Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Canada quietly shipping bomb-grade uranium to U.S., says 'Secret' federal memo
The Canadian Press ^ | Dec 27, 2011 | Andy Blatchford

Posted on 12/27/2011 3:56:42 AM PST by rickmichaels

MONTREAL - Weapons-grade uranium is quietly being transported within Canada, and into the United States, in shipments the country's nuclear watchdog wants to keep cloaked in secrecy.

A confidential federal memo obtained through the Access to Information Act says at least one payload of spent, U.S.-origin highly enriched uranium fuel has already been moved stateside under a new Canada-U.S. deal.

The shipments stem from the highly publicized agreement signed last year by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama, amid fears that nuclear-bomb-making material could fall into the hands of terrorists.

The Canadian stash gradually being shipped from Chalk River, Ont., contains hundreds of kilograms of highly enriched uranium — large enough to make several Hiroshima-sized nuclear bombs.

But even as the radioactive freight travels toward the U.S. border, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has no plans to hold public hearings or disclose which communities lie along the delivery route.

The shipments themselves are protected by intense security protocol, which means specifics like routes, transportation method, quantities and schedules remain top secret.

The federal nuclear body, a co-regulator of the uranium transfers, says rules restrict it from disclosing such information to the public.

A ministerial memorandum, classified as "Secret," says the nuclear watchdog considers it unnecessary to hold public sessions that would allow citizens to ask questions and comment on the shipments.

That same memorandum, dated Feb. 25, 2011, points out that recent hearings for another nuclear-shipment case generated intense public and media interest. The controversy has stalled the project to ship 16 generators from a Bruce Power nuclear plant through the Great Lakes, up the St. Lawrence River and on to Europe.

The memo, obtained by The Canadian Press, appears to warn against a repeat scenario.

"Given the public and media interest surrounding Bruce Power's plan ... there may be an expectation that similar information be made public on the shipments of spent HEU (highly enriched uranium) fuel to the U.S., and that the CNSC (Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission) hold public hearings," said the document, addressed to then-natural resources minister Christian Paradis.

"To date, the CNSC has not considered it necessary to hold public hearings on the shipment of spent HEU fuel to the U.S."

When asked why public hearings aren't necessary for the uranium deliveries, a commission spokeswoman replied by email: they "are not carried out given the robustness of the packages used and due to the security issues related to the transfers of highly enriched uranium."

The government added that there has never been a significant transport accident involving nuclear materials, anywhere in the world, and that such shipments occur regularly in Canada.

It said only authorized people or agencies, like police forces along the shipment route, are made aware of the details.

One nuclear expert said theft is the primary concern when shipping highly enriched uranium fuel — because there is virtually no danger of leaks or explosions.

"If I were the people doing the shipping and so on, I'd want to keep as low a profile as possible ... you don't want to give terrorists or criminals any advantage," said Bill Garland, a professor emeritus from McMaster University in nuclear engineering.

"There's a greater risk in the general public knowing, because then the bad guys would know as well."

As for non-theft incidents, like possible road accidents, he described the containers carrying the substance as highly resistant to collisions, chemicals, fire and explosions.

"It's relatively easy to contain and secure and it's not going to go off like a bomb," Garland said.

"I would have no hesitation sitting in the truck and driving across the country with it. It wouldn't bother me in the least."

Garland added that drivers share Canadian highways every day with trucks carrying loads of liquid chemicals, like gasoline and chlorine, that would pose a much bigger danger in a smash-up than nuclear waste.

While the risks are small, he said, that doesn't mean they don't exist. He warned that radiation could be released if someone deliberately opened a container, for instance.

Garland said moving uranium poses far more danger than shipping Bruce Power's old generators up the St. Lawrence.

He calls the generator shipments a "trivial radioactive situation" and a "non-issue" because the cylinders hold very low levels of radioactive material. He said that even if they fell into the bottom of the river, the generators would pose a negligible risk.

Canada has been importing highly enriched bomb-grade uranium from the U.S. to make medical isotopes at Chalk River for the past two decades. While Canada has been pushing for all nations to move to low-enriched uranium, it maintains a large inventory of the substance at Chalk River.

The Canada-U.S. agreement is part of a broader international project by the Obama administration to consolidate highly enriched uranium at fewer, more secure sites around the world.

The U.S. government says it wants to convert the uranium into a form that cannot be used to build nuclear weapons.

Canada made its first uranium delivery under the repatriation deal in 2010, the February memo says. It occurred in "a single shipment using an existing, licensed fuel shipping package."

The continued shipments are scheduled to take place until 2018.

But some nuclear-industry observers fear that Canadians have been left in the dark about the project.

"I don't think Canadians are aware that strategic nuclear material is, in fact, travelling across Canadian roads," said Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition of Nuclear Responsibility.

"I think it's essential that people be aware of what is involved here. People should be aware of the degree of secrecy which is required."

While he has few fears about the safety of the shipment Garland, the nuclear engineering professor, does have some concerns about the government's selective approach to transparency.

"They're willing to talk about those things (the Bruce Power generators) publicly, but yet when they talk about something that's more dangerous — like moving HEU — they're not so willing to talk about it," Garland said.

He said while it's critical to keep specific details about the shipments confidential, there are ways to maintain security while offering some public oversight.

"If I were king ... I would say, 'Look, let's have a committee of experts looking at this, working on behalf of the public so that they could analyze this without having to give out all the details to the public,' " Garland said


TOPICS: Canada; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: uranium

1 posted on 12/27/2011 3:56:47 AM PST by rickmichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels

why do we know this? Secrets should remain secrets. Jmho.


2 posted on 12/27/2011 4:06:39 AM PST by VaRepublican (I would propagate taglines but I don't know how. But bloggers do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
The shipments stem from the highly publicized agreement signed last year by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama, amid fears that nuclear-bomb-making material could fall into the hands of terrorists.

Looks like an Islamic terrorist already got their hands on it.
3 posted on 12/27/2011 4:19:17 AM PST by mkjessup (Jimmy Carter is the Skidmark in the panties of American history, 0bama is the yellow stain in front.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
MONTREAL - Weapons-grade uranium is quietly being transported within Canada, and into the United States, in shipments the country's nuclear watchdog wants to keep cloaked in secrecy.

The Canadian Press ^ | Dec 27, 2011 | Andy Blatchford


Good job, geniuses.
4 posted on 12/27/2011 4:24:01 AM PST by arderkrag (Georgia is God's Country. LOOKING FOR ROLEPLAYERS. Check Profile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
"If I were king ... I would say, 'Look, let's have a committee of experts looking at this, working on behalf of the public so that they could analyze this without having to give out all the details to the public,' " Garland said

Funny, isn't it, that if he were king, he would act EXACTLY like Obama acts?

5 posted on 12/27/2011 4:51:43 AM PST by Never on my watch (WTF happened to my country?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels
Where in the US is it going?

We got tons and tons of the stuff here in South Carolina and we had a deal with both Nevada and Uncle Sam to ship it to Yucca Mt. We spent billions of state funds (and we are not a rich state) on logistical preparations and then Dingy Harry gets reelected and welshes on the deal.
If that canook crud goes to either Nevada or South Carolina there will be heck to pay.
SC and GA at the Savannah River Site made nukes for America's defense since the 50s and now we are stuck with the waste. Too bad we ain't Canadians I guess.
Once again, Obama does for foreigners more than for Americans.

6 posted on 12/27/2011 4:53:31 AM PST by Happy Rain ('The GOP establishment thinks a conservative can't win--Liberal Democrats KNOW conservatives win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rickmichaels

Could this be all—or part—of Saddam’s old Uranium stash, which was air-shipped to Canada for “recycling”?


7 posted on 12/27/2011 5:31:10 AM PST by Does so
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain
"Once again, Obama does for foreigners more than for Americans."

Which also begs the question if the material is to be used in the USA, why cannot the USA produce its own U-235? Am I correct in understanding that the US has little or no active capacity to produce enriched uranium save for a scaled down operation in Paducah, Ky?

8 posted on 12/27/2011 8:07:11 AM PST by buckalfa (Confused and Bewildered With a Glass Half Empty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson