NO to a 3rd nuclear reactor at North Anna on the fault line!!!
 | VA Dominion Power is still moving forward with a plan for another reactor at North Anna. The time is NOW to tell them NO ~ Virginians want and need safe renewable energy sources! Campaign will run until 3/11/14 when there will be a protest at Dominion HQ's in Richmond VA. commemorating the 3rd year of the ongoing nuclear disaster in Fukushima. http://www.senate.gov/ http://www.house.gov/ Click here to join the fight: https://www.facebook.com/events/565445123542433/ Reasons for not building another nuclear plant at North Anna: September 8, 2011, 8:44 am When an Earthquake Shuts a ReactorBy MATTHEW L. WALD One of the revelations emerging in Dominion’s continuing inspections of its quake-shaken North Anna nuclear plant in Mineral, Va., is just why its reactors shut down. Oddly, modernization of the plant, which is filled with devices that were state-of-the-art for the 1970s, may have played a role in the events there.As I report in Thursday’s Times, Dominion has found what seems to be mostly cosmetic damage and hopes to prove to the satisfaction of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that the plant’s two reactors are safe to restart. North Anna shut down moments after the Aug. 23 quake.Because the earthquake moved the water in the reactors, the sensors indicated that the neutron population there was no longer distributed properly, and the system called for the automatic shutdown, Dominion officials say. In an automatic shutdown, control rods slide between the fuel rods and choke off the flow of neutrons. While one group of engineers continues to review data from the plant’s systems, another group is looking for damage to structures. They are finding various cracks, including one in a wall inside a reactor’s containment dome, but that one is in the grout covering a joint where two concrete sections join. The cracks probably need no more than a bead of caulk, they say.Click here to read all of the story: http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/08/when-an-earthquake-shuts-a-reactor/?_r=0 Elevated level of tritium detected in groundwater of North Anna Nuclear Station, US
Posted by Adonai on
Dominion Virginia Power has found elevated levels of a weak form of radioactivity in a sampling well at its North Anna nuclear power station. On Friday, the Richmond-based utility was notified by its laboratory contractor that water taken from an on-site groundwater sampling point contained an unusually high level of tritium — more than twice the EPA's standard for drinking water.
Quake shifted nuclear storage containers in Virginia
Last week's East Coast earthquake jolted huge concrete containers holding spent nuclear fuel at the North Anna power plant about 115 miles southwest of Washington, shifting some containers 1 to 4 inches, said the plant's operator, Dominion Virginia Power.
List:
Reasons North Anna should not have nuke plants at all:
Elevated level of tritium detected in groundwater of North Anna ...
thewatchers.adorraeli.com/.../elevated-level-of-tritium-detected-in-groun,
Earthquake shuts North Anna reactors automatically: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/results.aspx?sparam=Virginia ,
Geologic Faulting Under the North Anna Nuclear Power Plant The History of Dominion-Virginia Power's Seismic Cover-up: http://www.bredl.org/pdf3/051008_factsheet_Allegation2005A0014.pdf,
Quake shifted nuclear storage containers in Virginia: http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2016084866_quakeva02.html
|
Geologic Faulting Under the North Anna Nuclear Power Plant The History of Dominion-Virginia Power's Seismic Cover-up
- Categorized in: NUCLEAR POWER
The North Anna nuclear power plant is on unstable ground. The potential danger of an earthquake in central Virginia was brought to the attention of regulators by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League in 2005. Their investigative report reveals the events which led to the building of nuclear reactors in an active earthquake zone.
Report posted at: http://www.bredl.org/pdf3/051008_factsheet_Allegation2005A0014.pdf
Update: Since this report was written Dominion-Virginia Power has reduced its proposal to just one additional nuclear reactor at North Anna. 8/24/2011
North Anna’s Nuclear Reactors are Built on Unstable Ground
Virginia Electric and Power Company (Vepco), now Dominion Energy, was at the center of a decade-long struggle which ended in two nuclear reactors being built on top of an earthquake fault. Vepco withheld documents and lied to federal regulators during license application proceedings for Units 1 and 2 in 1973. Ultimately, Vepco was found guilty of lying and a cover- up in its efforts to obtain a construction license for the North Anna nuclear station near Louisa, Virginia. Despite the deceptions, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted Vepco a license but fined the company $32,000 for seven materially false statements about the geologic fault under North Anna. Today, the evidence shows that Dominion Energy is attempting a similar cover up in pursuit of two or more additional reactors at North Anna.
The First Cover Up
The story begins in 1967, the year Vepco awarded the initial contract of $446 million for the North Anna Nuclear Station on the banks of the Pamunkey River in Louisa County. Vepco hired Dames & Moore, an environmental consulting firm, to do geology studies in support of the license application. Within a year evidence of seismic faults were found but Vepco resisted the findings. The truth would not remain hidden for long.
In February 1970 the construction excavation wall for Reactor Unit 1 collapsed. A month later, three independent geologists visited the site, identified a major fault zone, took pictures and reported their finding to Vepco’s resident engineer. Disregarding this evidence, Vepco representatives who testified before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board later that year omitted any mention of these problems. Vepco’s comprehensive Safety Analysis report for North Anna stated: “Faulting at the site is neither known nor suspected.”
Three years later, on May 17, 1973, the Atomic Energy Commission received notification from Vepco about faulting under North Anna. On that same day the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board closed the license hearing record on public comment. On June 21, 1973 an Atomic Energy Commission memo confirmed faults beneath all four reactor sites.
Inexplicably, in 1974 the Atomic Energy Commission deemed the site acceptable. On April 1, 1978 the agency granted an operating license to Vepco for North Anna Units 1 and 2, the only nuclear plants in the nation located on top of a geologic fault.
Citizens’ Lawsuit Reveals the Truth
The details of the violations and cover-up did not come to light until a lawsuit was brought by a group of citizens living in the Charlottesville area, the North Anna Environmental Coalition, which was organized in 1973. The group enlisted the expertise of a geology professor who testified that geologic faults did in fact underlay the proposed reactor site. The group waged a long and expensive legal campaign which resulted in both the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Virginia’s Attorney General’s office joining the coalition in pressing charges against Vepco. 1 The case revealed that Vepco had failed to tell the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board of the faulting problem at construction permit hearings on North Anna units 3 and 4 held on May 7-10, 1973.
Page 1Vepco’s competence and management were called into question by the NRC. The ASLB’s order asked the NRC’s staff to evaluate Vepco’s performance “in depth to determine whether additional monitoring of the licensee is needed beyond that employed in routine follow- ups to violations and infractions.” 1
On September 11, 1975 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the successor to the Atomic Energy Commission, imposed fines on Vepco for making false statements in its licensing documents. The violations were critical because the North Anna nuclear power station site is on top of a geologic fault. Judge Lester Kornblith termed Vepco’s failure “entirely inexcusable.” He added, “Such blatant disregard of the need of the commission, its staff and its hearing board to have the information necessary to carry out its duty to protect the health and safety of the public is almost entirely beyond belief and is indicative of, at best, extremely poor and unsound judgment on the part of Vepco management.”
One of the violations cited was Vepco’s report to the AEC which stated that the North Anna site had no geologic faults. On July 31, 1973 Vepco filed a document with the agency’s licensing board; maps which indicated faulting were deleted from the Stone & Webster licensing report. 2
Regarding the Department of Justice investigation of wrongdoing, Assistant Attorney General Peter Taft said,
“...VEPCO and its consultants knowingly and willfully filed false statements of material fact with the AEC and conspired to conceal from the public and the Board the existence of a fault underlying its nuclear reactor site...” 3
Vepco officials attempted to deny the charges, saying that they “promptly notified“ NRC personnel. However, a memorandum by Bradford F. Whitman, assistant chief of the US Department of Justice pollution control section, does not bear this out. Newspaper investigations in 1977 revealed that:
High-ranking staff members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission knew the Virginia Electric and Power Co. was building two nuclear plants on potentially unsafe ground at North Anna, but failed for several months to alert the NRC board which had the authority to stop the construction, according to a Justice Department memorandum released yesterday.... Whitman’s memo, based on interviews with 12 Vepco officials and one former official, details phone calls and memos that indicate Vepco was told of the fault by its engineer, Stone & Webster Engineering Co., on April 25, 1973—more than three months before the licensing board was told. 2
Ultimately, civil penalties but no criminal sanctions were levied; the case was tainted by the actions of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission itself. Because NRC condoned Vepco’s actions, criminal prosecution was considered all but impossible by the Justice Department. On November 12, 1976 the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission fined Vepco $32,000 for making seven materially false statements about the geologic fault at North Anna. 2
Virginia Electric and Power Company should never have received approval to build and operate the reactors at North Anna. In 1977 June Allen testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation:
...At North Anna, a construction permit should have been denied in 1970, and it is no more Page 2
defensible now just because this is seven years and close to two billion dollars later. A major siting mistake was made in 1968....By February of 1970, the site was in trouble. The wall of the excavation for Reactor 1 was collapsing. 4
Vepco’s deception worked long enough to allow the company to obtain construction and operating permits from the NRC.
The Second Cover Up
In 2003 Dominion Energy submitted an application for an Early Site Permit for new reactors at North Anna. The company appears be avoiding a comprehensive investigation of the geology at the first new reactor sites in 30 years. Dominion has again failed to adequately address the seismic history of the proposed ESP site.
The current Early Site Permit draft Environmental Impact Statement says that seismological data will be addressed in the safety evaluation report. But the draft EIS contains only one page on the geology of the ESP site at North Anna. Section 2.4 alludes to two previous environmental reports prepared for North Anna Units 1 & 2 (done by Dames and Moore for VEPCo in 1969) and the never constructed North Anna Units 3 & 4 (Dames and Moore, 1971).
In March 2005 written testimony to the NRC by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League requested that the EIS include and consider all documents in the case filed by North Anna Environmental Coalition during the litigation brought during the 1970’s. Much of the evidence about Vepco’s deceit was recorded in hearings conducted by the US Senate in 1975 and 1977. The hearing record includes the testimony of Chairman Joseph Hendrie and other Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials; June Allen, President of the North Anna Environmental Coalition; and Bradford F. Whitman, Assistant Chief, Pollution Control Section, US Department of Justice. 4
The ongoing Early Site Permit process for two or more additional nuclear reactors at North Anna can and should prompt the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to use their authority to do whatever they can to avoid the errors made in the 1970’s. The draft EIS plainly omits critical information about seismology in the central Virginia area. The geology under the reactors has not changed in 30 years; new studies cannot alter the facts. The proposed construction of two or more reactors in close proximity to two existing nuclear reactors in an active earthquake zone must not be permitted.
Louis Zeller, October 8, 2005
End notes
1. “Vepco Fined; NRC Imposes Licensing Conditions,” The Daily Progress, September 12, 1975, 2. “Was N-Plant Danger Covered Up?” Sheilah Kast, Washington Star, October 1, 1977 3. Statement before the Virginia State Corporation Commission, June Allen, North Anna Environmental Coalition 4. Hearing before the Senate Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, 95th
Congress, October 13, 1977.
Thanks to June Allen for providing important documents.
The photo on the cover of this report shows the fault under North Anna, indicated by arrow number 3. Note also arrows 1 and 2 indicating people for size reference.
Report posted at: http://www.bredl.org/pdf3/051008_factsheet_Allegation2005A0014.pdf
The North Anna nuclear power plant is on unstable ground. The potential danger of an earthquake in central Virginia was brought to the attention of regulators by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League in 2005. Their investigative report reveals the events which led to the building of nuclear reactors in an active earthquake zone.
Report posted at: http://www.bredl.org/pdf3/051008_factsheet_Allegation2005A0014.pdf
Update: Since this report was written Dominion-Virginia Power has reduced its proposal to just one additional nuclear reactor at North Anna. 8/24/2011
North Anna’s Nuclear Reactors are Built on Unstable Ground
Virginia Electric and Power Company (Vepco), now Dominion Energy, was at the center of a decade-long struggle which ended in two nuclear reactors being built on top of an earthquake fault. Vepco withheld documents and lied to federal regulators during license application proceedings for Units 1 and 2 in 1973. Ultimately, Vepco was found guilty of lying and a cover- up in its efforts to obtain a construction license for the North Anna nuclear station near Louisa, Virginia. Despite the deceptions, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted Vepco a license but fined the company $32,000 for seven materially false statements about the geologic fault under North Anna. Today, the evidence shows that Dominion Energy is attempting a similar cover up in pursuit of two or more additional reactors at North Anna.
The First Cover Up
The story begins in 1967, the year Vepco awarded the initial contract of $446 million for the North Anna Nuclear Station on the banks of the Pamunkey River in Louisa County. Vepco hired Dames & Moore, an environmental consulting firm, to do geology studies in support of the license application. Within a year evidence of seismic faults were found but Vepco resisted the findings. The truth would not remain hidden for long.
In February 1970 the construction excavation wall for Reactor Unit 1 collapsed. A month later, three independent geologists visited the site, identified a major fault zone, took pictures and reported their finding to Vepco’s resident engineer. Disregarding this evidence, Vepco representatives who testified before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board later that year omitted any mention of these problems. Vepco’s comprehensive Safety Analysis report for North Anna stated: “Faulting at the site is neither known nor suspected.”
Three years later, on May 17, 1973, the Atomic Energy Commission received notification from Vepco about faulting under North Anna. On that same day the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board closed the license hearing record on public comment. On June 21, 1973 an Atomic Energy Commission memo confirmed faults beneath all four reactor sites.
Inexplicably, in 1974 the Atomic Energy Commission deemed the site acceptable. On April 1, 1978 the agency granted an operating license to Vepco for North Anna Units 1 and 2, the only nuclear plants in the nation located on top of a geologic fault.
Citizens’ Lawsuit Reveals the Truth
The details of the violations and cover-up did not come to light until a lawsuit was brought by a group of citizens living in the Charlottesville area, the North Anna Environmental Coalition, which was organized in 1973. The group enlisted the expertise of a geology professor who testified that geologic faults did in fact underlay the proposed reactor site. The group waged a long and expensive legal campaign which resulted in both the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Virginia’s Attorney General’s office joining the coalition in pressing charges against Vepco. 1 The case revealed that Vepco had failed to tell the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board of the faulting problem at construction permit hearings on North Anna units 3 and 4 held on May 7-10, 1973.
Page 1Vepco’s competence and management were called into question by the NRC. The ASLB’s order asked the NRC’s staff to evaluate Vepco’s performance “in depth to determine whether additional monitoring of the licensee is needed beyond that employed in routine follow- ups to violations and infractions.” 1
On September 11, 1975 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the successor to the Atomic Energy Commission, imposed fines on Vepco for making false statements in its licensing documents. The violations were critical because the North Anna nuclear power station site is on top of a geologic fault. Judge Lester Kornblith termed Vepco’s failure “entirely inexcusable.” He added, “Such blatant disregard of the need of the commission, its staff and its hearing board to have the information necessary to carry out its duty to protect the health and safety of the public is almost entirely beyond belief and is indicative of, at best, extremely poor and unsound judgment on the part of Vepco management.”
One of the violations cited was Vepco’s report to the AEC which stated that the North Anna site had no geologic faults. On July 31, 1973 Vepco filed a document with the agency’s licensing board; maps which indicated faulting were deleted from the Stone & Webster licensing report. 2
Regarding the Department of Justice investigation of wrongdoing, Assistant Attorney General Peter Taft said,
“...VEPCO and its consultants knowingly and willfully filed false statements of material fact with the AEC and conspired to conceal from the public and the Board the existence of a fault underlying its nuclear reactor site...” 3
Vepco officials attempted to deny the charges, saying that they “promptly notified“ NRC personnel. However, a memorandum by Bradford F. Whitman, assistant chief of the US Department of Justice pollution control section, does not bear this out. Newspaper investigations in 1977 revealed that:
High-ranking staff members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission knew the Virginia Electric and Power Co. was building two nuclear plants on potentially unsafe ground at North Anna, but failed for several months to alert the NRC board which had the authority to stop the construction, according to a Justice Department memorandum released yesterday.... Whitman’s memo, based on interviews with 12 Vepco officials and one former official, details phone calls and memos that indicate Vepco was told of the fault by its engineer, Stone & Webster Engineering Co., on April 25, 1973—more than three months before the licensing board was told. 2
Ultimately, civil penalties but no criminal sanctions were levied; the case was tainted by the actions of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission itself. Because NRC condoned Vepco’s actions, criminal prosecution was considered all but impossible by the Justice Department. On November 12, 1976 the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission fined Vepco $32,000 for making seven materially false statements about the geologic fault at North Anna. 2
Virginia Electric and Power Company should never have received approval to build and operate the reactors at North Anna. In 1977 June Allen testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation:
...At North Anna, a construction permit should have been denied in 1970, and it is no more Page 2
defensible now just because this is seven years and close to two billion dollars later. A major siting mistake was made in 1968....By February of 1970, the site was in trouble. The wall of the excavation for Reactor 1 was collapsing. 4
Vepco’s deception worked long enough to allow the company to obtain construction and operating permits from the NRC.
The Second Cover Up
In 2003 Dominion Energy submitted an application for an Early Site Permit for new reactors at North Anna. The company appears be avoiding a comprehensive investigation of the geology at the first new reactor sites in 30 years. Dominion has again failed to adequately address the seismic history of the proposed ESP site.
The current Early Site Permit draft Environmental Impact Statement says that seismological data will be addressed in the safety evaluation report. But the draft EIS contains only one page on the geology of the ESP site at North Anna. Section 2.4 alludes to two previous environmental reports prepared for North Anna Units 1 & 2 (done by Dames and Moore for VEPCo in 1969) and the never constructed North Anna Units 3 & 4 (Dames and Moore, 1971).
In March 2005 written testimony to the NRC by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League requested that the EIS include and consider all documents in the case filed by North Anna Environmental Coalition during the litigation brought during the 1970’s. Much of the evidence about Vepco’s deceit was recorded in hearings conducted by the US Senate in 1975 and 1977. The hearing record includes the testimony of Chairman Joseph Hendrie and other Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials; June Allen, President of the North Anna Environmental Coalition; and Bradford F. Whitman, Assistant Chief, Pollution Control Section, US Department of Justice. 4
The ongoing Early Site Permit process for two or more additional nuclear reactors at North Anna can and should prompt the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to use their authority to do whatever they can to avoid the errors made in the 1970’s. The draft EIS plainly omits critical information about seismology in the central Virginia area. The geology under the reactors has not changed in 30 years; new studies cannot alter the facts. The proposed construction of two or more reactors in close proximity to two existing nuclear reactors in an active earthquake zone must not be permitted.
Louis Zeller, October 8, 2005
End notes
1. “Vepco Fined; NRC Imposes Licensing Conditions,” The Daily Progress, September 12, 1975, 2. “Was N-Plant Danger Covered Up?” Sheilah Kast, Washington Star, October 1, 1977 3. Statement before the Virginia State Corporation Commission, June Allen, North Anna Environmental Coalition 4. Hearing before the Senate Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, 95th
Congress, October 13, 1977.
Thanks to June Allen for providing important documents.
The photo on the cover of this report shows the fault under North Anna, indicated by arrow number 3. Note also arrows 1 and 2 indicating people for size reference.
Report posted at: http://www.bredl.org/pdf3/051008_factsheet_Allegation2005A0014.pdf
US nuclear plant shuts safely as tornado hits
Located in: Industry Talk
18 April 2011
Both units at Dominion Virginia Power's Surry nuclear plant in Virginia shut down automatically as designed when an apparent tornado touched down at the plant's switchyard, cutting off external electricity supplies to the station. Backup diesel generators started up immediately to provide the necessary power to keep the two pressurised water reactors in a safe and stable condition. The tornado did not strike the nuclear units themselves, although their steel-reinforced concrete containment buildings are designed to withstand such natural events. Off-site power sources were subsequently restored to each unit.http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/results.aspx?sparam=Virginia
Minimal earthquake damage at North Anna
Located in: Regulation and Safety
09 September 2011
Dominion has told the US nuclear regulator that, although the earthquake that struck near its North Anna facility in Virginia last month exceeded the plant's design basis, no significant damage has been found.Earthquake shuts North Anna reactors automatically
Located in: Industry Talk
23 August 2011
Two nuclear power reactors at the North Anna plant automatically shut down on 23 August after the grid failed following a 5.8 magnitude earthquake. People reported feeling tremors over a very wide area of the US eastern seaboard after the earthquake struck six kilometres below Mineral, Virginia, at 1.51pm. The units are owned by Dominion Virginia Power, whose spokesman Richard Zuercher told local reporters that four diesel generators started as expected to maintain cooling. However, one of the generators had to be replaced in order to repair a generator coolant leak. Dominion later announced that off-site power had been restored at North Anna, eliminating the need to rely on its back-up diesel generators. The plant was unaffected by several aftershocks that were felt in the region, the company said. Dominion's two-unit Surry nuclear power plant, also in the region, was not affected and
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/results.aspx?sparam=Virginia
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/results.aspx?sparam=areva%20in%20virginia
Entergy is to be fined $650,000 for being too slow to ensure public warning systems had back-up power at the Indian Point nuclear power plant. Florida Power & Light will face a $208,000 fine over security issues, and BWXT will pay $32,500 for a safety lapse.
BWXT's facility at Lynchburg, Virginia, had previously been declared as "official use only" in response to concerns about security-sensitive information in publicly available documents. Approximately 1900 documents dating from January 2004 will be reviewed by NRC staff and those adjudged to meet agency guidelines for "Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information" will be released to the public. The review exercise is expected to last until at least May 2008, with documents being made available as they are reviewed and approved. NRC has already released a number of documents regarding a spill of high-enriched uranium at NFS in March 2006.
http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=4794059162217432293#editor/target=page;pageID=3029714830420683206
Separate contracts for naval nuclear power systems have been signed by engineering companies Rolls-Royce and Babcock & Wilcox. Both firms also have a significant presence in the civil nuclear industry.
US EPR component plant delayed
Located in: Industry Talk
25 August 2010
Areva has adjusted its construction scheduled for the Areva Newport News plant in Virginia, its joint venture project with Northrop Grumman for the manufacture of heavy components for EPR reactors. In an emailed statement, Areva said that the postponement of the start of operations at the $360 million facility was made "to meet our customers' planning timetables and to ensure we have production capabilities and capacity when our customers are ready for our components." It added, "In the absence of sufficient loan guarantee funding and commitments to qualified applicants, some customers are delaying the start of projects which affects when the heavy components to be manufactured in Newport News will be required." The plant will be able to finish the largest nuclear grade steel-alloy components such as reactor pressure vessels, steam generators and pressurizers. Construction of the new 30,000 square meter plant at Northrop Grumman's existing shipbuilding site at Newport News began in July 2009. At that time, operations at the new facility were expected to start in 2012. Construction work continues at the site, Areva said, adding that it "remains committed to completing this facility in a timely manner which will continue to support Areva’s US and global equipment needs." Areva spokesman Jarret Adams told the local Daily Press newspaper, "We're hoping to have people in the building in 2012, and we're looking at operational dates in maybe 2013.http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/results.aspx?sparam=areva%20in%20virginia
US regulator dishes out fines
Located in: Regulation and Safety
25 January 2008
Entergy is to be fined $650,000 for being too slow to ensure public warning systems had back-up power at the Indian Point nuclear power plant. Florida Power & Light will face a $208,000 fine over security issues, and BWXT will pay $32,500 for a safety lapse.BWXT's facility at Lynchburg, Virginia, had previously been declared as "official use only" in response to concerns about security-sensitive information in publicly available documents. Approximately 1900 documents dating from January 2004 will be reviewed by NRC staff and those adjudged to meet agency guidelines for "Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information" will be released to the public. The review exercise is expected to last until at least May 2008, with documents being made available as they are reviewed and approved. NRC has already released a number of documents regarding a spill of high-enriched uranium at NFS in March 2006.
http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=4794059162217432293#editor/target=page;pageID=3029714830420683206
Naval nuclear contracts awarded
Located in: Corporate
15 February 2013
Separate contracts for naval nuclear power systems have been signed by engineering companies Rolls-Royce and Babcock & Wilcox. Both firms also have a significant presence in the civil nuclear industry.
Areva, Rolls-Royce team up for UK EPRs
Located in: Corporate
11 March 2011
Areva has signed an industrial cooperation agreement with the UK's Rolls-Royce for the manufacture of components for nuclear energy related projects both in the UK and overseas.http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/results.aspx?sparam=Babcock%20
B&W to build mPower test facility
Located in: New Nuclear
28 July 2010
Babcock & Wilcox (B&W) is to construct a test facility for the mPower reactor design in Bedford County, Virginia. The facility - not far from B&W's headquarters in Lynchburg - will be used to support licensing activities for the small, modular reactor design.
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/results.aspx?sparam=Babcock%20
