 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
2/6/12 |
 |
||||||||
|
 |
Home / Projects & Publications / News |
|
||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
RANSAC Nuclear News, March 4, 2003 Compiled by Lauren Arestie A. Cooperative Threat Reduction
 A. Cooperative Threat Reduction 1. Lawmaker Seeks Tighter Weapons Control WASHINGTON - A House committee chairman said he wants the military to keep tighter control on a program to dismantle former Soviet weapons, following the collapse of two projects that cost the United States about $200 million. Rep. Duncan Hunter, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said Monday that almost $95 million spent by the United States to develop a plant to help dismantle former Soviet missiles has been wasted because local Russian officials have blocked the facility. Last year, the United States spent $106 million to build a plant to dispose of liquid missile fuel, only to be told last year that the fuel had been used for Russia's civilian space program. ``We've got two white elephants here,'' said Hunter, R-Calif., who was holding a hearing on the program Tuesday. ``An enormous amount of money has been wasted here. Taxpayer money.'' But the $95 million figure was disputed by a spokesman for Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., the co-founder of the U.S.-funded program to dismantle Soviet nuclear weapons. The spokesman, Andy Fisher, said $80 million can be salvaged if the plant is built elsewhere. Fisher said problems have been the exception in the 12-year-old program. ``The preponderance of money has been very successful in eliminating very deadly weapons of mass destruction, and that needs to be the focus.'' The widely hailed program, created by Lugar and former Sen. Sam Nunn, D-Ga., is credited with destroying 6,000 nuclear warheads and finding employment for 22,000 scientists, keeping weapons and scientific expertise out of the hands of terrorists and other U.S. enemies. Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is interested in expanding the program beyond the former Soviet Union. But Hunter has argued that in the zeal to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, inadequate oversight has been given to the money spent on the program by the Pentagon--about $450 million this year. The dispute has been a rare, public clash between two influential committee chairmen. At a hearing last fall, Lugar criticized Hunter and Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., by name, saying they were blocking funding for the program. Hunter, at a news conference in January, recalled how Lugar had been denied entrance to a Russian facility funded by his program and suggested ``perhaps we're not serving the American taxpayers.'' The $95 million was spent for a facility near the city of Votkinsk to remove solid propellant from Russian rocket motors. Hunter's committee said $80 million was spent on designing and testing the facility and $14.6 million for site improvements. The project was blocked by local officials because of pollution concerns. ``They were spending all of this money that was focused on the community and they didn't have the permits in the hand from the community,'' Hunter said. An official at the Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency said no one was available to comment late Monday. Hunter said the problems at the Votkinsk facility and those at the liquid propellant plant in Krasnoyarsk in 2002 have meant that $200 million was wasted instead of being used for dismantling weapons. ``What this program begs is for common sense practical management,'' he said. ``That hasn't been forthcoming and the United States hasn't required it.'' In a recent interview, Lugar said he agrees there has been waste and that strong oversight is needed. He said he has told top Russian officials that these problems are unacceptable. But he also suggested that difficulties will be inevitable in dealing with the vast bureaucracies and different factions in a nation that was once the main U.S. adversary. return to menu 2. Editorial: Wasteful 'Threat Reduction' in Russia Deep in the heart of Russia stands an enormous, new, empty facility built with 100 million American tax dollars. It has no purpose or future. It is a monumental example of U.S. good intentions gone awry and another disturbing chapter in the history of the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program. Twelve years and more than $7 billion later, it is worth revisiting the original purpose of this program. Designed as a temporary, focused effort to shrink Moscow's vast strategic arsenal with American funding and know-how, the CTR program has, over time, morphed into an open-ended, unfocused and sometimes self-defeating venture. On balance the initiative has achieved a respectable measure of success, in the process earning the support of many members of Congress, including myself. Since its 1991 inception, the Department of Defense-funded initiative has eliminated nearly 500 ballistic missiles and 370 submarine-launched types, as well as 25 missile submarines and 100 nuclear-capable bombers. The program initially focused on such strategic nuclear systems, most of which were aimed at American territory, because they posed a grave threat to U.S. national security. But CTR money eventually gave chase (rather unsuccessfully) to a slew of other projects that few would characterize as meeting a similar standard. The results of this drift are evident in remote Krasnoyarsk, Russia, where American taxpayers, at Moscow's request, built a $100 million-plus facility to convert rocket fuel from nuclear missiles into chemicals useful for making consumer products. The immense plant was finished last year, but it will never be used for its intended purpose, because Russia, before the plant was completed and without telling us, used most of the volatile liquids to gas up its space program and pad its satellite-launch profits. Useless now, the high-priced compound will recoup the United States only about $1 million after its valuables are gutted. In an equally wasteful example of CTR mismanagement, the United States dumped $100 million into a plant that will not even be built. Again at Moscow's behest, Washington committed to build a state-of-the-art, environmentally sound disposal facility (the blueprints alone cost $80 million) to burn off missile engines indoors. This time, Moscow stood idle while a small-town politician from Votkinsk blocked the necessary land-use permits to exploit groundless environmental fears during a local campaign. The United States could have bankrolled vital nonproliferation projects with these wasted funds -- about $230 million combined; more than half of this year's total CTR budget -- but a lack of accountability, transparency and sound planning prevented it. In Krasnoyarsk, the Department of Defense bet on a handshake that the rocket fuel would be there when the time came, even though Russia has been launching missiles with the same fuel for more than 30 years. At Votkinsk, U.S. officials erroneously and naively assumed that Moscow would produce the critical permits. Amazingly, program officials may not have learned the obvious lesson. They are currently considering a plan devised by Russia to dispose of the same missile engines with refurbished outdoor burners, even though this approach would be much dirtier and there is no guarantee of securing land-use permits. This project could run another $80 million. At the same time, for every dollar the United States commits to helping Russia destroy these weapons, we run the risk that Moscow will use the savings to fund military programs that are contrary to U.S. national security interests. For example, the White House told us in January that Russia maintains a biological weapons program and may keep -- at great expense -- an ability to mobilize its chemical weapons production facilities, in violation of its treaty obligations. We were also told that the Kremlin is procuring new intercontinental ballistic missiles it brags can defeat American missile defenses (even though the forthcoming U.S. system is not designed against Russia). The Department of Defense does not make the United States appreciably safer by disposing of surplus rocket fuel and stationary missile engines. These materials cannot be easily carted off by would-be terrorists, who could not use them anyhow. The fuel and engines instead represent an environmental challenge -- one that might warrant a good many Russian rubles but certainly not hundreds of millions of already overstretched U.S. defense dollars. If the Cooperative Threat Reduction program is to once again benefit U.S. national security, it must refocus its resources on real threats and ensure real Russian cooperation. Moscow's leadership has to understand that it cannot stand by as CTR projects fail, $100 million at a time, and still expect U.S. assistance. Either way, the stakes are high enough that Congress must maintain a strong continued oversight role to ensure that this program and others like it remain true to their original principles and that every U.S. dollar invested yields tangible and verifiable results in reducing any remaining threats to America. return to menu 3. Washington Should Triple Nonproliferation Funding (excerpted) WASHINGTON - A member of the House Armed Services Committee last week called on U.S. lawmakers to triple nonproliferation funding. Washington should be promoting nonproliferation programs and avoiding efforts to develop new nuclear weapons, according to Representative Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), who spoke Wednesday at the annual meeting of the Energy Facilities Contractors Group. Tauscher criticized the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review, released January 2002, which diminishes the importance of nuclear retaliation but keeps alive the possibility of new U.S. nuclear weapons for use on the battlefield. "Rather than improve on past accomplishments, the United States is currently in a pattern of rejecting treaties, has put forth a Nuclear Posture Review that seems divorced from reality, and is making only paltry investments in nuclear nonproliferation," Tauscher said. The United States should triple its nonproliferation budget and spend $30 billion over the next decade, she said. "To put this in perspective, for less than 1 percent of what the U.S. currently spends on defense, we can eliminate the risk of these deadly weapons falling into the hands of terrorists or rogue states," according to Tauscher. [...] Tauscher said that the Moscow Treaty, officially known as the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, could decrease international security. "To make matters much worse, the new Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty will, ironically, make nuclear security problems worse because it does not commit either nation to actually destroying a single nuclear weapon. Instead, it will allow the United States and Russia to merely store weapons - like putting a car on blocks in a garage - leaving more nuclear parts in more locations where they will likely be less secure," she said. return to menu B. MPC&A 1. Russian Arms Safeguards Found Lacking A decade-long U.S. effort to safeguard stockpiles of Russian nuclear, chemical and biological weapons is faltering because of bureaucratic obstacles, federal auditors warn in a draft report that faults leaders in both countries. The problems already have delayed the destruction of thousands of Soviet-made chemical weapons, while raising the risk that nuclear bomb components or deadly germs could fall into the hands of terrorists, the General Accounting Office concludes in a report due to be released to Congress this week. The United States has spent $6 billion since 1992 to help Russia destroy or secure Cold War-vintage weapons. But basic security improvements still have not been made at dozens of Russian military installations where more than 60 percent of the country's weapons-grade uranium and plutonium are kept, the GAO found. The biggest obstacle is Russia's continuing refusal to let U.S. officials visit the facilities where the upgrades are to take place, the report says. "Russia is not providing needed access to many of the sites," the draft report says. "Unfortunately, there is little reason to believe this situation will change in the near future." Congress and the Bush administration contributed to the delays by denying critical funds or refusing to grant waivers for the awarding of contracts, the auditors found. The report also criticizes the Defense Department for the slow pace of security improvements at chemical and biological facilities where access was permitted. The report by Congress's independent auditing agency underscores the practical challenges of containing a vast arsenal considered by many security experts to be a continuing threat. The collapse of the Soviet Union prompted fears that Russia and other newly independent states would lose control of nuclear warheads as well as hundreds of tons of weapons-grade plutonium and uranium, large stockpiles of chemical munitions and a network of laboratories where biological weapons were developed. In 1992, Congress approved the first of a series of measures, known collectively as the Cooperation Threat Reduction program, that funded the destruction of bombers and submarines with nuclear capabilities and the installation of modern security systems at dozens of installations throughout Russia, Ukraine and other former Soviet republics. Although President Bush and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, publicly embraced the programs at recent summits, the GAO found that progress at many Russian facilities has slowed significantly in recent years. For example, Russia's refusal to grant access to sensitive nuclear installations has prevented the Energy Department from upgrading security at Defense Ministry facilities where most of Russia's remaining plutonium and uranium are kept, the report says. As a result, the department's goal of securing all weapons-grade nuclear material by 2008 is no longer realistic, the GAO concluded. By contrast, the Energy Department has secured nearly all nuclear storage sites controlled by the Russian navy and civilian agencies. return to menu C. Russia-U.S. 1. Minister RF For Atomic Energy And US Ambassador To Russia Visit Snezhinsk On March 1 the Minister of the Russian Federation for Atomic Energy Alexander Rumyantsev and the US Ambassador to the Russian Federation Alexander Vershbow visited the city of Snezhinsk, Chelyabinsk Oblast, - location of the Russian Federal Nuclear Center - All-Russia Research Institute of Technical Physics (VNIITF), according to RIA Novosti press agency. During the visit Vershbow and his attendants were showed to several enterprises which creation had been a part of the joint Russia-US Nuclear Cities Initiative: Science an Production Enterprise "Spektr-Konversiya", the Snezhinsk International Development Center, the pharmaceuticals productions, and "Uraltravers-PAK" company. They also had a meeting with students of the Snezhinsk Physics and Engineering Academy. Minatom of Russia and the US Department of Energy (US DOE) have been implementing nuclear non-proliferation cooperative programs in Snezhinsk since 1992. According to Mr. Vershbow, the visit focused on three cooperative areas: jobs for former weapons scientists and downsizing of weapons infrastructure; safety and security of nuclear materials; and development of new counter-terrorist technologies. Vershbow said that after the September 11 Presidents V.V. Putin and G. W. Bush came up to an unprecedented level of cooperation in combating nuclear terrorism. The US Department of Energy headed by Secretary S. Abraham and Minatom of Russia headed by Minister Rumyantsev have formed close working relations while joint non-proliferation actions of both agencies have been strengthened and expanded. "In fact, to stress the importance of our cooperation President G. Bush requested for FY 2004 the largest in the country's history budgeted funds for the US DOE non-proliferation programs", Mr. Vershbow said. Rumyantsev, the Minister of RF for Atomic Energy, said addressing the joint press conference in Snezhinsk that at present the Russian-American relations had entered an absolutely new situation. In particular, he said, "The meeting of Presidents V. Putin and G. Bush last May was a cornerstone event which formalized the main areas of the Russia-US cooperation in nuclear weapons non-proliferation, combat international terrorism, and elimination of nuclear materials. This cooperation is secured by mutual interests of both states". Minister Rumyantsev thinks it is also important to continue cooperation between Russia and the US in basic nuclear research. In Snezhinsk the Russia-US cooperation covers student exchanges, health care; they also develop relations with the sister-city Livermore (California) where the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is located. return to menu 2. Nuclear Security Chief Slain The head of the Atomic Energy Ministry's International Center for Nuclear Security, Sergei Bugaenko, was found dead in the stairway of his Moscow apartment building on 27 February, Russian news agencies reported on 28 February. According to the police, the 68-year-old Bugaenko apparently surprised burglars breaking into his apartment and was killed by a blow to the head from a blunt object. However, police are also investigating the possibility that Bugaenko's killing is related to his professional activity, Polit.ru reported. The International Center for Nuclear Security was created on the basis of a U.S.-Russian bilateral agreement in 1996, and Bugaenko was named its director that year. The center maintains a database of Russian civilian nuclear facilities, carries out research, and coordinates the activities of the Atomic Energy Ministry and the U.S. Department of Energy. return to menu 3. Russia To Ratify Moscow Treaty On Strategic Offensive Arms Before Summer WASHINGTON - The Russian-US treaty on reduction of the offensive potentials, signed by Vladimir Putin and George Bush last May, will be ratified by Russia and the USA within the first six months of this year, chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the Federation Council Mikhail Margelov stated. Speaking at a press conference in Washington on Thursday, Margelov said that Russia is expected to ratify the above-said treaty "before this summer". Margelov cited the meetings with the chairmen of several profile Senate committees, as well as in the National Security Council under the U.S. president, in the American capital, and also said he expected ratification of the treaty by US Congress as early as within "the next fortnight". In the Russian Senator's opinion, the ratification of the Moscow treaty will make it possible to close the page in relations between our countries when we counted each other's warheads, and to bring the dialogue between Russia and the USA onto a different strategic level. return to menu D. Russia-Iran 1. Russia Taps Nuclear Opportunities In Iran Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), visited Iran last week to inspect the controversial Natanz, Arak and Isfahan nuclear facilities. While the American government largely ignored the visit during which ElBaradei confirmed Iran's peaceful use of nuclear energy, the Russian nuclear authorities took the opportunity to discredit the American government's campaign on an alleged Iranian nuclear weapon project assisted by Moscow. ElBaradei visited Iran on the request of Golam-Reza Aqazadeh, the head of Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI). During his visit, an IAEA delegation headed by him inspected the under-construction uranium enrichment facility in Natanz, located in Iran's central province of Isfahan. Reportedly, the AEOI authorities briefed the IAEA head on "the process of designing, construction and progress of the project" meant to help Iran meet its future nuclear fuel requirements. The AEOI authorities also offered that ElBaradei inspect two other Iranian nuclear facilities under construction in Arak and Isfahan. However, he postponed such inspections due to his heavy workload, which forced him to leave Iran on February 22, a day earlier than planned. Last December, the American government identified the Natanz and Arak facilities as nuclear installations being secretly constructed by the Iranians for their alleged clandestine nuclear weapon project. At the end of his visit to Iran, ElBaradei attended a joint press conference with Aqazadeh during which he confirmed Iran's cooperation with the IAEA and the consistency of Iran's nuclear projects with its status as a non-nuclear signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968 (NPT). He stated that he had not observed anything "unexpected" during his inspection. He also praised Iran's policies of "confidence-building" and "transparency" in its nuclear programs. As well, the IAEA head stressed Iran's right to have non-military nuclear programs by stating that "application of nuclear energy for civilian purposes is the right of every nation". While in Iran, ElBaradei talked to high-ranking Iranian officials, including President Mohammad Khatami, speaker of parliament Mehdi Karroubi and the head of the Expediency Assembly, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The three officials stressed Iran's commitment to its NPT obligations and the absence of any nuclear weapons program in their country, while stressing their right to have non-military nuclear programs, including energy production. In his elaboration on the latter, Khatami stated, "We deserve the right to acquire nuclear technology for its application [to] our national development and welfare plans and expect the IAEA to help Iran with know-how in this respect." The mentioned officials also emphasized the necessity of making the Middle East a nuclear free zone through the nuclear disarmament of Israel, the only regional nuclear power, and by ensuring the compliance of all other regional states with their NPT obligations. A week earlier, Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi also stressed the importance of ensuring a nuclear free status for the Middle East in his remarks on the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program and on why it needed a nuclear power generation industry. Iran currently uses about 2.5 million barrels of oil per day to generate electricity for domestic consumption, a little less than its daily oil export of about 3 million barrels. To generate sustainable and "cost-effective electricity" for its growing needs, Iran plans to produce 6,000 megawatts of nuclear-generated electricity within the next 20 years. Such objective requires the construction of other nuclear power generators apart from the currently under-construction Bushehr reactor for which Russia is assisting Iran. As stated by Agazadeh, Iran's construction of the fuel processing and uranium enriching facilities of Natanz, Arak and Isfahan would enable the Iranians to produce fuel for other nuclear power reactors to be constructed over time. The IAEA head's visit to Iran was largely ignored by the American government, which had made an uproar over Iran's clandestine activities in its Arak and Natanz facilities in December 2002. However, Russian Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev used the occasion to defend Russia's non-military nuclear cooperation with Iran. In his remarks made during the IAEA head's visit to Iran, Rumyantsev capitalized on ElBaradei's confirmation of Iran's cooperation with the IAEA and the peaceful nature of its nuclear program. He stated that talks between the IAEA delegation and its Iranian counterpart would "further clarify the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear activities". Using ElBaradei's remarks as a proof of the legitimacy of the Iranian-Russian nuclear cooperation and its consistency with the two countries' NPT obligations, he held that "the nuclear technology provided by Russia at Iran's Bushehr nuclear plant is under direct supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency". In response to the American government's allegation on Iran's ongoing nuclear weapons program, Rumyantsev rejected the ability of Iran to embark on such program since Iran had "none of the required technical facilities to manufacture atomic weapons". For this matter and based on ElBaradei's approval of the Iranian nuclear program, Rumyantsev reacted to this month's American expression of concern about Iran's uranium mining and its constructing uranium enrichment facilities by saying, "Unlike the United States, Russia is not the slightest bit worried about the discovery of uranium mines in Iran." Hence, the Russian minister backed Iran's efforts to mine uranium as he stated, "[I]t is also the economic and natural right of the Iranians to benefit from their own uranium mines." The Russian media gave extensive coverage to ElBaradei's visit to Iran and Rumyantsev's remarks. Many Russian radio and television programs as well as major news agencies, such as Itar-Tass, echoed ElBaradei's confirmation of Iran's nuclear health and the Iranian president's reiteration of his country's commitment to peaceful use of nuclear energy. Undoubtedly, Rumyantsev's mentioned statements and others such as "it is the natural right of Iran to use the nuclear energy" reflected Russia's approval of Iran's nuclear program and its rejection of the American accusations on its military nature to which the Russians allegedly contribute. However, it also revealed Russia's determination to expand its share of the lucrative Iranian nuclear projects regardless of American pressure. return to menu 2. U.S. Bill Lets NASA Fund Russian Craft WASHINGTON - U.S. Congressman Nick Lampson on Thursday introduced legislation to allow NASA to help Russia build additional spacecraft if President George W. Bush notifies Congress that the vehicles are needed to ensure the safety of the crew on the international space station. The bill would exempt NASA from the Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000, which forbids payments to Russia. With space shuttle flights on hold because of the Columbia disaster, the Russian craft is "the sole means of support for the space station until the shuttle fleet returns to service," Lampson said. NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe told a congressional committee Thursday that the 16 countries participating in the ISS have agreed that the Soyuz space capsule now docked at the station will be used to bring the current crew back to Earth. Two new residents, an American and a Russian, will go up on a fresh craft. O'Keefe said the station partners have agreed to accelerate the flights of Progress supply ships. An extra ship will be launched this year and next year. return to menu E. Nuclear Smuggling 1. FSB Thwarts Attempts To Sell Osmium-187 MOSCOW - Russia's Federal Security Service said Friday that it had thwarted a criminal gang's attempts to sell osmium-187, an isotope often portrayed as a valuable potential component in nuclear terrorism, and counterfeit Iraqi money. Federal Security Service officers in the Siberian city of Omsk, about 2,250 kilometers (1,400 miles) east of Moscow, detained one person with an unspecified amount of osmium-187, said Natalya Grutsina, a spokeswoman for the Omsk branch of the security service, which is known by the Russian acronym FSB. Another person was detained with 158,000 Iraqi dinars ($53.19), which a preliminary analysis showed to be fake, she said. Both people belonged to the same criminal gang, Grutsina said. They have been charged with rare-metals smuggling and counterfeiting. Russian officials have frequently sounded the alarm about illicit trade in osmium-187, a member of the platinum metals group that is mined at two plants in the former Soviet Union: Norilsk Nickel, in Russia's Arctic North, and the Kazakhmys plant in the Central Asian nation of Kazakhstan. The isotope is very expensive, bringing $150,000-$200,000 per gram (0.035 ounce), but international experts say it has no nuclear fission applications and is most useful as an object of criminal scams. The ITAR-Tass news agency said that the suspects were trying to sell the osmium-187 and the fake currency to criminal gang members from Moscow. It said that they had put 1.14 grams (0.039 ounce) of osmium in a vial disguised as a pen and tried to sell it for $30,000. return to menu F. Plutonium Disposition 1. US Nuclear Regulators Endorse MOX Fabrication Plans Despite Russian Side Delays The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC, issued this week an environmental impact report recommending preliminary approval of a plan to build a plant at the US Department of Energy's Savannah River Site in South Carolina to convert plutonium nuclear bomb cores to mixed-oxide, or MOX, fuel for burning in commercial reactors, NRC officials reported. The preliminary approval from the NRC gives the green light to the US Department of Energy, or DOE, plans to move forward in a bilateral surplus weapons plutonium disposition agreement finalized between Russia and the United States in 2000. Under the agreement, Russia and the United States are obligated to destroy, in parallel progress, 34 tons apiece of weapons-grade plutonium that each side has declared as exceeding its weapons needs. The endorsement given by the NRC study is a clear signal that most bureaucratic hurdles have been cleared on the US side to begin construction of the controversial MOX fabrication facility, designed by US nuclear contractor Duke, Cogema, Stone & Webster, or DCS. Moscow, in December, adopted the DCS design for its own MOX fabrication plant to be constructed at the beleaguered - and currently unlicensed - Mayak Chemical Combine in the Urals. The Bush administration earlier this month asked US Congress for a whopping 30 percent increase for the DOE's nuclear non-proliferation budget for 2004. If the budget is approved, 80 percent of that increase - $402m - will be poured into constructing the MOX facility at Savannah River Site. Last year, the Bush administration abandoned another plutonium disposition plan, which would have allowed for at least some of America's surplus stocks to be immobilized by vitrification - a much cheaper destruction method that environmentalists assert is safer because it provides for the plutonium's permanent internment. Spent MOX fuel, by contrast, can still be reprocessed to recover plutonium, which arguably defeats the very purpose of the $4bn MOX disposition process. President Bush's backing of the MOX program at the expense of immobilization coincides with movements in his administration that suggest the US may overturn nuclear policies that have since the 1970s forbidden reprocessing. This apparent shift in policy is welcomed by Russia, which has long fought against immobilization of its own stocks. Focusing on disposition by MOX - which is currently well beyond Moscow's financial and technical means - also allows Russia to continue its thoroughly documented pattern of staving off efforts to destroy its surplus weapons-grade plutonium. The MOX program will also give Russia several necessary tools toward the development of a plutonium-based fuel economy, partially at US expense. At present, Russia's Mayak facility remains out of commission since Russia's federal nuclear watchdog agency pulled its license in January after decades of waste dumping violations. The birthplace of the Soviet atomic weapons program, Mayak is the most radioactively contaminated place on earth. This week's NRC environmental impact report on Savannah River Site, or SRS, found any catastrophic accident at the plant to be "highly unlikely." But the report is ringing alarm bells for human rights and environmental groups in the United States, especially because of its finding that a serious accident at SRS MOX would most likely kill or harm poor, non-white residents who live near the plant. Among the accident scenarios studied in the report, the NRC found that a hypothetical release of tritium at a proposed bomb core disassembly facility within SRS would be the most dangerous. Tritium, which is radioactive hydrogen gas, is used in nuclear weapons. If such an accident were to occur, the report found, it could produce 400 latent cancer deaths in the surrounding neighborhoods within one year of a potential leak. "The communities most likely to be affected by a significant accident would be minority or low-income [ones], given the demographics and prevailing wind direction," the report said. The report urged DCS to conduct an information campaign to educate minority and poor communities about the project and the risks involved. The NRC also recommended DCS to work with emergency agencies to see that the communities were prepared in the event of an accident. However, US government documents studied by Bellona Web found that a release of tritium at the SRS facility is not as hypothetical as the NRC environmental impact study implies. According to SRS accident reports, the past decade has seen 283 incidents at the SRS tritium facility, ranging from on-site contamination to leaks of the deadly gas to outside air. More than a dozen reports filed by other facilities within SRS have made note of suspected or actually measured tritium releases or tritium contamination. In 1999, for example, tritium was released into the outside atmosphere when an aging safety gasket failed. According to the reports, SRS officials had decided it was more economical to use the gaskets until they failed than to undertake a more costly preventative maintenance program. But Russia's own abysmal nuclear safety record, and its hedging on the MOX plutonium disposition agreement, may well hinder the overall progress of the program, according to DOE budget documents reviewed by Bellona Web. "While the US program has progressed according to schedule, the Russian program has slipped," a DOE commentary on the White House's recently submitted budget request said. "Due to the Congressional mandate that the US and Russian programs must proceed in parallel, the US program may have to be delayed slightly in order to allow the Russian program to catch up to the US program schedule. The exact timing cannot be determined until detailed technical discussions take place with the Russians." Dr Edwin Lyman, president of Nuclear Control Institute, or NCI, a Washington-based non-proliferation group, was quoted in American press reports as saying that the DOE's statement on its budget is "the first admission that the two programs are getting so out of whack that it may actually require the US to slow down its program here." Lyman's group opposes MOX and wants the surplus plutonium to be disposed of through immobilization. Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, which studies nuclear issues, pointed out how the delays in the MOX program are actually contributing to the dangers that the program aims to solve. "Very unfortunately, what is happening is all the plutonium is just sitting around and I believe it may sit around for a lot longer than the MOX program envisages," Makhijani told the South Carolina-based Greenville News. Makhijani said three major problems have stalled Russian progress: a lack of money, objections over how the fuel will be designed and disagreement over who is liable if a major accident occurs. "Until these three issues are resolved, I don't see how there can be anything but delays," he said. The NRC report also raises several questions about the level of preparations on the US side. For instance, the DOE has not identified enough reactors to complete the MOX project according to its timetable - a problem that also plagues Russian planning. According to the NRC study, two nuclear power plants - one in North Carolina, the other in South Carolina - have stated an interest in burning MOX fuel, but no plants have yet applied to burn test fuel, a necessary step for the plants to be licensed by the NRC to burn MOX. Additionally, the NRC report identified the necessity of constructing a waste solidification building at SRS to deal with spent MOX fuel. However, according to a Greenpeace statement on the NRC report, "the DOE has not even admitted that such a facility is needed." Finally, the report fails to assess environmental impacts if the US government were to expand plutonium disposal in MOX beyond the 34 tons it agreed to destroy. return to menu G. Announcements 1. Russian-American Consultations Regarding Arms Liquidation, Reduction and Limitation On March 4 consultations were held at the Russian MFA with Stephen Rademaker, Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control. In the course of the discussion a broad range of questions pertaining to arms liquidation, reduction and limitation was examined. In particular, the sides exchanged information on the course of the process of ratification of the Treaty Between Russia and the USA on Strategic Offensive Reductions, on the ratification of the Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and expressed their thoughts about the work of the Conference on Disarmament and on other problems of multilateral disarmament. The consultations were in continuation of regular contacts as part of implementation of the provisions of the Declaration on the New Strategic Relationship Between Russia and the USA. return to menu 2. On the Verification of the Efficacy in the Use of the Funds Being Allocated by Russia and the United States for the Implementation of the HEU Disposition Agreement The utilization by American atomic power stations of Russian low enriched uranium makes highly enriched the cooperation of the two countries both in the field of disarmament and in the area of advanced technologies, said Chairman of the Russian Audit Chamber Sergei Stepashin yesterday during a telephone conversation with his American colleague - David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States. The heads of the highest bodies of state financial control exchanged congratulations on the occasion of the tenth anniversary a few days ago of the Russian-US agreement concerning the disposition of highly enriched uranium extracted from nuclear weapons, under which that uranium is being processed into low enriched uranium supplied as nuclear fuel to American atomic power stations. During the conversation, held as part of the established practice of regular consultations, both leaders discussed questions related to carrying out parallel checks of the accuracy and effectiveness of the use of the funds being allocated by both countries for the implementation of the Agreement, as well as of the fullness and timeliness of the transfer of revenues to the budget of Russia. Questions concerning the final stage of work on the creation within the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) of a special working group for the fight against the penetration of transboundary crime into world financial systems and for cutting off the channels of financial support for international terrorism were also considered. The decision on the establishment of that group has been adopted by the Congress of INTOSAI on the initiative of the Audit Chamber of Russia. Agreement was reached on the further continuation of contacts on questions relating to carrying out parallel checks under the Russian-American HEU Agreement, as well as to the creation of the special working group of INTOSAI. return to menu 3. Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Igor Ivanov's Remarks on DPRK at Russian Embassy in Beijing (excerpted) [...] As neighbor countries having traditional close ties with the states of the Korean Peninsula, Russia and China are worried by the present aggravation of the situation in this area. We support a politico-diplomatic solution of all existing problems and stand for the preservation of peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region. Toward this end, in our opinion, it is necessary to secure the denuclearized status of the Korean Peninsula, to keep the nonproliferation regime for weapons of mass destruction there and to guarantee due consideration of the legitimate concerns of all concerned parties, including the DPRK. We attach special importance to the establishment of a dialogue between the United States and the DPRK, and Russia is ready to assist this in every possible way. [...] Question: What are the concrete plans of Russia with respect to resolving the situation in the Korean Peninsula? Is Russia planning to send a special representative to Korea? Could you give us some details of possible future visits and what is the attitude of Russia to negotiations in a multilateral format? Foreign Minister Ivanov: During our yesterday talks with the Chinese partners, we discussed this topic in detail. It is reflected in our joint statement. I can only add that Russia and China are ready to assist the process of politically resolving the situation in the Korean Peninsula. The principles on which we are ready to assist this settlement are well known. It is a denuclearized status for the Korean Peninsula, it is the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, it is security guarantees for all states in this region. At the same time I want to stress that, while Russia and China can assist this process, the central element in settlement is, of course, a direct dialogue between the DPRK and the United States. In what format this dialogue will proceed - bilateral or multilateral - it's up to the sides. We are ready to facilitate any option. I repeat the main element is a direct dialogue between Washington and Pyongyang. And we for our part, of course, are ready and keen to assist this dialogue. return to menu H. Links of Interest 1. Dirty Bomb return to menu 2. CTR Scorecard return to menu 3. The Bush Nuclear Posture Review's First Budget in Congress return to menu 4. What's Left After SORT? return to menu DISCLAIMER: Nuclear News is presented for informational purposes only. Views presented in any given article are those of the individual author or source and not of RANSAC. RANSAC takes no responsibility for the technical accuracy of information contained in any article presented in Nuclear News. RANSAC's Nuclear News is compiled two to three times weekly. If you would like to be removed from our mailing list or if you have questions/comments/concerns, please reply to news@216.119.87.134 |
|
|
|
© 2007 Partnership for Global Security. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement.