It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Uranium One deal led to some exports to Europe, memos show

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:43 PM

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Vasa Croe

That's not what your letter actually says though.

It's very specific; shall I remind you?

Subsequently, the U.S. Department of Energy granted approval for some re-transfers of U.S. uranium from the Canadian conversion facility to European enrichment plants.

That statement is preceded by these:

However, in 2012, RSB Logistics Services, a shipping company, received from the NRC an amendment to its export license to allow it to export uranium from various sources, including the Uranium One, Inc. Willow Creek site in Wyoming, to the Blind River conversion plant in Canada, and then return the uranium to the U.S. for further processing. That license stated that the Canadian Government needed to obtain prior U.S. Government approval before any of the U.S. material could be transferred to any country other than the U.S.

... and followed by these ...

Before issuing this license amendment to RSB Logistics Services—or any other export license or license amendment—the NRC must determine that the proposed export is not inimical to the common defense and security of the United States. Under existing NRC regulations, this means that any uranium proposed to be exported to any country for use in nuclear fuel would be subject to the Atomic Energy Act Section 123 agreement for peaceful nuclear cooperation between the U.S. and that other country and confirmed in case-specific, government-to-government assurances for each export license.

Which backs up the claims that have been made since 2010 about what the final destination of the material from the Uranium One mines would be.

I cited from the NRC website what re-transfer means, and I cited material which explains what a 123 Agreement is.

Whatever "re-transfer" of material was cited and approved by the Department of Energy was done legally, but it is fairly clear that this was material that had already been out of the US.

The letter is in direct response to an inquiry on Uranium One material from the Wyoming mine and the particular handling of that material.

If Uranium One material was not shipped to Europe then it would have been stated as such based on the inquiry.

With how much press this particular issue has gotten, that would be foremost on their mind, especially coming from a Congressman and knowing that this was an issue.

This response is smart...they can't deny it was and lays the blame solely on those that decided it could be shipped. It even lays out how it was done. This is a total CYA response making sure they aren't in the line of fire. I commend the author for their tact really.

posted on Nov, 2 2017 @ 10:52 PM
a reply to: Vasa Croe

As I said, I see where you’re coming from. It seems clear that the NRC’s comments in 2010 couldn’t predict the future.

They are clear on the statements about export licenses and that is square with their previous claims.

Apparently under Agreement 123 the Dept of Energy can approve material going out of the US to countries in our approved non-proliferation lists. NRC is quite direct and consistent in their statements, in 2010, 2012 and 2015.

new topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in