The armed British nuclear transport ship, Pacific Pintail sailing into Takahama, Japan on 14 June 2002.
Greenpeace received eleventh hour assurances last night from
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd that made it unnecessary for the group to
seek an injunction in the English High Court to prevent BNFL from
taking irreversible steps that might prevent important safeguards,
designed to protect the public, applying to loading of the faulty
plutonium - MOX fuel onto a ship bound for the UK from Japan.
Greenpeace wants to prevent BNFL from proceeding with its
loading until a decision is made by the Environment Agency on
whether the faulty MOX (mixed oxide fuel) should be legally
classified as 'radioactive waste' and also to preserve the
possibility of challenging any adverse decision in the Courts. [1].
The Agency launched a high priority investigation into the matter
last week. If it decides the material should be regarded as
radioactive waste, the shipment would be covered by Transfrontier
Shipment of Radioactive Waste Regulations and, among other things,
would only be able to sail with the permission of relevant nation
states. Such permission may well not be forthcoming.
BNFL has told Greenpeace that they "do not anticipate that
loading of the vessels or any irreversible steps towards
transportation of the fuel will be taken by BNFL or PNTL within 48
hours of the Environment Agency advising of its view on the status
of the MOX fuel. If this changes Greenpeace will be notified"....
and..... "Secondly, as a matter of fact, the preparatory steps
which BNFL and PNTL are intending to take prior to loading the
vessels are reversible".
Greenpeace campaigner, Pete Roche said: 'We're delighted that
BNFL has told us it will not pre-empt any decision by the
Environment Agency without giving us enough notice to do something
about it."
Kansai Electric, the original customer for BNFL, had stated that
loading of the mixed oxide waste into transportation flasks would
begin on Friday. The BNFL assurance means that, if this goes ahead,
it is reversible and that BNFL is not committed to transporting the
faulty MOX to England, come what may.
The latest legal developments in the UK come as three more
Pacific nations expressed their opposition to Japanese and British
plans to make the plutonium shipment.
Earlier today, June 20th, the Australian Senate passed a
resolution with the support of the Australian Democrats, Labor
Party, and Greens calling on the Australian Government to
"expressly deny permission to transport this shipment of mixed
oxide plutonium nuclear fuel through our region through the
bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement, 'Australia/Japan Nuclear
Safeguard Agreement', and conduct an urgent public review of
Australia's bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement with
Japan."(2)
Others opposing the transport include U.S. Congressional
Representative Robert A. Underwood, from the Pacific Island of
Guam. "Recognizing that this MOX can be diverted for nuclear
weapons use, I remain especially concerned with the physical and
security protection measures for this planned shipment and its
traversing near Guam and through the Pacific in a post-September
11th environment," the Congressman wrote. "Such a shipment, without
adequate and heightened security protections, threatens to
compromise the environmental safety of the Pacific and may be
harmful to U.S. national security interests."
In a June 11th letter to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell,
Representative Underwood has called for assurances from Japan, the
United Kingdom, and the United States that every precaution
possible be taken, so the health and welfare of Pacific Islanders
will not be jeopardized by a possible terrorist act or mishap at
sea.(3) In addition to Guam, the Northern Marianas also condemned
the shipment. "The government is concerned about the possible
impact of this to the environment, and on any activity that may be
related to terrorism," Lieutenant Governor Diego Benavente of the
Northern Marianas stated June 19th.(4)
Countries on the planned route for the shipment are concerned
over the lack of consultation, the vulnerability of the shipment to
catastrophic accident, malicious acts and issues of liability and
salvage in the event of accident. Security of the transport,
including terrorist threats - already a major concern before the
events of September 11th 2001 - have become even more pressing.
"This planned shipment is becoming an international pariah.
These nations are expressing legitimate fears about this shipment.
They should not be threatened by this deadly cargo any longer."
said Shaun Burnie of Greenpeace International.
Notes: For background materials, including maps, briefings and news please see www.Greenpeace.org1- BNFL said yesterday that they forsee a use for the fuel i.e. that it will be used as a source of fissile material to support the provision of new MOX fuel. However, this would not prevent the shipment meeting the definition of "radioactive waste" since parts of it are unusable. And, the UK government has said that the shipments have nothing to do with the only plant (SMP) that could make new MOX fuel. The Environment Agency (England and Wales) has not authorised the shipment of the material to the UK, in accordance with the Transfrontier Shipment of Radioactive Waste Regulations 1993 (as amended) ("the 1993 Regulations"). Prior approval of the United States must be obtained before there can be any transportation of uranium and plutonium which originated in the United States. This applies to the consignment of radioactive material and so transportation cannot take place without US approval.2 - Tabled by Democrat Senator, Lyn Allison see: http://vic.democrats.org.au/lynallison/3 - For full statement by Rep. Underwood see http://www.house.gov/underwood/news-releases/02/0617020.html4 - See, Pacific News, June 20th 2002, SAIPAN (Pacnews) http://www.guampdn.com/