— Would You CONSENT to Nuclear Waste? Tell DOE “NO” to Fukushima Freeways — deadline July 31

The DOE proposal is about the “future” of nuclear energy. DOE wants to continue promoting nuclear power plants, continue creating nuclear weapons, continue churning out nuclear waste. Without disposal, there is no future. We can collectively refuse.

Sane people want to  know: how can there be “disposal” for something that lasts millions or billions of years?

From Nuclear Information and Resource Service

July 27, 2016

Dear Friends,

What would it take for you to consent to accept nuclear waste in your region? The Department of Energy (DOE) wants to know.

DOE has held 9 public meetings across the country this year, and is now taking written comments, on the concept of public “consent” to accept high-level radioactive waste.

Send DOE  your comment today: No more nuclear waste – No Fukushima Freeways!

After decades of trying to force-feed the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear dump down the throats of Nevadans and the Western Shoshone Nation, the DOE and nuclear proponents now want to know what it will take to get people to “consent,” or at least appear to consent, to take nuclear waste in their communities.

DOE acknowledges this is also “consent” to future nuclear waste production as part of setting up an “integrated waste management system.” The federal agency says that the future of nuclear energy in this country depends on this.

Tell DOE what you think of nuclear waste by clicking here.

DOE seeks public input on how to be FAIR, WHO to include in the consent process, and what RESOURCES it will take to induce community participation in the nation’s radioactive waste program.

  • DOE wants to identify who adequately represents a community and will consent to take nuclear waste on its behalf.
  • DOE is not defining exactly what or how much nuclear waste we would be “consenting” or not consenting to accept.
  • And DOE is not asking how a community can refuse or express permanent “non-consent,” although you can let them know that if you choose to.

Although they have reports, diagrams of storage containers and systems, ideas and plans for the tens of thousands of tons of nuclear waste in this country, they claim to want to negotiate with communities who would “consent” to take it forever or supposedly temporarily.

Tell DOE what you think of nuclear waste by clicking here.

No consideration of the rights or consent of communities along transport routes is being made or requested. Although one of the greatest dangers to the most people, environments and ecosystems is the movement of tens of thousands of tons of nuclear waste on roads, rails and waterways, DOE has stated that there is complete federal preemption over transport of nuclear waste, so states and communities along the transport routes would have no voice, no matter how much waste DOE plans to move through them.

DOE is giving no consideration of the rights of future generations who will inevitably be affected.

DOE and the nuclear industry are eager for volunteering or consenting communities to take the waste and for the DOE to take title to it–absolving the industry of responsibility for managing the waste it creates before there is even a proven solution for its long-term management.

Thanks for all you do!

Mary Olson – Southeast Office Director
Diane D’Arrigo – Radioactive Waste Project Director

For More Information

NIRS Info Materials on Fukushima Freeways and Consolidated Storage
Talking Points on Consent-Based Siting from Beyond Nuclear

Click here to read a Federal Register notice that explains more about DOE’s request for public comment on these issues. There is also information on this DOE website.

You can contact Diane D’Arrigo or Mary Olson at NIRS for more information about the other meetings and the issue generally.

Submit a Public Comment! We encourage everyone to submit your own thoughts on these issues to DOE. Comment deadline is July 31, 2016. Please send an email to consentbasedsiting@hq.doe.gov. Please include “Response to IPC” in the subject line.

Stay Informed:

NIRS on the web: http://www.nirs.org

GreenWorld: (NIRS’ blog chronicling nuclear issues and the transition to a nuclear-free, carbon-free energy system) http://www.safeenergy.org

NIRS on Facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Nuclear-Information-and-Resource-Service/26490791479?sk=wall&filter=12

http://www.facebook.com/nonukesnirs

http://www.facebook.com/groups/nukefreeclimatefreemarch/

NIRS on Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/nirsnet

NIRS on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/nirsnet
http://org2.salsalabs.com/o/5502/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_KEY=1369374

— Idaho: Ready to give “consent” to allow more commercial nuclear waste?

From Idaho Statesman

Guest Editorial
by BreBrent Marchbanksnt Marchbanks
July 12, 2016

Longtime Idahoans remember being shocked some 40 years ago when it was revealed the INL was dumping radioactive waste water directly into the volcanic, porous ground above the Snake River Aquifer; the source of our agricultural irrigation and the water supply for thousands.

Many have seen the pictures from the ’70s of trucks dumping blue barrels full of transuranic waste into ditches at the site.

Public outcry stopped those specific practices. But that waste is still there. Radioactive isotopes have leached into the aquifer. Tons and tons of other people’s nuclear waste kept arriving.

In 1995 Gov. Phil Batt worked a deal with the U.S. Department of Energy: In exchange for a limited amount of new military waste shipments (the “nuclear Navy,” Three Mile Island, etc.) the DOE would: 1) Build a permanent site for those (and previous) shipments, and 2) Clean up the mess that was already there.

The agreed-to shipments began to arrive. Neither the permanent storage nor the cleanup has happened.

The military waste shipments that were allowed into Idaho continue to this day; I saw new shipments in rail cars at the Pocatello yard two weeks ago.

Many of us anti-nuclear types, including the Snake River Alliance, opposed the Batt 1995 Agreement at the time, believing it was too weak; it allowed for too much waste and caved in to the Feds.

But, even if too weak, it was at least some kind of a brake on the seemingly endless shipments to our state. Idaho voters approved the Batt Agreement. Even the campaign slogan of the pro-Batt Agreement forces, including INL itself, was ”Keep the Waste Out.”

Now, those same forces want to get rid of the Batt Agreement altogether; not because it’s too weak, but because it’s too strong. It doesn’t allow enough waste in. It commits the feds and our state to clean-up. Apparently, they want more waste, with no permanent repository in sight, and they want it without a commitment for cleanup. They want to throw out the people’s referendum vote. The governor has used state dollars to support this campaign by creating the Leaders In Nuclear Energy (LINE) Commission. One of the appointed members is Larry Craig.

The DOE is coming to Boise on Thursday [July 14] for a discussion of whether Idaho is willing to throw out the Batt Agreement. The federal jargon being used is whether Idaho is now willing to become a become a “Consent State;” volunteering to allow tons and tons of new shipments of commercial waste generated by the dying nuclear power plant industry (in our own country and overseas.)

The meeting is being held 5 to 9:30 p.m., at the Boise Centre on the Grove.

The public is invited to listen, ask questions and comment.

Brent Marchbanks is a retired lawyer and longtime Boise resident. He remains active in social issues.

— Nuclear info sessions across South Australia

From Great Lakes Advocate
July 19, 2016

CONSULTATION: Nuclear consultation sessions will be held around EP.

LOCALS are urged to have their say on nuclear as part of the state’s largest community engagement program.

Teams from the state government’s Nuclear Consultation and Response Agency will run sessions at more than 100 sites including 10 on the Eyre Peninsula.

The key themes discussed will be community consent and the importance of an informed opinion, economics including the benefits and risks to the state, safety including key issues around storage, health and transport, and trust.

Eyre Peninsula consultation sessions will run from 11am to 7pm at Streaky Bay on August 2, Ceduna on August 3, Elliston on August 4, Port Lincoln on August 5, Kimba on August 16, Cummins on August 17, Cowell on August 18, with separate Aboriginal community consultation at Port Lincoln and Ceduna.

There will also be a booth at the EP Field Days at Cleve on August 9 and 10.

For more information about the sessions visit the YourSAy nuclear website. http://yoursay.sa.gov.au/

http://www.greatlakesadvocate.com.au/story/4039198/nuclear-info-sessions-across-sa/?cs=2452

— Reminder: Attend remaining DOE meetings July 14, 21, for “consent-based siting”, parking lot dumps & Mobile Chernobyls — Public comments urgently needed by July 31 deadlines

From Beyond Nuclear

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has a few more public meetings scheduled regarding “Consent-Based Siting” of centralized interim storage sites for high-level radioactive waste, and the truck, train, and barge shipments it would take to deliver the irradiated nuclear fuel there:
Boise, Idaho, July 14;
Minneapolis, Minnesota, July 21.

Strong turnouts are needed, both in person and via Webinar. If you live close enough, please consider attending, and taking folks with you; otherwise, spread word to people you know who live nearby, and watch online.

Public comments are urgently needed by DOE’s July 31 deadline.

Beyond Nuclear has prepared “We Do Not Consent!” talking points you can use to prepare your own.

Comments can be submitted by email, mail, fax, or Web form, in addition to orally in person at the public meetings. More

Beyond Nuclear

Cindy at beyondnuclear.org

— PG&E (and other utility companies) promote “Nuclear Science Week” in our public schools

This same event happens at school districts across the United States and probably other countries sponsored by the nuclear industry and related utility companies.

Adapt this sample letter for your area.

From Mothers for Peace

Below is a sample letter to public school administrators that we encourage parents and tax-payers to adapt and send to their local school boards, superintendents and principals.

Dear School Administrator:

The third week of October is annually designated “Nuclear Science Week” by the nuclear industry, and representatives from Diablo Canyon nuclear plant are giving talks and demonstrations in our public schools, touting nuclear energy as “safe,” “clean,” “reliable,” and “of good benefit.”

These representatives from Diablo Canyon do NOT tell the students that radioactive releases are routinely allowed into our air, land and water. They don’t mention that Diablo Canyon, storing over 64 million pounds of highly radioactive nuclear waste, is built at the intersection of at least 13 earthquake faults, two of which have been identified as “active” and “major.” This lethal waste will remain on site at Diablo Canyon far beyond the day the nuclear plant has generated its last watt of energy, and that waste will be the responsibility of these same children who are being given just one side of the nuclear power story – that of Pacific Gas and Electric.

California does not need the electricity supplied by Diablo Canyon. Equivalent energy is already available through renewable energy sources. Nuclear energy has no place in future power generation.  California’s clean energy future rests on wind, solar, wave, and geothermal energy. Our children and grandchildren will thank us for investing in it.

Sincerely,

 

https://mothersforpeace.org/blog/pg-e-promotes-nuclear-science-week-in-our-public-schools

— Japan’s new rule designates radioactive waste as ordinary waste when radioactivity is below 8000Bq/kg

From Japan Atomic Industrial Forum:

May 2, 2016

On April 28, Japan’s Ministry of the Environment (MOE) officially decided on a new rule regarding so-called “specified waste” from the March 2011 accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plants, to the effect that when the concentration of radioactive cesium in such waste falls below 8,000Bq/kg, the waste will no longer be deemed specified and may be disposed of in the same manner as ordinary waste.

By Ms. Tamayo Marukawa

The actual lifting of a specified waste designation, however, will be determined in talks between the national government and the local municipality concerned. Costs for disposal of the waste after the lifting will be borne by the national government, as is the case with specified waste.

MOE revised its ministerial ordinance under the Act on Special Measures Concerning the Handling of Pollution by Radioactive Materials, and those revisions took effect the same day. At a press conference, MOE Minister Tamayo Marukawa said, “The national government will deal with the matter, after lifting the designation, together with local municipalities.”

Specified waste is generated primarily in five prefectures—Miyagi, Ibaraki, Tochigi, Gunma and Chiba—and has been temporarily stored at such places as waste treatment facilities, sewage plants and on farmers’ private property. Radioactive concentrations have fallen naturally in the five years since the nuclear accident, and there are increasing volumes of waste with concentrations lower than the criteria. There had, however, been no clear rule on lifting the designation, and municipalities had asked the government to issue such a rule as swiftly as possible.

Under the new rule, either the MOE or the municipality will check the level of radioactive cesium concentration, and lifting the specified waste designation will be determined in talks between the two parties. After the lifting, municipalities will be able to dispose of the waste as ordinary waste.

In the case of specified waste stored in Miyagi Prefecture, re-measuring by the MOE showed that the radioactive concentrations in 2,300 tons of it—two-thirds of the total—were lower than the criteria.

http://www.jaif.or.jp/en/moe-revises-ordinance-changing-waste-designation-to-ordinary-when-radioactive-concentration-falls

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

Question: Along with this being completely absurd, when these piles are “remeasured”, are the metrics and gauges even calibrated correctly?

— Hanford nuclear waste contractors under US investigation; given $13.7 Million bonus for “Very Good” ops; “Excellent” tank management despite continued tank leakage

From Mining Awareness
April 19, 2016

The current Hanford contractor, WRPS, LLC, for the leaky Hanford radioactive waste tanks is a consortium comprised of AECOM (due to recent purchase of URS), EnergySolutions (owned by Energy Capital Partners – mostly former Goldman Sachs investment bankers led by Doug Kimmelman), and French Government owned AREVA, which would be bankrupt if it weren’t French State owned. If AREVA knows so much then why did the US take French HEU (highly enriched uranium) or HEU waste off the hands of the French? Why didn’t the French take Swiss HEU waste or Swiss plutonium? Why, instead, was it dumped on America?

The State of Washington, Dept of Ecology, Explains: “The alarm indicates an increase in waste seeping from the primary tank into the space between the primary and secondary tank, known as the annulus.” Read the rest here:https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/leaking-hanford-nuclear-waste-tanks/

Hanford Contractors Under US Government investigation

In an SEC Quarterly filing, last August, AECOM, which recently bought URS stated:
DOE Hanford Nuclear Reservation

URS Energy and Construction, Washington River Protection Solutions LLC and Washington Closure Hanford LLC, affiliates of URS, perform services under multiple contracts (including under the Waste Treatment Plant contract, the Tank Farm contract and the River Corridor contract) at the DOE’s Hanford nuclear reservation that have been subject to various government investigations or litigation:

· Waste Treatment Plant government investigation: The federal government is conducting an investigation into our affiliate, URS Energy & Construction, a subcontractor on the Waste Treatment Plant, regarding contractual compliance and various technical issues in the design, development and construction of the Waste Treatment Plant.

· Tank Farms government investigation: The federal government is conducting an investigation regarding the time keeping of employees at our joint venture, Washington River Protection Solutions LLC, when the joint venture took over as the prime contractor from another federal contractor.

· Tank Farms government investigation: The federal government is conducting an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the response of our joint venture, Washington River Protection Solutions LLC, to a leak within the tank farms of the Hanford nuclear reservation.

· River Corridor litigation: The federal government has partially intervened in a false claims act complaint filed in the Eastern District of Washington on December 2013 challenging our joint venture, Washington Closure Hanford LLC, and its contracting procedures under the Small Business Act.

· Waste Treatment Plant whistleblower and employment claims: Two former employees have each filed employment related claims against our affiliate, URS Energy & Construction, seeking restitution for alleged retaliation and wrongful termination.

URS Energy and Construction, Washington River Protection Solutions LLC and Washington Closure Hanford LLC dispute these investigations and claims and intend to continue to defend these matters vigorously; however, URS Energy and Construction, Washington River Protection Solutions LLC and Washington Closure Hanford LLC cannot provide assurances that they will be successful in these efforts. The resolution of these matters cannot be determined at this time and could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations and cash flows.https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/868857/000110465915058803/a15-12010_110q.htm (Emphasis our own).

Contractors Given “Very Good” Ranking for (Now) Leaking Radioactive Tank Ops and $13.7 million Bonus

Home » Hanford Site Contractor Receives Overall ‘Very Good’ Rating for Tank Operations Hanford Site Contractor Receives Overall ‘Very Good’ Rating for Tank Operations

January 27, 2016 – 12:45pm

WRPS workers do preparatory work at the A/AX tank farms at Hanford in April 2015. They are the next tank farms from which waste will be retrieved at Hanford. WRPS recently received an 88 percent award fee for its performance in fiscal year 2015.

RICHLAND, Wash. – EM recently gave its Office of River Protection (ORP) tank operations contractor Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) an overall “very good” rating for fiscal year 2015, allowing the company at the Hanford Site to earn a $13,728,000 award fee.

Each year EM releases information relating to contractor fee payments — earned by completing the work called for in the contracts — to further transparency in its cleanup program.

WRPS also received an overall “very good” in 2014, but the 2015 award fee was five percent higher than the previous year.

The company was recognized for strong, consistent leadership in several key activities, including:

Taking over responsibilities for the Effluent Treatment Facility, which removes radioactive and hazardous contaminants from waste water;
Implementing recommendations from the independent Tank Vapors Assessment Team, which has worked to minimize risks to workers, including chemical vapors in the tank farms; and
Improving integration between ORP contractors and the DOE national laboratories.
WRPS exceeded many significant award fee criteria and met overall cost, schedule, and technical performance requirements, according to the fee determination scorecard.

The scorecard lists eight special emphasis areas of which WRPS received “very good” ratings in six and “excellent” in two: management of the single-shell and double-shell tank system, and nuclear safety.

WRPS is responsible for safely managing the Hanford Site’s 56 million gallons of nuclear and chemical waste in 177 underground tanks, and preparing the systems to feed waste to the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant for vitrification.http://energy.gov/em/articles/hanford-site-contractor-receives-overall-very-good-rating-tank-operations (Emphasis added; Embedded links at original, which didn’t work for us making us wonder if the US DOE doesn’t want people to see the report card? Or perhaps we were just unlucky.That waste treatment facility isn’t built yet is it? The Hanford gov link won’t open but the LA Times says that it is partially built with significant design vulnerabilities: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hanford-waste-20150826-story.html )

https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/nuclear-waste-contractors-under-us-gov-investigation-given-13-7-million-bonus-for-very-good-ops-excellent-tank-management-but-alarm-just-went-off-indicating-increased-tank-seepage-of-rad-wa/

— French government/AREVA is partner in Hanford waste consortium

A highlight from this article on Hanford.

From Mining Awareness, April 19, 2016

The current Hanford contractor, WRPS, LLC, for the leaky Hanford radioactive waste tanks is a consortium comprised of AECOM (due to recent purchase of URS), EnergySolutions (owned by Energy Capital Partners – mostly former Goldman Sachs investment bankers led by Doug Kimmelman), and French Government owned AREVA, which would be bankrupt if it weren’t French State owned. If AREVA knows so much then why did the US take French HEU (highly enriched uranium) or HEU waste off the hands of the French? Why didn’t the French take Swiss HEU waste or Swiss plutonium? Why, instead, was it dumped on America? [1]

Why is France co-managing nuclear waste facilities in the U.S.?

Is AREVA dumping nuclear waste in the U.S.?

AREVA dumps nuclear waste at sea in France. It used to dump drums of waste at sea. These are AREVA’s environmental credentials. It cares nothing for the environment.

The beautiful Columbia River. Salmon. The ocean.

Not important to AREVA or the French government or WRPS.

 

[1]

https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/04/19/nuclear-waste-contractors-under-us-gov-investigation-given-13-7-million-bonus-for-very-good-ops-excellent-tank-management-but-alarm-just-went-off-indicating-increased-tank-seepage-of-rad-wa/

http://enenews.com/tv-plutonium-being-pumped-ocean-miles-underwater-pipes-nuclear-waste-left-lying-beach-kids-playing-sand-machines-scoop-plutonium-day-video-photos

— Drigg: quaint coastal village and the UK’s “low level” nuclear dump

Up until the late 1980s radioactive wastes including plutonium wastes were tumble tipped into trenches. Now the site has gone all hi tech and compacts radioactive waste into rusting shipping containers…

From Radiation Free Lakeland
April 30. 2016

Drigg the quaint coastal village is also home to the UKs ‘Low Level Waste Repository’ (the word ‘Nuclear’ has been dropped from the official title) Although locals know this as the  Nuclear Dump.  Drigg is located near the Sellafield nuclear site on the shifting sands of the Cumbrian coast. Up until the late 1980s radioactive wastes including plutonium wastes were tumble tipped into trenches. Now the site has gone all hi tech and compacts radioactive waste into rusting shipping containers, any void in the container is filled with concrete.

The site sits above West Cumbria Aquifer from which is drawn the borehole water supply for much of West Cumbria while Sellafield gets most of its water from Wastwater.

The plan is to keep on dumping the high end of “low level” radioactive waste here despite the threat of inundation not just from the Irish Sea but also from the rivers and becks running through and alongside the site.

The planning application to extend the wastes, stacking ever more shipping containers higher, has already been approved by our toothless regulators, the Environment Agency.

Please write to the Development Control and Regulation Committee of Cumbria County Council who will be looking at this application on the 11th May ( if it isn’t postponed again) and ask them to refuse permission for the continued use of Drigg as a nuclear waste dump. Ask them to lobby government to hold a moratorium on “decommissioning” and dumping (breaking up and ‘disposing’ of old nuclear plants) which we now know means dispersal of radioactive wastes to Drigg rather than containment on original sites. Many more Driggs and radioactive landfills will be needed if new nuclear build goes ahead.

The site owners the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority pass day to day running of the site to multinational corporations involved in “decommissioning’ and those corporations largely monitor themselves. SO the same people responsible for producing the waste are also responsible for dumping it. The Environment Agency has told us it sees no conflict of interest in this…but we do!   Studsvik, a Swedish company who operate the only radioactive scrap metal plant in Europe here in Cumbria is one of the partners of the Drigg site.  On 20th April Studsvik’s waste operations were taken over by EDF.  Presumably this means that EDF  now have a large hand in running the Drigg site? Will EDF be tempted to ship tonnes of radioactive metals from their 9 nuclear plants being decommissioned now in France, to the Studsvik plant in Workington now that they own it?  And will the ever increasing tonnage of radioactive shot metal from that radioactive metal “recycling” end up in Drigg which they will also be operating?

more info here:http://www.theecologist.org/campaigning/2986745/cumbria_flooding_environment_agency_issues_alert_on_drigg_nuclear_waste_site.html

https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2016/04/30/drigg-quaint-coastal-village-and-the-uks-low-level-nuclear-dump/

US-Ukraine “partnership” threatens new Chernobyl-style disaster

The company Holtec mentioned here is the company making the San Onofre nuclear waste storage system that the California Coastal Commission approved in 2015 to be installed at the ocean adjacent to millions of people in Southern California. The canisters are not inspectable and may be prone to cracking.

But what could go wrong?

From Fort Russ

April 27, 2015 –
Leonid Savin, Katehon

April 26, 2016 will mark the 30th anniversary of the catastrophic explosion of the 4th reactor at the Chernobyl power plant, the effects of which are felt to this very day. This comes at a time when alarming news has arrived which evokes concern over the future of Ukraine’s nuclear industry.
The problems started  along with the “Maidan” coup backed by the US and EU, because Washington immediately started to lobby for a large deal in its own interests, including nuclear industry projects.
The Ukrainian state enterprise Energoatom and the Westinghouse Company (US), agreed in 2014 to extend the contract to supply Ukrainian nuclear power plants with US nuclear fuel, until 2020.
But the use of US produced fuel for Soviet reactors is not compatible with their design, and violates security requirements, and could lead to disasters comparable with what happened in Chernobyl. The International Union of Veterans of Nuclear Energy and Industry (IUVNEI) issued the following statement on April 25th, that “Nuclear fuel produced by the US firm Westinghouse does not meet the technical requirements of Soviet-era reactors, and using it could cause an accident on the scale of the Chernobyl disaster, which took place on the 26th April 1986.” The IUVNEI brings together more than 15,000 nuclear industry veterans from Armenia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Finland, the Czech Republic, Russia, Slovakia and Ukraine. It was founded in 2010 and is headquartered in Moscow.

Four years ago, there was a near-miss in the Ukraine, when a TVS-W unit with damaged distancing armatures, nearly experienced a significant uncontrolled release of dangerous radiation. Only by a miracle was there no disaster at the South Ukrainian nuclear power plant. But it did not prevent the signing of the agreement. A Czech nuclear power plant experienced a depressurization of fuel elements produced by Westinghouse several years ago, followed by the Czech government’s abandoning the company as a fuel supplier. According to Yuri Nedashkovsky, the president of the country’s state-owned nuclear utility Energoatom, on April 23th, 2014 Ukraine’s interim government ordered an allocation of 45.2 hectares of land for the construction of a nuclear waste storage site within the depopulated exclusion area around the plant of Chernobyl, between the villages of Staraya Krasnitsa, Buryakovka, Chistogalovka and Stechanka in the Kiev Region (the Central Spent Fuel Storage Project for Ukraine’s VVER reactors). The fuel is to come from Khmelnitsky, Rovno and South Ukraine nuclear power plants.
At present, used fuel is mostly transported to a new dry-storage facility at the Zheleznogorsk Mining and Chemical Factory in the Krasnoyarsk region, and storage and reprocessing plant Mayak in the Chelyabinsk region; the both facilities are situated in the Russian Federation.
In 2003, Ukraine started to look for alternatives to the Russian storage units. In December 2005, Energoatom signed a 127.8 million euro agreement with the US-based Holtec International to implement the Central Spent Fuel Storage Project for Ukraine’s VVER reactors. Holtec’s work involved design, licensing, construction, commissioning of the facility, and the supply of transport and vertical ventilated dry storage systems for used VVER nuclear fuel. By the end of 2011 Holtec International had to close its office in Kiev as it had come under harsh criticism worldwide. It is widely believed that the company has lost licenses in some countries because of the poor quality of its containers resulting in radiation leaks.  Westinghouse and Holtec are members of the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC). Morgan Williams, President/CEO of the U.S.-Ukraine Business Council, has worked in Ukraine since the 1990’s.
“Today is one of the most important days since Ukraine’s independence as the efforts of these two internationally known companies will go a long way to assuring that Ukraine has greater energy independence,” he said at the ceremony devoted to  Westinghouse Electric Company and Holtec International signing contracts with Ukraine. The President of USUBC added, “This is made more important by the fact that for Ukraine, energy and political independence are closely interdependent. I join all of the USUBC members in toasting the success of these two great member companies, as we all work to assist Ukraine on its path to Euro-Atlantic integration and a strong democratic, private market driven nationhood.”
Morgan Williams is known as a lobbyist representing the interests of Shell, Chevron and ExxonMobil in Ukraine. He has direct links with Freedom House which is involved in staging “color revolutions” in Eurasia, North Africa and Latin America.
One more interesting fact to be mentioned here. In Spring 2014 it was reported that according to covert agreements reached between Ukraine’s interim government and its European partners, the nuclear waste coming from EU member states would be stored in Ukraine.  Being in violation of the law, the deal is kept secret. Some high standing officials in Kiev were remunerated. It is said that Alexander Musychko (Sashko Biliy), a prominent nationalist from Rovno, tried to blackmail the Kiev rulers threatening to make the conspiracy public. That’s why he was killed, on the orders of the Minister of Internal Affairs, Arsen Avakov.
US is the main manager of the self-isolation of the Ukrainian regime from Russia, which has greatly impacted cooperation between two countries, as well as in the area of nuclear security. The administration of the Chernobyl nuclear plant has stated clearly that the process is going in wrong way.