archive-org.com » ORG » L » LASG.ORG

Total: 881

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • TA-21
    TA 21 Incinerator LANL 2001 Material disposal areas under construction Canyon bottoms and flood plains and under construction Photo gallery under construction Additional information under construction References and acronyms from LA UR 97 4275 Los Alamos National Laboratory LANL Site Wide Environmental Impact Statement Project Office 1997 Description of Technical Areas and Facilities at Los Alamos National Laboratory LA UR 97 4275 Approved for public release and unlimited distribution LANL

    Original URL path: http://lasg.org/maps/pages/contents/21contents.htm (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive


  • TA-46
    Outfalls map LANL 2001 Material disposal areas under construction Canyon bottoms and flood plains and under construction Photo gallery under construction Additional information under construction References and acronyms from LA UR 97 4275 Los Alamos National Laboratory LANL Site Wide Environmental Impact Statement Project Office 1997 Description of Technical Areas and Facilities at Los Alamos National Laboratory LA UR 97 4275 Approved for public release and unlimited distribution LANL Facility

    Original URL path: http://lasg.org/maps/pages/contents/46contents.htm (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • TA-15
    maps LANL 2001 Material disposal areas under construction Canyon bottoms and flood plains and under construction Photo gallery under construction Additional information under construction References and acronyms from LA UR 97 4275 Los Alamos National Laboratory LANL Site Wide Environmental Impact Statement Project Office 1997 Description of Technical Areas and Facilities at Los Alamos National Laboratory LA UR 97 4275 Approved for public release and unlimited distribution LANL Facility for

    Original URL path: http://lasg.org/maps/pages/contents/15contents.htm (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • SPD-SEIS Final, Apr 2015
    FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES Appendix B FACILITIES DESCRIPTION Appendix C EVALUATION OF HUMAN HEALTH EFFECTS FROM NORMAL OPERATIONS Appendix D EVALUATION OF HUMAN HEALTH EFFECTS FROM FACILITY ACCIDENTS Appendix E EVALUATION OF HUMAN HEALTH EFFECTS FROM TRANSPORTATION Appendix F IMPACTS OF PIT DISASSEMBLY AND CONVERSION OPTIONS Appendix G IMPACTS OF PLUTONIUM DISPOSITION OPTIONS Appendix H IMPACTS OF PRINCIPAL PLUTONIUM SUPPORT FACILITIES Appendix I IMPACTS OF MIXED OXIDE FUEL USE IN DOMESTIC

    Original URL path: http://lasg.org/documents/SPD-SEIS_Apr2015/SPD-SEIS_cover.html (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Obama Aims to Terminate MOX Project, NSDM, 9 Feb 2016
    allows the agency to complete targeted disposal of the plutonium significantly earlier and cheaper than with MOX Other opponents of the program were similarly pleased There are options that will cost far less be completed more quickly and not create the unnecessary security risks inherent in the MOX based approach said Edwin Lyman a senior scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists While MOX opponents are celebrating South Carolina s lawmakers have already denounced the project s potential shutdown MOX advocates include U S Sen Lindsey Graham R S C who supporters may look to first to sustain construction of the Savannah River Site facility Graham serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee as well as the upper chamber s Appropriations Committee which means a final vote to nix MOX would have to pass through him on more than one occasion On Tuesday Graham said in a press release that Obama s proposal is reckless because it seeks MOX termination without a proven disposition plan in place He added that now is not the time to renegotiate with Russia the terms of a 2000 deal in which both countries will dispose of 34 metric tons of weapons usable plutonium MOX was the designated U S means for achieving this goal One can only imagine what the Russians will ask for in return Graham said in the press release Following Tuesday s budget rollout the state of South Carolina reported it has filed a lawsuit against the DOE and others for missing a key deadline at the MFFF and for nonpayment of the associated penalties The complaint lists four defendants including Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz the National Nuclear Security Administration NNSA and the agency s administrator Lt Gen Frank Klotz A 2003 agreement drawn up by Graham who was in the

    Original URL path: http://lasg.org/press/2016/NSDM_9Feb2016.html (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Half-Built Nuclear Fuel Plant in South Carolina Faces Test on Its Future, NYT, 8 Feb 2016
    Iron one of the two companies that own the main contractor for the facility gave 10 000 to Mr Wilson s 2014 re election campaign and the other owner Areva Group donated 8 000 according to campaign records Programs like this stay in the budget when they become jobs programs and then senior members of Congress try to protect them even if they have no redeeming value said David Hobson a former Republican congressman from Ohio who said he tried and failed to kill the MOX program while he was in the House Where are all the budget hawks on this Mr Wilson countered that the administration had used discrepancies in data to overestimate costs for finishing the project Proponents of the MOX plant also cited a recent study paid for by the main contractor working on the plant that concludes that the costs of the program are much lower than the estimates in recent studies sponsored by the Energy Department The Obama administration has wanted to get rid of the program for years In a budget request three years ago it said the idea of making reactor fuel may be unaffordable But Congress has repeatedly restored funding The plant is being built to comply with an agreement with Russia in 2000 when both countries said they would eliminate 34 metric tons of weapons grade plutonium from their nuclear arsenals Construction started during the George W Bush administration but has been plagued by long delays cost overruns and little interest from commercial nuclear plants in buying the fuel that the plant was designed to produce Even proponents of the program have long said the Energy Department badly managed it This is one of the most important nonproliferation programs ever but when it comes to implementing this agreement it s been a nightmare Mr Graham said Giving up on the plant means the administration will abandon plans to turn the weapons grade plutonium into fuel for commercial nuclear reactors and will instead switch to a process that dilutes the plutonium into nuclear waste The Energy Department would like to move that nuclear waste to a facility near Carlsbad N M where it would be stored deep underground in salt formations The administration says it can get rid of the weapons material under the alternative approach for about 300 million to 400 million a year compared with 800 million to 1 billion a year under MOX There have been several independent analyses that have concluded that the MOX fuel approach for plutonium disposition will be significantly more expensive and take longer than anticipated said John J MacWilliams a top Energy Department official The analyses also all confirmed that there is an alternative option that would be less than half the cost of the MOX fuel approach Still the administration faces big obstacles before it can make the switch It will have to persuade the Russian government to agree to modify the agreement to allow the United States to change its method for

    Original URL path: http://lasg.org/press/2016/NYT_8Feb2016.html (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • White House Said to Propose Deep Cuts for MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility, NSDM, 5 Feb 2016
    arms reduction deal given current DOE budgets Completing the MFFF that team said is prohibitively expensive at expected funding levels MFFF is being built by CB I AREVA MOX Services a partnership of The Netherlands based CB I and AREVA North America the U S arm of French nuclear power company AREVA Estimates of the facility s life cycle cost vary drastically In 2015 a congressionally chartered report from the Pentagon funded Aerospace Corp of El Segundo Calif pegged the cost at 51 billion CB I shot back with its own report by consulting firm High Bridge Associates of Greensboro Ga which said the MFFF life cycle cost was 17 billion A White House request to even partially defund MFFF would face large if not insurmountable technical and political hurdles The facility has many allies in Congress where lawmakers on the appropriations committees that draft budget bills could simply ignore the White House s request The drum beat for full funding had already started in a Feb 3 hearing of the House Budget Committee during which Rep Joe Wilson R S C whose second congressional district includes the entire Savannah River Site said it was critical to continue construction on MFFF This facility is our only viable method at this time of disposing of weapons grade plutonium and our country s only means to honor the Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement we have with the Russian Federation Wilson said If Congress did agree to shut down MFFF it would take about three years and cost 550 million to 700 million according to DOE s National Nuclear Security Administration That finding was part of a report titled Study on the Disposition of Weapons Usable Plutonium which lawmakers ordered DOE to prepare as part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2015 Even according to the most conservative appraisal published so far MFFF construction is about 50 percent complete Meanwhile the DOE chartered Red Team acknowledged there is not enough space in WIPP to store all 34 metric tons of the plutonium of which the White House pledged to dispose WIPP slated to reopen in December after a nearly three year moratorium on waste shipments prompted by a fire and subsequent radiation leak in 2014 is already the country s only disposal facility for transuranic waste equipment and material contaminated during refining Sending even less than half of the 34 metric tons covered by the 2010 disposal pact to WIPP would take up about 68 percent of the present remaining storage space at the facility according to the August 2015 Red Team report Transuranic waste bound for WIPP is already piled up at some of the 16 Cold War era waste cleanup sites on which DOE s Office of Environmental Management is still working Meanwhile new plutonium refining whether for Pentagon programs or commercial fuel rods generates new transuranic waste Enlarging WIPP would require Congress to modify the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act of 1992 under which the federal government took over a

    Original URL path: http://lasg.org/press/2016/NSDM_5Feb2016.html (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Russian Official: Gov’t Open to Alternative U.S. Plutonium Disposition Methods, NSDM, 16 Oct 2015
    official said Moscow has expected more information from its US partners on Washington s approach to the PMDA for several years now National Nuclear Security Administration chief Frank Klotz said in a brief interview last week that neither party is currently negotiating an amendment to the PMDA but added that the U S has informed Russia of DOE s support for the alternative dilution and disposal approach We have raised to their awareness at the technical level that we are exploring alternative pathways to get to the mission of disposing of 34 metric tons of excess weapons grade plutonium Klotz said Their response has been Well if you have something more definitive then let s get back together and discuss it The U S in the bilateral agreement pledged to provide 400 million to help Moscow operate its MOX plant at Russia s Mining Chemical Combine GKhK which sits in the south central part of the country Workers recently completed construction of the facility which as of mid September had produced its first 10 kilograms of MOX fuel according to Russian state media outlet Russia Today House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee Chairman Mike Rogers R Ala said during a MOX hearing last week that it appears a virtual impossibility for Congress to approve any funds for Russia s MOX program in the near future given recent public statements by Pentagon brass about the danger Russia could pose to the U S Given that so many senior U S military leaders are saying they are our biggest threat it s going to be a virtual impossibility to get more money out of Congress for Russia he said Experts have said renegotiating the PMDA would have little to no impact on Russian plutonium disposition as the nation has already started acting on its commitment to use fast neutron reactors embedded with MOX fuel to advance the country toward a closed fuel cycle But some have said Russia could push to remove certain reprocessing bans included in the agreement until the amount of plutonium covered by the accord is fully disposed as noted in a 2014 essay by Anatoli Diakov chief research scientist for the Russian think tank the Center for Arms Control Energy and Environmental Studies and Vladimir Rybachenkov senior research scientist for the same think tank We are of the view that Russia may agree with any disposition method which the USA would deem acceptable their report Disposition of Excess Weapon Grade Plutonium New Developments states In return the Russian side would have the right to repudiate the provision of the Agreement prohibiting spent fuel and blanket reprocessing till the full disposition of 34 tons of excess plutonium is over Blanket reprocessing in fast breeders often involves a blanket of tubes that surround a MOX core The blankets commonly contain non fissile uranium 238 that absorbs fast neutrons from reactions in the core and then converts to fissile plutonium 239 before being reprocessed and used as nuclear fuel Along with

    Original URL path: http://lasg.org/press/2015/NSDM_16Oct2015.html (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive



  •