DOCSLIB.ORG

26 JULY 2002 Ii Iii

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
26 JULY 2002 Ii Iii 1982 UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA BEFORE AN ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL ESTABLISHED UNDER ANNEX VII IN THE DISPUTE CONCERNING THE MOX PLANT, INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENTS OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, AND THE PROTECTION OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT OF THE IRISH SEA IRELAND V. UNITED KINGDOM MEMORIAL OF IRELAND VOLUME I 26 JULY 2002 ii iii MEMORIAL OF IRELAND CONTENTS List of Colour Plates in Volume I .................................................................................xi PART I: THE FACTUAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ....................1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION............................................................................... 3 A. Geography and Oceanography................................................................................. 6 B. The Irish Sea and its Importance to Ireland ............................................................. 8 Radioactivity in the Irish Sea............................................................................. 9 OSPAR Reports............................................................................................... 10 Other Reports................................................................................................... 14 Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 15 C. The Sellafield Site (MOX, THORP and Related Facilities) .................................. 16 Operational Activities............................................................................... 18 Radioactive Waste Management............................................................... 20 Transport Activities................................................................................... 22 Transfer of MOX and THORP from BNFL to the New Liabilities Management Authority ............................................................ 22 D. The General Concerns of the Irish People, the Irish Government and Third Governments. ......................................................................................................... 23 CHAPTER 2: THE MOX PLANT........................................................................... 27 A. The Manufacture of MOX fuel, and Related Activities......................................... 27 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle............................................................................. 28 Step 1: Reprocessing of Spent Nuclear Fuel ............................................. 29 The THORP Reprocessing Plant............................................................... 30 Step 2: The Manufacture of MOX Fuel .................................................... 31 B. International Shipments of Radioactive Materials through the Irish Sea............... 34 Transports of Spent Fuel into the United Kingdom .................................. 34 Transport of MOX fuel from the United Kingdom................................... 34 Transport of MOX fuel to the United Kingdom........................................ 35 Opposition to the Transport of Radioactive Materials by Sea................... 35 Vessels Used for Transportation ............................................................... 37 C. MOX Economics – Its Market, and Competition .................................................. 38 D. Ownership and Management of the Sellafield Site: BNFL and the Proposed Liabilities Management Authority. ........................................................ 39 iv The MOX Plant and the LMA................................................................... 39 BNFL’s Compliance Record..................................................................... 41 E. Regulatory Background and the Decision-making Process ................................... 44 Planning Permission and the 1993 Environmental Statement................... 45 The Justification Process and the Discharge Authorisations..................... 45 The Decision of 3 October 2001 ............................................................... 47 CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE MOX AUTHORISATION................................................................ 51 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 51 A. Pollution Arising as a Result of the Authorisation of the MOX Plant................... 52 (1) The MOX Plant and THORP Are Inextricably Linked............................. 52 (2) The Overall Amounts of the Discharges from Sellafield .......................... 54 (3) The Effects of the MOX Development on the Amounts of the Discharges from Sellafield ........................................................................ 56 Planned Discharges of Radioactive Isotopes from MOX Production........................................................................................... 56 Planned Discharges of Radioactive Isotopes from THORP and Other Associated Facilities .......................................................... 58 Consequences for Liquid and Aerial Discharges From Sellafield for Three Different Operational Scenarios......................... 59 Unplanned Discharges from MOX, THORP and Associated Facilities, and Other Factors That Could Affect Discharges from Sellafield.................................................................................... 61 B. Radiation Pathways from the MOX Plant and Associated Facilities and Shipments, and Impacts upon Humans and the Environment................................ 62 (1) Radiation Pathways................................................................................... 62 (2) The Effects of Discharges into the Irish Sea ............................................. 63 Effects upon Marine Life.................................................................... 63 Effects on Humans ............................................................................. 64 (3) The Effects of Radiation............................................................................ 65 C. Use of Abatement Technologies ............................................................................ 66 CHAPTER 4: THE DISPUTE.................................................................................. 69 A. The THORP Plant: 1977-1984............................................................................... 70 B. The MOX Environmental Statement: 1993 ........................................................... 70 C. The Discharge Authorisations................................................................................ 71 D. “Justification” and the OSPAR Dispute: 1997-2001 ............................................. 71 The Consultation Process.......................................................................... 72 The Justification Decision of 3 October 2001........................................... 75 Ireland’s Efforts to Obtain Information..................................................... 75 UNCLOS................................................................................................... 79 v Proceedings before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Order of Tribunal Dated 3 December 2001 ........................... 82 Developments Subsequent to the ITLOS Order........................................ 83 Exchange of Information between the Parties........................................... 84 Transportation of Radioactive Materials to and from Sellafield in the Light of the United Kingdom’s Assurances to the ITLOS and Ireland................................................................................................. 85 PART II: THE LAW .............................................................................................93 CHAPTER 5: JURISDICTION................................................................................ 95 CHAPTER 6: THE APPLICABLE LAW............................................................... 99 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 99 A. The Relationship between the Rules of the 1982 UNCLOS and Other Rules of International Law..................................................................................... 99 B. The Application of the Rules in UNCLOS .......................................................... 101 C. The Application of Other Rules of International Law Not Incompatible with the Convention............................................................................................. 102 (1) International Treaties............................................................................... 102 (2) Customary International Law.................................................................. 105 Precautionary Principle .................................................................... 105 Sustainable Development and the Obligation to Apply Current Norms and Standards of Environmental Protection ............ 107 (3) Internationally Agreed Standards and Recommended Practices and Procedures ........................................................................................ 109 Summary and Conclusions ........................................................................................ 110 CHAPTER 7: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT.......................... 111 Introduction................................................................................................................ 111 A. The Rationale for Environmental Assessment..................................................... 112 B. The Law..............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dounreay Broadsheet
    N949 AU6UST ISEPTEMBER 1985 Background Radiation Dounreay Broadsheet Nuclear Leeks! -contents Comment Dounreay: The Rigged Inquiry 3 On May 24th Alistair Goodlad, junior Energy The campaign against the reprocessing Minister, announced that the Department of plant hots up by lan Leveson Energy will be supporting the application by the News 4-5 UKAEA and BNFL to construct the European Background Radiation 6-7 Demonstration Reproc:::essing Plant (EDRP) to Adding to natural radiation won't handle spent fast reactor fuel at Dounreay on harm you? by Don Arnott the north coast of Scotland. Although this Radhealth 7-8 application had been publicised last autumn, the Trades Unions and the IC RP manner and timing of the announcement came by Tony Webb as a surprise to the anti-nuclear movement. Dounreay Information Broadsheet 9-12 lt has long been realised that the activities at Dounreay deserve national prominence, but Nuclear Leeks! 13 understandably the campaigns against Windscale The Welsh Magnox stations' record and Sizewell B haV'e taken much of the move­ by Hugh Richards ment's attention recently. However, the EDRP NPT- No Peace Tomorrow (5) 14 proposal has instilled in us a sense of urgency Concluding our series for the so we have produced the enclosed fourJ)CI9e Treaty Review Conference broadsheet on Dounreay to assist campaigners by Jos Gallacher to publicise the hazards of this ludicrous pro­ Greentown - Green Future 15 posal. Milton Keynes' co-operatively run Looking at the plans one can believe that the community by David Olivier applicants have gone out of their way to devise Appropriate Technology 16-17 the worst possible scenario: highly radioactive Reviews 18-19 spent plutonium fuel will be shipped across the Listings, Little Black Rabbit 20 congested and inhospitable North Sea from the Tony Webb works with the Trades Union Radi­ European mainland (remember the Mont Louis?) ation and Health Information Service.
    [Show full text]
  • 1322217 December 2000 Search Results From
    1322217 December 2000 Source : CNN.COM NEWS, DECEMBER 17, 2000, (http://www.cnn.com). Location : Oshkosh, Wisconsin, USA Injured : 4 Dead : 0 Abstract A rail transportation incident. A fire occurred onboard and box car containing sodium hydrosulphite. Nearby residents were evacuated. Sodium hydrosulphite is highly flammable that can heat and ignite in the presence of moisture and air. Four people were affected by fumes. [fire - consequence, gas / vapour release] Lessons [None Reported] Search results from IChemE's Accident Database. Information from [email protected] 1319605 November 2000 Source : CHEMICAL SAFETY AND HAZARD INVESTIGATION BOARD, NOVEMBER 5, 2000, (http://www.chemsafety.gov), Disclaimer: The Chemical Incident Reports Center (CIRC) is an information service provided by the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB). Users of this service should note that the contents of the CIRC are not intended to be a comprehensive listing of all incidents that have occurred; many incidents go unreported or are not entered into the database. Therefore, it is not appropriate to use the CIRC database to perfrom statistical analysis that extends conclusions beyond the content of the CIRC. Also, although the CSB never knowingly posts inaccurate information, the CSB is unable to independently verify all information that it receives from its various sources, much of which is based on initial reports. CIRC users should also note that the CSB receives more comprehensive reports about incidents that occur in the U.S.; comparisons made between U.S. incidents and those in other nations should take this fact into consideration. Location : Sonora, Texas, USA Injured : 6 Dead : 0 Abstract A fire and several explosions occurred at a chemical warehouse when lightning struck an electrical transformer during a thunderstorm.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiological Consequences Resulting from Accidents and Incidents Involving the Transport of Radioactive Materials in the UK – 2011 Review
    HPA-CRCE-037 Radiological Consequences Resulting from Accidents and Incidents Involving the Transport of Radioactive Materials in the UK – 2011 Review M P Harvey and A L Jones ABSTRACT This report includes descriptions of thirty eight accidents and incidents involving the transport of radioactive materials from, to, or within the United Kingdom, which occurred in 2011. The number of events reported in 2011 was higher than in 2010 (30 events), and near the top of the range of the number of events that have occurred in the last five year period: 30 events in 2010, 33 events in 2009, 39 events in 2008, 26 events in 2007 and 29 events in 2006. Of the 38 events included in this review 11 involved irradiated nuclear fuel flasks (there were also 8 such events in 2010). Only one of the events reported, involving the transport of a radiopharmaceutical source, resulted in any potentially significant radiation dose. The details of these events have been entered into the RAdioactive Material Transport Event Database (RAMTED), which now contains information on 1018 events that are known to have occurred since 1958. This study was funded by the Radioactive Material Transport division (RMT) of the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), © Crown Copyright Approval: August 2012 Publication: August 2012 £15.00 ISBN 978-0-85951-720-1 This report from the HPA Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards reflects understanding and evaluation of the current scientific evidence as presented and referenced in this document. This work was undertaken under the Environmental Assessment Department’s Quality Management System, which has been approved by Lloyd's Register Quality Assurance to the Quality Management Standards ISO 9001:2008 and TickIT Guide Issue 5.5, certificate number LRQ0956546.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Impact Assessment Report Volume 3: Baseline Report and Policy and Legislative Context Review Final
    Nuclear Decommissioning Authority NDA Strategy (2021) Integrated Impact Assessment Report Volume 3: Baseline Report and Policy and Legislative Context Review Final June 2020 NDA Strategy (2021) OFFICIAL FINAL June 2020 Contents Baseline Report ...................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Sources 1 2.0 The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority estate ...................................... 3 2.1 Sellafield (SLC – Sellafield Ltd) 3 2.2 Magnox nuclear power stations (SLC – Magnox Ltd) 3 2.3 Nuclear research facilities (SLC – Magnox Ltd) 4 2.4 Dounreay (SLC – Dounreay Site Restoration Limited) 4 2.5 Capenhurst uranium enrichment facility (via Capenhurst Nuclear Services) 4 2.6 Springfields nuclear fuel manufacturing facility (via Springfields Fuels Limited) 4 2.7 Low Level Waste Repository (SLC – LLW Repository Ltd) 5 3.0 Site Specific Baseline / Community Profiles ............................................. 6 3.1 Berkeley 6 3.2 Bradwell 8 3.3 Chapelcross 10 3.4 Dungeness A 12 3.5 Trawsfynydd 14 3.6 Sizewell A 16 3.7 Dounreay 18 3.8 Sellafield 20 3.9 Oldbury 22 3.10 Hinkley Point A 24 3.11 Hunterston A 26 3.12 Wylfa 28 3.13 Capenhurst 30 3.14 LLWR 32 3.15 Springfields 34 3.16 Winfrith 36 3.17 Harwell 38 4.0 Future baseline .......................................................................................... 40 4.1 Introduction 40 4.2 Future
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8 Co-Operation
    139 CHAPTER 8 CO-OPERATION INTRODUCTION 8.1. Ireland believes that its population, its natural resources, and its interests are at risk of being detrimentally affected by various aspects of the operation of the Sellafield plant and the associated shipments of nuclear materials. Particular aspects of their concern are identified elsewhere in this Memorial. Ireland appreciates, however, that it is not possible for the protection of all of a State’s interests in these matters to be secured entirely by detailed legal regulations. The issues are too complicated, and too changeable, to be dealt with comprehensively by such legal means. It is necessary for there to be a practical and effective co-operation between the States concerned, so that the rights and interests of each of them can be taken into account by any State that is proposing to take steps that might affect those rights and interests. As is explained below, particular importance is placed on the obligation to co-operate in the UNCLOS. 8.2. Ireland’s concerns relating to the failure of the United Kingdom to conduct an adequate environmental impact assessment were described in the previous chapter. That failure might be termed a “procedural” failure, in as much as it does not itself directly cause physical or economic harm. Rather, the failure cuts out a safety mechanism that is built into the UNCLOS in order to ensure, so far as is possible, that physical or economic harm is not caused by the implementation of projects such as the MOX plant. 8.3. The second of Ireland’s principal concerns in this case is also procedural.
    [Show full text]
  • International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation (Infce)
    INFCE International Nuclear Fuel INFCE/DEP/WG.6/'S M» Cycle 0 Evaluation RESPONSES TO TASK 1 QUESTIONNAIRE OF INFCE WORKING GROUP 6 SUPPLIED BY PARTICIPATING STATES March 1978 INPCE/GROUP VI - QUESTIONNAIRE COUNTRY: ARGENTINA 1. Nuclear power forecast (MWe) 1980 1990 2000 REF 1.000 HIGH 3.300 10.000 LOW 2.700 8.000 2. Spent fuel forecast (tons UO-) » 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 REF 780 2.360 HIGH 5.500 10.650 23.900 LOW 5.350 10.275 19.100 3. Pool reactor spare capacity (ton U02) (a) full core discharge 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 REF 250 400 HIGH 850 1.450 2.500 LOW 700 1.250 2.000 4. Under the fuel cycle conditions which you anticipate in your country what requirements have you identified for away-from- reactor (AFR) storage? To be considered after 1985. - 49 - 5. Current programme (a) At reactor storage Present Under Construction ton U0- years tons U02 years Atucha I 500 5 1.300 13 Embalse 1.500 10 (b) Away from reactor storage - national none (c) Away from reactor storage - Multinational Not envisaged by the time being 6. Spent fue) storage short-fall Not envisaged 7. Spent fuel future plans (a) At reactor storage All units will be required a minimun holding capacity, in site, equivalent to 10 years full power operation (80% load factor) plus full core discharge reserve. (b) Away from reactor storage The position will be reviewed after 1985. (c) Go/no-go decision factors The development of the overall energy programme, particular­ ly the hydrc-electric programme.
    [Show full text]
  • Stichting Laka: Documentatie- En Onderzoekscentrum Kernenergie
    Stichting Laka: Documentatie- en onderzoekscentrum kernenergie De Laka-bibliotheek The Laka-library Dit is een pdf van één van de publicaties in This is a PDF from one of the publications de bibliotheek van Stichting Laka, het in from the library of the Laka Foundation; the Amsterdam gevestigde documentatie- en Amsterdam-based documentation and onderzoekscentrum kernenergie. research centre on nuclear energy. Laka heeft een bibliotheek met ongeveer The Laka library consists of about 8,000 8000 boeken (waarvan een gedeelte dus ook books (of which a part is available as PDF), als pdf), duizenden kranten- en tijdschriften- thousands of newspaper clippings, hundreds artikelen, honderden tijdschriftentitels, of magazines, posters, video's and other posters, video’s en ander beeldmateriaal. material. Laka digitaliseert (oude) tijdschriften en Laka digitizes books and magazines from the boeken uit de internationale antikernenergie- international movement against nuclear beweging. power. De catalogus van de Laka-bibliotheek staat The catalogue of the Laka-library can be op onze site. De collectie bevat een grote found at our website. The collection also verzameling gedigitaliseerde tijdschriften uit contains a large number of digitized de Nederlandse antikernenergie-beweging en magazines from the Dutch anti-nuclear power een verzameling video's. movement and a video-section. Laka speelt met oa. haar informatie- Laka plays with, amongst others things, its voorziening een belangrijke rol in de information services, an important role in the Nederlandse anti-kernenergiebeweging. Dutch anti-nuclear movement. Appreciate our work? Feel free to make a small donation. Thank you. www.laka.org | [email protected] | Ketelhuisplein 43, 1054 RD Amsterdam | 020-6168294 1 | P a g e This publication is a tribute and a follow up to the years of work carried out by retired Western Australian ALP Senator Ruth Coleman.
    [Show full text]
  • Severity, Probability and Risk of Accidents During Maritime Transport of Radioactive Material Final Report of a Co-Ordinated Research Project 1995-1999
    ХА010263/: IAEA-TECDOC-1231 Severity, probability and risk of accidents during maritime transport of radioactive material Final report of a co-ordinated research project 1995-1999 WJ IAEA 32/44 July 2001 IAEA SAFETY RELATED PUBLICATIONS IAEA SAFETY STANDARDS Under the terms of Article III of its Statute, the IAEA is authorized to establish standards of safety for protection against ionizing radiation and to provide for the application of these standards to peaceful nuclear activities. The regulatory related publications by means of which the IAEA establishes safety standards and measures are issued in the IAEA Safety Standards Series. This series covers nuclear safety, radiation safety, transport safety and waste safety, and also general safety (that is, of relevance in two or more of the four areas), and the categories within it are Safety Fundamentals, Safety Requirements and Safety Guides. • Safety Fundamentals (silver lettering) present basic objectives, concepts and principles of safety and protection in the development and application of atomic energy for peaceful purposes. • Safety Requirements (red lettering) establish the requirements that must be met to ensure safety. These requirements, which are expressed as 'shall' statements, are governed by the objectives and principles presented in the Safety Fundamentals. • Safety Guides (green lettering) recommend actions, conditions or procedures for meeting safety requirements. Recommendations in Safety Guides are expressed as 'should' statements, with the implication that it is necessary to take the measures recommended or equivalent alternative measures to comply with the requirements. The IAEA's safety standards are not legally binding on Member States but may be adopted by them, at their own discretion, for use in national regulations in respect of their own activities.
    [Show full text]
  • NDA Research and Development Needs, Risks and Opportunities
    NDA R&D Needs, Risks and Opportunities NDA Research & Development Needs, Risks and Opportunities ISSUED APRIL 2006, VERSION 1. NDA R&D Needs, Risks and Opportunities NDA R&D Needs, Risks and Opportunities NDA Research & Development (R&D) Needs, Risks and Opportunities Purpose: This document provides an openly available summary of the R&D requirements presented as part of the Life Cycle Baseline Plans 005, submitted by the Site Licensee Companies – a requirement identified in the NDA strategy document. It is designed to provide the R&D community with information regarding areas of best practice and improvement and in particular to highlight the opportunities that exist for developing common and fit for purpose technical solutions to a range of challenging issues. NDA R&D Needs, Risks and Opportunities Executive Summary The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) is a non-departmental public body, set up in April 005 by the UK Government under the Energy Act 00 to take strategic responsibility for the UK’s nuclear legacy. Our mission is clear: ‘To deliver a world class programme of safe, cost-effective, accelerated and environmentally responsible decommissioning of the UK’s civil nuclear legacy in an open and transparent manner and with due regard to the socio-economic impacts on our communities’. NDA R&D Needs, Risks and Opportunities Acceleration of the clean-up The University Research Alliances Experience gained from overseas programme through the application are helping to develop the next decommissioning work feeds directly of innovative technology. generation of nuclear scientists. into our clean-up activities. The NDA does not carry out clean-up The purpose of including technical baselines 14 work itself but has in place a contract and underpinning R&D requirements within with Site Licensee Companies (SLCs), the LCBL is to establish an auditable trail who are responsible for the day-to-day through the LCBL and a direct link between decommissioning and clean-up activity on the programme components and programme each UK site.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf of the Catalogue
    W.C. Marshall NCUACS 171/2/09 Catalogue of the papers and correspondence of Walter Charles Marshall, Kt CBE FRS Baron Marshall of Goring (1932-1996) VOLUME I Introduction Section A: Biographical – Section K: Non-textual media By Anna-K. Mayer, Peter Harper and Timothy E. Powell NCUACS catalogue no. 171/2/09 W.C. Marshall NCUACS 171/2/09 Title: Catalogue of the papers and correspondence of Walter Charles Marshall FRS (1932-1996), physicist Compiled by: Anna-K. Mayer, Peter Harper and Timothy E. Powell Date of material: 1949-2008 Extent of material: ca 1850 items Deposited in: Churchill College, Cambridge Reference: GB 0014 MRSL 2009 National Cataloguing Unit for the Archives of Contemporary Scientists, University of Bath NCUACS catalogue no. 171/2/09 The work of the National Cataloguing Unit for the Archives of Contemporary Scientists in the production of this catalogue is made possible by the support of the W.C. Marshall NCUACS 171/2/09 NOT ALL THE MATERIAL IN THIS COLLECTION MAY YET BE AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION. ENQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED IN THE FIRST INSTANCE TO: THE ARCHIVIST CHURCHILL ARCHIVES CENTRE CHURCHILL COLLEGE CAMBRIDGE W.C. Marshall NCUACS 171/2/09 LIST OF CONTENTS Items Page GENERAL INTRODUCTION 5 SECTION A BIOGRAPHICAL A.1-A.52 10 SECTION B UNITED KINGDOM ATOMIC ENERGY B.1-B.138 15 AUTHORITY (UKAEA) SECTION C CENTRAL ELECTRICITY GENERATING C.1-C.342 26 BOARD (CEGB) SECTION D SELECT COMMITTEE ON ENERGY, D.1-D.49 54 ‘THE COST OF NUCLEAR POWER’ SECTION E HOUSE OF LORDS E.1-E.14 63 SECTION F ROYAL SOCIETY F.1-F.57 65 SECTION G PAPERS AND PUBLICATIONS G.1-G.80 71 SECTION H LECTURES H.1-H.727 76 SECTION J CORRESPONDENCE J.1-J.369 174 SECTION K NON-TEXTUAL MEDIA K.1-K.7 185 INDEX OF CORRESPONDENTS 187 W.C.
    [Show full text]
  • NDA Strategy: Integrated Impact Assessment Report
    Version 3 March 2016 NDA Strategy Integrated Impact Assessment Report Volume 3: Baseline Report and Policy and Legislative Context Review Final March 2016 Doc ID: 23649278 NDA Strategy Version 3 March 2016 Contents Baseline Report ...................................................................................................... 1 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Sources 1 2.0 The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority estate ...................................... 3 2.1 Sellafield (SLC – Sellafield Ltd) 3 2.2 Magnox nuclear power stations (SLC – Magnox Ltd) 3 2.3 Nuclear research facilities (SLC – Magnox Ltd) 3 2.4 Dounreay (SLC – Dounreay Site Restoration Limited) 4 2.5 Capenhurst uranium enrichment facility (SLC – Capenhurst Nuclear Services) 4 2.6 Springfields nuclear fuel manufacturing facility (SLC – Springfields Fuels Limited) 4 2.7 Low Level Waste Repository (SLC – LLWR Repository Ltd) 4 3.0 Site Specific Baseline / Community Profiles ............................................. 7 3.1 Berkeley 7 3.2 Bradwell 9 3.3 Chapelcross 11 3.4 Dungeness A 13 3.5 Trawsfynydd 15 3.6 Sizewell A 17 3.7 Dounreay 19 3.8 Sellafield 21 3.9 Oldbury 23 3.10 Hinkley Point A 25 3.11 Hunterston A 27 3.12 Wylfa 29 3.13 Capenhurst 31 3.14 Low Level Waste Repository (LLWR) 33 3.15 Springfields 35 3.16 Winfrith 37 3.17 Harwell 39 4.0 Future Baseline .......................................................................................... 41 4.1 Introduction 41 4.2 Future health and socio-economic baseline 41 4.3 Future Environmental Baseline 46 4.4 Assumptions / Limitations 57 Appendix A Socio-economic and health indicators ............................... 58 Final - NDA Strategy - Integrated Impact Assessment Report i March 2016 NDA Strategy Version 3 March 2016 Policy and Legislative Context Review .............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Petition 73-10
    "-'r--1VED 1999 JUL -8 PM 7:18 STATE OF NEVADA RULES 4 F,-.bW.,-.,.H US NRC 0 FFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 100 N. Carson Street Carson City, Nevada 89701-4717 FRANKIE SUE DEL PAPA Telephone (775) 684-1100 THOMAS M. PATTON Attorney General Fax (775) 684-1108 First Assistant Attorney General WEBSITE: htpj/iwww.state.nv.us/ag/ E-Mail: aginfo~govmail.state.nv.us June 22, 1999 Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555-0001 Re: Nevada's Petition To Institute Rulemaking To Amend Regulations Governing Safeguards for Shipments of Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Against Sabotage and Terrorism and To Initiate A Comprehensive Assessment Dear Dr. Jackson: Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn, on behalf of the people of the State of Nevada, has requested that this office file the attached Petition for rulemaking with the Commission. The Petition requests that the Commission initiate rulemaking to reexamine and strengthen its regulations governing safeguards for shipments of spent nuclear fuel against sabotage and terrorism in light of real world conditions. It has been nearly two decades since the Commission reviewed its regulations designed to ensure the physical protection of spent nuclear fuel shipments. It is imperative that the Commission factor into its regulations the changing nature of threats posed by domestic terrorists, the increased availability of advanced weaponry and the greater vulnerability of larger shipping casks traveling across the country. 0 ) 1. "ProtectingCitizens, Solving Problems,Making Government Work" Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson June 22, 1999 Page 2 I respectfully urge the Commission to conduct the needed risk and consequence assessment of the existing safeguards and security regulations to determine if changes need to be made, publish new proposed rules for public comment, and ultimately to make the necessary modifications to the regulations.
    [Show full text]