the Fifth Circuit decision outlawing the licensing of off-site nuclear waste dumps, it could considerably slow the renewed push for nuclear power, particularly by high-tech companies. That might give more time to evaluate the potential dangers of widespread renewal of nuclear power.

But depending on the legal rationale for SCOTUS’ decision, it could further enhance the power of courts to overturn decisions of regulatory agencies.

The Fifth Circuit used several rationales to block the license of temporary off-site nuclear waste facilities. The first, and least concerning, is its statutory holding that the Atomic Energy Act is “unambiguous” and “nowhere authorizes issuance of a materials license to possess spent nuclear fuel for any reason, let alone for the sole purpose of storing such material in a standalone facility.” If SCOTUS upholds the Fifth Circuit purely on statutory interpretation grounds, it would create few problematic precedents for regulatory agencies in general.

The Major Questions Doctrine

But the Fifth Circuit unnecessarily went further, holding that “even if the statutes were ambiguous, the [government’s] interpretation would not be entitled to deference by the courts” pursuant to the Chevron Doctrine, under which for previous decades, until recently rejected by the Roberts Court, judges deferred to the expertise of regulatory agencies when reasonably interpreting ambiguous statutes.

The Fifth Circuit cited SCOTUS’ precedent-setting 2022 decision in West Virginia v. EPA, in which, for the first time, a conservative majority of SCOTUS justices relied on the “major questions” doctrine to overturn a major Environmental Protection Agency rule. Under the newly invented “major questions” doctrine, SCOTUS ruled that courts should not defer to agencies on matters of “vast economic or political significance” unless the U.S. Congress has explicitly given the agencies the authority to act in those situations.

Citing West Virginia v. EPA, the Fifth Circuit held that “[D]isposal of nuclear energy is an issue of vast ‘economic and political significance.’ What to do with the nation’s ever-growing accumulation of nuclear waste is a major questions that—as the history of the Yucca Mountain repository shows—has been hotly contested for over half a century.”

It’s questionable whether the Fifth Circuit needed to reach the issues concerning the major questions doctrine in order to block the waste depository. It had already decided that the statutes were “unambiguous” and therefore it was not necessary to decide what would happen if they were “ambiguous,” which is the only situation in which the major questions doctrine might arguably apply. If SCOTUS wants to affirm the Fifth Circuit’s result, it can simply agree that the statutes were unambiguous and treat the parts of the decision involving the major questions doctrine as mere dicta. That would set no additional precedent for when courts can question the expertise of regulatory agencies.

What Party Has the Right to Sue?

There’s also a procedural issue in the case, that depending on SCOTUS’ rationale, could set precedent allowing a wider range of entities to legally challenge regulatory agency decisions. Under the Hobbs Act, a “party aggrieved” by an agency’s final order may seek judicial review in a federal appeals court.

The NRC argued, however, that the plaintiffs were not parties aggrieved by the NRC’s licensing order because they were not parties to the underlying administrative proceeding. The Fifth Circuit cited its own precedent asserting that the Hobbs Act contains an “ultra vires” exception to the party aggrieved requirement when the petitioner attacks the agency action as exceeding its authority and therefore the plaintiffs had a right to sue.

In granting cert SCOTUS agreed to rule on two questions. First is the substance issue on whether the government exceeded its authority in granting the off-site nuclear storage license. The second is the procedural issue of whether an allegation of ultra vires can override statutory limitations on jurisdiction, as the Fifth Circuit held. If SCOTUS rules that the Fifth Circuit was wrong to grant jurisdiction to the plaintiffs, the likely result would be that the licenses for off-site nuclear waste facilities would go forward and expand.

It will be highly consequential if SCOTUS simply upholds the Fifth Circuit’s result, which would greatly slow high tech’s attempts to kick start nuclear power without time to reexamine the environmental dangers. At the same time, if SCOTUS also rules that the plaintiffs had an ultra vires right to sue, it could further cripple the ability of regulatory agencies to act to protect the public interest under broad grants of power.

Miles Mogulescu is an entertainment attorney/business affairs executive, producer, political activist and writer.

January 7, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

Poland threatens to arrest Netanyahu at Auschwitz

https://www.rt.com/news/609773-israel-arrest-pm-poland/ 24 Dec 24

Warsaw has to comply with the International Criminal Court’s decisions, the deputy foreign minister has said

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be arrested if he attends next month’s ceremonies marking the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz in Poland, the EU country’s deputy foreign minister, Wladyslaw Bartoszewski, told newspaper Rzeczpospolita on Friday.

Warsaw’s top diplomat stated that Poland, as a signatory of the Rome Statute, is obligated to comply with the directives of the International Criminal Court (ICC). In November, ICC issued warrants for the arrests of Netanyahu and former Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant, citing alleged war crimes related to the ongoing conflict in Gaza.

The court accused Netanyahu and Gallant of using starvation as a method of warfare, alleging they deliberately deprived civilians in Gaza of food, water, and medicine. There was “no obvious military necessity” for such actions, which amount to violations of international law, according to prosecutors.

Israel’s Education Minister Yoav Kisch is expected to be the only government representative at the Auschwitz commemoration, Jerusalem Post reports. The participation of President Isaac Herzog “seems unlikely.”

While all 27 European Union member states are parties to the Rome Statute and thus required to enforce ICC arrest warrants, responses to the court’s decision have varied. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has openly invited Netanyahu to visit, assuring him that Hungary would not enforce the arrest warrant.

Conversely, countries like Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Ireland, Lithuania, and Slovenia have indicated their intent to comply with the ICC’s directives, regardless of diplomatic immunity.

France initially expressed its intention to adhere to the arrest warrant but later cited diplomatic immunity protections for Netanyahu.

The ICC’s actions have elicited strong reactions from Israeli officials. Prime Minister Netanyahu has likened the arrest warrants to a “modern-day Dreyfus affair,” asserting that they are politically motivated.

Auschwitz was a Nazi concentration and extermination camp in occupied Poland during World War II. Over 1.1 million Jews were murdered there, alongside tens of thousands of others, including Poles and Soviet prisoners of war.

December 25, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | EUROPE, Legal | Leave a comment

Nuclear company Orano seeks arbitration over Niger mining licence

World Nuclear News 20th Dec 2024, https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/orano-seeks-arbitration-over-niger-mining-licence

The French company has opened international arbitration proceedings against the State of Niger following the withdrawal of its mining licence for the Imouraren project in June.

“This move comes after several months of unsuccessful attempts at mediation and conciliation,” the company said.

The Imouraren project is about 80km south of Arlit and about 160km north of Agadez and, with mineral reserves of over 200,000 tU, is one of the largest known uranium reserves in the world. Operating company Imouraren SA – owned 66.65% by Orano Expansion and 33.35% by Niger state interests – was awarded an operating permit to mine the deposit in 2009, but development work was suspended in 2015 due to market conditions at the time.

Earlier this year, the company announced it had restarted preparatory work for the project, but within days the Nigerien authorities withdrew the Orano subsidiary’s operating permit.

“The announcement of the withdrawal of the licence took place when Orano presented the State of Niger with a concrete, technical proposal, which would have allowed the IMOURAREN deposit to be exploited as quickly as possible, and after works had resumed since June 2024,” Orano said today. It has engaged law firm Clay Arbitration as its representative.

In July, the Nigerien authorities also withdrew Canadian company GoviEx Uranium’s mining rights for the Madouela uranium project. Earlier this month, the company and its fully owned subsidiary GoviEx Niger Holdings Ltd started proceedings against Niger under the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States, on the basis the state had breached its legal obligations in withdrawing the permit.

December 21, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, Niger, Uranium | Leave a comment

The legal decision on the Murdoch media – what does it mean for us?

NOEL WAUCHOPE, DEC 13, 2024, https://theaimn.com/the-legal-decision-on-the-murdoch-media-what-does-it-mean-for-us/

There is nothing either good or bad, but only thinking makes it so.

Shakespeare’s profound idea applies to that recent legal case, about the Murdoch Family Trust, in the Probate Court in Nevada.

The 93 year-old Rupert Murdoch sought to change the existing “irrevocable trust” which is to govern the arrangements of his media empire, after his death. The issue was that the trust should be in “the best interests” of the Murdoch children.

Rupert Murdoch argued that after his death, his children would benefit best if control of his media empire were to be changed from the existing trust arrangement which gives control to four of his children – Lachlan, Elizabeth, James and Prudence. Murdoch wanted that changed to control by only eldest son Lachlan. The other three disagreed, and took the case to court.

Rupert Murdoch’s given reason was that the whole media enterprise would thus be more profitable, – so all four children would get more money. That way, Elizabeth, James, and Prudence would not have control, but would be richer, and this would be “in their best interest”. Under the present unchanged “irrevocable” trust arrangement, they would share the control with Lachlan, but they would be less rich.

Many commentators are arguing that Rupert Murdoch’s real goal is power and influence – so that is why he wanted the very right-wing Lachlan to be in charge of the media show. Perhaps this is true.

The case was heard in a secret court, but the core of Rupert Murdoch’s argument was that the children’s monetary gain was in their best interest, rather than them having any control of the media and its content.

Apparently the three did not think so, and neither did Commissioner Edmund J Gorman, who ruled in the children’s favour, concluding that Murdoch and his son Lachlan, had acted in “bad faith”, in a “carefully crafted charade”.

Lachlan shares the same right-wing views as his father does, even more so,- while Elizabeth, James and Prudence are reported as having more moderate views. Murdoch has controlling interests in Fox News and News Corp , the Wall Street Journal, in the UK the Times and the Sun, the Australian and others. Apparently it is assumed by all, that the media empire will continue its current record profits only under Lachlan’s leadership. In 2023–24 the Fox Corporation’s net income was US$1.5 billion (A$2.35 billion).

This case raises the question – what is the purpose of the news media ?

According to the Murdoch argument, the purpose is to enrich the owners of the media. That would include all the shareholders, too, I guess. The means by which this is done is to provide entertainment and information to the public. And this is central to Rupert Murdoch’s stated argument.

Some people, including many journalists, and perhaps the Murdoch children, might see the informational role of the news media as its main purpose, with excessive profitability as a secondary concern.

Apparently Elizabeth, James and Prudence preferred to have some control in the media empire, even if that meant less money for them. They thought that “having a say” in the business was in their best interest. It is possible that they might take some pride in news journalism that would be more accurate and balanced than the Murdoch media is now.

Only thinking makes it so

The best example of “Murdoch media thinking” -is in its coverage of climate change. For decades, the Murdoch view was pretty much climate denialism – climate concern seen as a “cult of the elite” and the “effects of global warming have so far proved largely benign”. But more recently, this view was moderated, towards concern that some action should be taken to limit global warming – coinciding with the new right-wing push for nuclear power as the solution to climate change.

In the USA, Murdoch media has a powerful influence, supported by the big corporations, and the right wing in general, and by the Trump publicity machine, but it does have some competition from other right wing outlets like Breitbart and the Daily Wire, and in talk radio, and blogs. It has lost some influence in the UK, following its phone hacking scandal in 2011.

That Murdoch interpretation contradicts the view of thousands of scientists, yet is welcomed by the fossil fuel industries, the nuclear industry, and the right-wing governments that they support. Similarly, the Murdoch media’s view on international politics generally favours military action that the USA supports – on Ukraine’s side, by Israel, and now in Syria. All this is seen to be good – by the USA weapons manufacturers and salesmen, US and UK politicians, and presumably by the public.

In Australia, Murdoch media is far more pervasive, and has been described as a virtual monopoly – with the only national newspaper, newspapers in each state, (often the only newspaper), and News Corp controls radio and television in Australia through a number of assets.

So – what now, after this remarkable probate court decision?

Commissioner Gorman’s recommendation could still be rejected by a district judge. Murdoch’s lawyers can appeal the decision. Even if the decision is finally upheld, it will be a complicated process to rearrange the control of the media in the event of Rupert Murdoch’s death – and that might not happen for a decade or more. News Corp has a dual-class share structure which gives the family 41% of company votes, despite having just 14% of an overall stake in the company. Shareholders might change this arrangement.

In the meantime – fertile ground for endless speculation on what it all might mean – for the share price, for the future direction of the media, for the Murdoch family relationships.

Only thinking makes it so

Some see this legal decision as such a blow to the Murdoch empire – leading to its fatal collapse. And that thought can be viewed as a bad outcome. Even if Rupert Murdoch overturns the decision on appeal, it might have dealt a big blow to the empire.

Some welcome it, visualising a change in direction, with a more progressive media, directed by the three siblings with their more moderate opinions. For Australians who don’t like Donald Trump, and fear a Peter Dutton election win in 2025, well, it really doesn’t matter much. For the foreseeable future, the political right wing is still hanging on to its grip on news and information across this continent, thanks to the Murdoch empire.

December 12, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | legal, media, USA | Leave a comment

Campaigners lose bid to challenge Sizewell C licence decision in High Court

TEAGS claimed that the ONR unlawfully failed to include sea defences in its considerations when issuing a nuclear site licence for the development

Rayo 3rd Dec 2024

A campaign group has lost a High Court bid to challenge a regulator’s decision to issue a licence for the Sizewell C nuclear site in Suffolk.

Theberton and Eastbridge Action Group on Sizewell Limited (TEAGS), which campaigns under the name Stop Sizewell C, claimed that the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) unlawfully failed to include sea defences in its considerations when issuing a nuclear site licence (NSL) for the development.

Barristers for TEAGS told a hearing on Tuesday that the legal challenge over the decision should be allowed to continue while lawyers for the ONR and Sizewell C Limited (SZC), which owns the site, claimed it should be thrown out.

In a ruling, Mrs Justice Lieven dismissed the claim, ruling that the challenge had “no chance of success” and was “totally without merit”.

She said: “The fundamental argument advanced by the claimant is, in my view, plainly wrong.”

……………………………….Philip Coppel KC, for TEAGS, said in written submissions the challenge to the issuing of the NSL was “arguable” as the licence does not “cover the event of an accident or other emergency in respect of” sea defences.

In court, he said: “Sea defences have the obvious potential to affect safety.”

He continued: “The regulator cannot treat the consequences of such a mistake as an acceptable risk in the operation of a nuclear reactor.”

…………………Following the ruling, Paul Collins, of Stop Sizewell C, said “We are disappointed and surprised that the Court concluded that the 1965 Nuclear Installation Act did not require the imposition of a condition, when the Sizewell C nuclear site licence was granted, to deal with a safety issue – namely the sea defences – that was well known at that time.

“The judge fully acknowledged that the sea defences are critical for the safety of Sizewell C’s reactors.”

Alison Downes, also of Stop Sizewell C, said: “It remains the case that we are deeply concerned about this issue.

“There is still no final design of the sea defences let alone guarantees that the construction is feasible. We thank our legal team and supporters and are considering our position.” https://hellorayo.co.uk/hits-radio/suffolk/news/campaigners-lose-bid-challenge-sizewell-c-licence-decision-high-court/

December 5, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, UK | Leave a comment

Today in Imperial Recklessness & Insanity

Caitlin Johnstone, Consortium News, 22 Nov 2024 https://consortiumnews.com/2024/11/22/caity-johnstone-today-in-imperial-recklessness-insanity/

Predictably, Benjamin Netanyahu has responded to this decision by shrieking about antisemitism. He’s doing this because he doesn’t have anything resembling a real argument in his defense, and neither does anyone else.

The International Criminal Court has formally issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

No such arrest warrants were issued for President Biden or any of the other western officials who’ve been backing Israel’s genocidal atrocities, which is a bit like a judge issuing a warrant for a mass murderer but not for the guy who gave him the gun and stood next to him handing him ammunition and drove the getaway car and lied to the police to cover up the crime.

Nothing will come of this new development because it is completely unenforcible and international law is only as real as the U.S. empire agrees to pretend it is, but it is a significant step in the deterioration of international consensus on Israel as the entire world watches the Zionist regime commit atrocity after atrocity right out in the open.

Predictably, Benjamin Netanyahu has responded to this decision by shrieking about antisemitism and calling the ICC’s move “a modern Dreyfus trial”. He is doing this because he does not have anything resembling a real argument in his defense, and neither does anyone else.

We saw this illustrated in a statement from Senator Tom Cotton, who proclaimed that the U.S. would invade The Hague if the ICC tries to enforce its arrest warrants.

“The ICC is a kangaroo court and Karim Khan is a deranged fanatic,” Cotton said. “Woe to him and anyone who tries to enforce these outlaw warrants. Let me give them all a friendly reminder: the American law on the ICC is known as The Hague Invasion Act for a reason. Think about it.”

This is as psychotic a public statement as anything you’ll see from the most far-right extremists in the Knesset. The United States is run by demented zealots with nukes, just like Israel.

The “Hague Invasion Act”, formally known as the American Service-Members’ Protection Act, is a U.S. federal law passed during the warmongering frenzy of the early Bush administration which authorizes the president to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court.”

That “or allied personnel” bit is why Cotton is able to cite this law in reference to an arrest warrant for Israelis.

Speaking of Israel and U.S. senators, a bill by Bernie Sanders to block a shipment of tank shells to Israel was just killed in the Senate by a vote of 18 to 79.

Sanders framed the bill as an effort to restrict “the sale of offensive arms to Israel”, making a distinction from “defensive” arms like the Iron Dome, which is absurd and obfuscatory to begin with.

All arms to Israel are offensive rather than defensive in nature, in that they are all used to help Israel murder people without experiencing the deterrence they would receive from a retaliatory response.

There’s a reason body armor is regulated in a way that’s similar to firearms; it’s because someone who wants to commit a violent crime can wear a bulletproof vest while doing so to ensure that they can perpetrate the crime without being stopped by police.

That’s exactly how Israel uses its so-called “defensive” weaponry.

And speaking of progressive US lawmakers taking feeble stands on Israel, congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has come under fire for voting to support House Resolution 1449, a bill which purports to simply denounce antisemitism but in reality promotes the false conflation of antisemitic hate speech with speech that is critical of Israel.

Progressive congresswoman Ilhan Omar, who voted against the bill, said in a statement that she did so because “the bill endorses the harmful definition of IHRA that dangerously conflates legitimate criticism of Israel to antisemitism and further harms our ability to address antisemitism.”

Everywhere you look it’s powerful criminals getting away with far too much while the people who are supposed to be resisting them do far too little.

This happens as Russia hits Ukraine with a new type of hypersonic missile, which Putin went out of his way to mention could easily have been equipped with a nuclear warhead. This attack was a warning to Ukraine for using long-range missiles supplied by the U.S. and U.K. to strike targets inside Russia, and occurs as Moscow revises its nuclear doctrine lowering the threshold for when nuclear weapons may be used.

This is unsustainable. It cannot continue. One way or the other, all this madness is going to come to an end.

December 2, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal | Leave a comment

What Project 2025 Would Do to the Environment – and How We Will Respond

The policy playbook from the Heritage Foundation would strip away our rights to clean air, clean water, and a healthy planet.

By Earthjustice November 12, 2024, https://earthjustice.org/article/what-project-2025-would-do-to-the-environment-and-how-we-will-respond

When Donald Trump takes office for the second time in January, we expect his administration to dramatically dismantle environmental protections. We see the shape of what’s coming not just from battling his first administration, but because of the blueprint laid out in Project 2025.

Project 2025 is 900 pages, and 150 of them are about how to destroy the environment. This deregulatory agenda, written by former Trump government officials and Heritage Foundation staff, would strip away our rights to clean air, clean water, and a healthy planet.

Earthjustice is built for moments like this. We’re the legal arm of the environmental movement, with more than 200 attorneys wielding the power of the law to defend the planet and its people. We filed more lawsuits on behalf of clients against the last Trump administration to protect the environment than any other organization – and we won 85% of our cases.

We’ve shown that we can take on the Trump administration’s worst ideas and win.

We’ve studied the proposed tactics in Project 2025, including undermining government staff who are charged with safeguarding health and environmental protections. We are prepared to defend the environment and communities from what comes next, no matter how long it takes. Here are some of the Project 2025 recommendations we’re most concerned about:

Taking a hatchet to bedrock environmental laws

What Project 2025 says:

Gut the Endangered Species Act (ESA): Project 2025 would rewrite the most successful legal tool we have for protecting wildlife in ways that would harm imperiled species. It specifically calls for removing protections from gray wolves and Yellowstone grizzlies.
No need for national monuments: Another proposal would repeal the Antiquities Act, which would strip the president of the ability to protect priceless public lands and waters as national monuments.
Weaken the Clean Air Act: Project 2025 would nix the part of the law that requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set health-based air quality standards.
Less say for communities in environmental decisions: The plan would undermine key portions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which ensures you have a voice in major projects built near you.

Why we’re prepared:

Defending endangered species: The Trump administration went after both Yellowstone grizzlies and the Endangered Species Act itself. Both times, Earthjustice went straight to court. One of our cases spared the grizzlies from planned trophy hunts, and the Biden administration subsequently reversed some damaging changes to the ESA.
Defending national monuments: When the Trump administration gutted Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments in Utah, Earthjustice immediately sued. Protections for the monuments have now been restored. We also helped defend the monuments from a later legal challenge by the state of Utah that attacked the Antiquities Act itself.
Defending NEPA: This summer, when 21 state attorneys-general sued to block important updates to NEPA, we intervened to fight back. The updates will ensure that critical infrastructure needed for the clean energy transition is built quickly and equitably and is resilient to climate change.

More mining and fossil fuel development on public lands

What Project 2025 says:

Prioritize oil and gas: Project 2025 tells the agencies that manage federal lands and waters to maximize corporate oil and gas extraction. It calls for approving more pipelines like Keystone XL and Dakota Access.
Willow? Make it bigger: The agenda explicitly aims to expand the Willow Project, which is already the largest proposed oil and gas undertaking on U.S. public lands.
Target iconic landscapes: The project also calls for drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and mining in Minnesota’s Boundary Waters wilderness, among other irreplaceable natural treasure

Why we’re prepared:

Fighting on all fronts: Under the Trump administration, Earthjustice challenged an aggressive extractive agenda at every turn. Our victories included winning protections for 128 million acres of ocean and hundreds of thousands of acres of sage-grouse habitat threatened by oil and gas development.
We’ve defended many of the places Project 2025 targets:
- We have been defending the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from fossil fuel development since the 1980s, and we celebrated last year when the government canceled a set of illegal oil leases
- Our litigation and advocacy has helped secure a 20-year mining ban in the Boundary Waters.
- Currently, we are fighting the Willow Project in court.
Undermining science and the regulation of toxic chemicals
What Project 2025 says:
Trust the chemical companies: Project 2025 tells the EPA to be more open to industry science and to stop funding major research into toxic chemical exposure.
Make it harder to regulate chemicals: The plan calls for the EPA to meet an absurdly high standard of proof that a chemical is hazardous before deciding to regulate it. This would give chemical companies greater freedom to put toxic substances into our air, water, and products.
Forever chemicals are fine: Project 2025 would walk back the determination that PFAS — the “forever chemicals” linked to reproductive harms, developmental delays, and increased risk of cancer — are a hazardous substance.

Why we’re prepared:

Fighting for the full use of the law: The government has the authority to protect us from harmful chemicals under a critical law called the Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA. Earthjustice is fighting to force the Biden administration to use this law more effectively.
Pushing for transparency: When the Trump administration EPA understated the risks of deadly chemicals, Earthjustice sued under TSCA.
Taking on PFAS: Earthjustice has fought for an array of protections against PFAS. We have helped protect communities from PFAS incineration, defended the public’s right to know about PFAS releases, pushed for stronger state laws regulating PFAS in water, and more.

Ending government efforts to address the climate crisis

What Project 2025 says:

The plan’s authors are climate skeptics: The document refers pointedly to “the perceived threat of climate change.”
Climate solutions? Don’t need ‘em: Project 2025 calls for undoing many of the clean energy investments in the Inflation Reduction Act, the largest climate solutions bill in history. It also supports Congressional efforts to repeal the law entirely.
Shut down climate research: The plan would get rid of more than a dozen government offices and agencies that study climate change.

Why we’re prepared:

Confronting government with climate reality: We have fought every administration in recent decades to include climate change impacts in various decisions. Earlier this century, we joined in a suit that became a landmark Supreme Court ruling, Massachusetts v. EPA, which found that carbon emissions are air pollutants and consequently the EPA must set limits on such pollution. We will defend the necessity to combat climate change — but further delays will hurt us all. An analysis from Energy Innovation found that enacting Project 2025 would increase carbon emissions by 2.7 billion tons by 2030 — equivalent to the annual emissions of India. These policies would cost households $32 billion in higher energy costs, result in 1.7 million lost jobs, and decrease the U.S. GDP $320 billion per year by 2030.
Fighting for science: Earthjustice has previously defended the critical role of scientific experts within the government. In 2020, we won a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s illegal decision to remove independent science advisors from the EPA.

Eliminating environmental justice programs

What Project 2025 says:

Environmental justice is not the government’s problem: Project 2025 questions whether the government should address the ways that communities of color and low-income communities are disproportionately exposed to dangerous pollution.
Get rid of staff who work on these issues: The plan calls for disbanding offices with the Department of Justice and the EPA that focus on environmental justice.

Why we’re prepared:

An environmental justice first: In 2021, after years of pushing by Earthjustice and our partners, the Justice Department opened its first-ever environmental justice investigation, looking into whether an Alabama county was managing sewage in a way that disproportionately harmed Black communities.
Raising our voice: We helped advocate for billions of dollars of funding from the Inflation Reduction Act to go to the communities that need it most.

What You Can Do

Take action: Join Earthjustice to fight back against Project 2025

November 29, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | environment, legal, USA | Leave a comment

International Criminal Court issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant

They’re being accused of crimes against humanity and war crimes

Aaron Sobczak, Nov 21, 2024, https://responsiblestatecraft.org/netanyahu-war-crimes/

On Thursday the International Court of Justice (ICC) issued warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, as well as a member of Hamas leadership.

The warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant were for charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes. The court unanimously agreed that the prime minister and former defense minister “each bear criminal responsibility for the following crimes as co-perpetrators for committing the acts jointly with others: the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts.”

“The Chamber considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that both individuals intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity, from at least 8 October 2023 to 20 May 2024,” the court detailed in its allegations.

The ICC also charged Hamas leader Ibrahim Al-Masri for mass killings during the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks on Israel, including rape and hostage taking.

A plan suggested by former IDF general, Giora Eiland, called for the explicit emptying out of northern Gaza and the labeling of all remaining civilians as military targets, as well as the purposeful blockage of humanitarian aid. Netanyahu reportedly did not agree to the plan, but evidence points to aspects of the plan being enacted.

“The ICC decision shows once more how out of sync Biden’s Gaza policy is with both American and international law,” says the Quincy Institute’s Executive Vice President Trita Parsi. “Biden has sacrificed America’s international standing to arm and protect leaders who the international courts have deemed to be war criminals.”

The ICC’s move comes just one day after unprecedented votes in the U.S. Senate to end the sale of certain offensive weapons to Israel. The measures ultimately failed, with the White House telling senators that they would be supporting Iran and Hamas should they vote to curb weapons sales to Israel.

Because of the ICC warrants, Netanyahu or Gallant could be arrested upon entering a nation that has recognized the ICC and its rulings. However, Israel is among dozens of other countries, including the United States, that do not recognize the court’s jurisdiction.

After warrants were requested in October, Israel reacted by challenging the jurisdiction of the ICC in the matter, but that challenge has been rejected. “Israel’s reaction — that no other democracy has been treated this way by the ICC — is indicative of how perverted certain approaches to international law have become,” said Parsi. “Israel essentially argues that because it defines itself as a democracy, it should be above the law. That war-crimes, apartheid, and genocide are ok as long as the perpetrator identifies as democratic. This approach — creating different sets of laws and standards for different countries — is a recipe for global instability and a threat to American security.”

November 23, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Israel, Legal | Leave a comment

Regulators update guidance on contamination of ground and water on nuclear licensed sites

by Practical Law Environment 18 Nov 24

The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), Environment Agency (EA), Natural
Resources Wales (NRW) and Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)
published updated guidance on expectations on the prevention and management
of radioactive and non-radioactive contamination of the ground and water on
nuclear licensed sites, on 14 November 2024.

Practical Law 18th Nov 2024
https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Document/I8b889a97a5a011efb5eab7c3554138a0/View/FullText.html

November 21, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, UK | Leave a comment

Pilgrim Worker Claims He Was Poisoned by Radiation

Adam Snyder’s lawsuit says Holtec knew of danger and withheld facts

By Christine Legere Nov 16, 2024, https://provincetownindependent.org/featured/2024/11/16/pilgrim-worker-claims-he-was-poisoned-by-radiation/?fbclid=IwY2xjawGo1QpleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHWShU5dHZhyKJptDuy4JZpZN9jdHmZc-esBuN4ZA6V8bJ02NZeQ-CWEfnw_aem_o8Hlm0YsDqphDpYEcT3x5g

PLYMOUTH — A 41-year-old worker assigned to the decommissioning of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station for several months in 2021 claims he was poisoned by radiation and that Holtec Pilgrim, the plant’s owner, misled workers about safety. He has sued the company for injuries caused by “the release of radioactive, hazardous, and toxic substances.”

Adam Snyder, a resident of Ohio, was employed by William Industrial Services, a company subcontracted by Holtec to work at a handful of nuclear plants the company is decommissioning. According to court documents, Snyder’s job was to remove fuel rods during the decommissioning process.

In an amended complaint filed on Nov. 8 in the U.S. District Court, he claims Holtec knew about the unsafe working conditions.

The complaint was initially filed in Plymouth Superior Court in early September. It was moved to federal court at Holtec’s request. Holtec had also filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, saying it lacked details and had not been filed under the provisions of the Price Anderson Act. That law ensures that there is a substantial pool of money available for those who suffer damage from a nuclear incident.

Snyder’s attorney, Andrew Abraham of Keches Law Group in Milton, provided more details in an amended complaint filed in federal court and in his opposition to Holtec’s motion to dismiss. On Nov. 14, the judge allowed the amended complaint and denied Holtec’s motion, saying it was within the rights of the plaintiff to amend the complaint.

Abraham filed the action under the Atomic Energy Act and the Price Anderson Act, federal laws that regulate commerce in the nuclear industry. The named defendants are Holtec Pilgrim LLC, the subsidiary of Holtec International that owns the plant, and several related limited liability companies formed by Holtec. Snyder has requested a jury trial.

The court documents include inspection reports done at Pilgrim starting in 2020, shortly after Holtec bought the shuttered plant and began decommissioning it. “Throughout decommissioning of this facility, [Holtec] has caused the release of radioactive, hazardous and toxic substances into the jobsite,” Snyder states in the filing.

Snyder’s Claims

Snyder was assigned to Pilgrim from May to December 2021. He states in the court filing that Holtec knew of the unsafe conditions caused by elevated radiation levels at the site but withheld information from those working at the plant. Snyder claims his Holtec supervisor, Leon Johnson, “assured him the jobsite was safe to work at without protective gear or a ventilator and that the site had been tested for radioactive materials.”

Snyder claims he was exposed to nuclear radiation and was poisoned, causing “serious sickness.” During the last several weeks of his assignment at Pilgrim, he started to experience nausea, fatigue, and lack of stamina. Those symptoms grew worse in the six to eight weeks after he left the site, causing chronic nausea and vomiting.

In 2022, he learned of inspections done by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at Pilgrim, citing violations by Holtec related to improper monitoring and radioactive contamination in the same areas where he had worked.

In March 2023, doctors at WVU Medicine Wheeling Hospital told him that too much time had passed since exposure to put him on medicines for that condition. He was told to get his lymph nodes and blood tested annually. He was prescribed Ondansetron HCL, which he still must take daily for nausea. The medicine is prescribed to patients undergoing cancer treatments including chemotherapy and radiation.

Without the medication, Snyder is too sick to leave his house. In his opposition to Holtec’s motion to dismiss the complaint, attorney Abraham notes that one of Snyder’s co-workers also developed symptoms at about the same time as Snyder and had part of his tongue and esophagus surgically removed.

The experience at Pilgrim “ended my nuclear career,” said Snyder in a recent phone interview. His lawsuit seeks $393,000 for lost wages and medical expenses.

Snyder said he filed the complaint to shine a light on Holtec’s practices. “If it was $5 million or their boardroom going to jail,” he said, he would choose the latter. “What has gone on at that plant is the worst of the worst. All the money in the world doesn’t matter if you’re in a hospice bed.”

Lack of Monitoring

An NRC inspection report, released in late 2022, described a violation that occurred between Aug. 12 and Aug. 24, 2020, four months before Snyder’s arrival at Pilgrim. Holtec did not perform radiation or surface contamination surveys or take radiological air samples in the 23-foot elevation of the dry well where workers were unbolting and removing control-rod drives from the underside of the reactor vessel, which they then removed from the drywell.

The area was posted as an area of high radiation and high contamination, and workers located under the vessel wore plastic air-fed suits to provide protection from water, radioactive contamination, and potential airborne radioactivity. Support workers wore powered air-purifying respirators.

As a result of Holtec’s failure to perform the surveys, six workers received unplanned intakes of radioactive material, according to the inspection report.

Attorney Abraham included in the complaint an NRC inspection report from 2022, shortly after Snyder had left Pilgrim, that described violations related to failures to properly survey radiological conditions in areas where workers were present. In January of that year, a month after Snyder had finished working at the Pilgrim plant, a radiation protection technician performed a survey at the nine-foot elevation of the drywell and posted it as a “high contamination area.”

On April 7, 2022, a survey found three new areas “of loose surface contamination” at the nine-foot elevation of the work area that warranted radiological posting. Despite those readings, Holtec workers failed to conduct surveys of those areas. The 9-foot elevation was therefore inaccessible to the NRC inspector.

In a review of documents related to monitoring, the inspector found that a stop-work should have been executed based on the radiation levels found in areas on elevation 9, yet no such order was made. The NRC documented the violation as a Level IV, of low safety significance, because Holtec entered the deficiency into its corrective action program.

In an inspection done earlier this year and reported by the Independent, a series of mistakes had been made that had resulted in one worker getting an internal dose of 132 millirem and a 43-millirem external dose when surveying the underside of the head of the reactor vessel on April 2. The annual dose limit for the public is 100 millirems per year total, although workers in the nuclear power industry have a considerably higher annual dose limit of 5,000 millirem.

The judge has not yet scheduled any hearings in Snyder’s suit.

November 19, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

Imprisoned ex-Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder to ask Donald Trump for clemency, campaign attorney says

By Jeremy Pelzer, cleveland.com, COLUMBUS, Nov. 11, 2024,

Ex-Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder, who’s serving a 20-year prison sentence for overseeing the largest bribery scandal in Ohio history, is preparing to ask President-elect Donald Trump for clemency, according to his campaign’s attorney.

Householder, a Perry County Republican, is planning to submit an official pardon application to the U.S. Justice Department at some point closer to Trump’s inauguration on Jan. 20, 2025, according to the attorney, Scott Pullins.

“We will also be working to build support and communicate with the President and his team,” Pullins stated in a message. Pullins is not a member of Householder’s criminal defense team; rather, he’s advised Householder about legal and political matters over the years and represented him in some state elections cases.

Mark Marein, one of Trump’s criminal defense attorneys, declined comment.

U.S. presidents have the power to offer two kinds of executive clemency for federal crimes: a presidential pardon, and commuting a prison sentence. Either would result in Householder being immediately released from prison……………………………………………………………………….

Last year, Householder was convicted by a federal jury of leading a scheme to use $60 million in bribes from FirstEnergy to help pass and maintain House Bill 6, a 2019 energy law that offered the Akron-based utility a windfall of financial perks – headlined by a $1 billion-plus bailout of two Ohio nuclear power plants owned at the time by a company subsidiary.

……………………………………….. Even if Trump grants a presidential pardon for his federal conviction, Householder could still remain behind bars if he’s convicted of pending state-level charges filed against him last March claiming he lied on state ethics disclosure forms and illegally used campaign funds to pay criminal defense fees from his federal trial.

While Householder was prosecuted at trial by the office of U.S. Attorney Kenneth Parker, an appointee of Democratic President Joe Biden, the House Bill 6 corruption investigation was launched under Parker’s predecessor, Trump appointee David DeVillers………………………………………….. more https://www.cleveland.com/news/2024/11/larry-householder-imprisoned-ex-ohio-house-speaker-to-ask-donald-trump-for-clemency-campaign-attorney-says.html?outputType=amp&fbclid=IwY2xjawGjYXRleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHVnzOLnrs4RtAZadAmLBy1ftyo-ntH8VLFbM5eb32xO1e2i2iaCHrnYdmQ_aem_C0GQArV6rnh_v9JKVSeyGQ

November 16, 2024 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »