August, 02 2013, 01:54pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Michael Mariotte, Executive Director 301-270-6477
Environmental Groups Tell NRC to Strengthen Rules Barring Foreign Ownership of U.S. Reactors; Bring Them Into Line With Congressional Intent
A cross-section of national, regional and local environmental organizations from every part of the country today joined in comments to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission urging strengthening of the agency's rules that implement the Atomic Energy Act's prohibition against foreign ownership, control or domination of a U.S. nuclear reactor project.
WASHINGTON
A cross-section of national, regional and local environmental organizations from every part of the country today joined in comments to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission urging strengthening of the agency's rules that implement the Atomic Energy Act's prohibition against foreign ownership, control or domination of a U.S. nuclear reactor project.
The NRC Commissioners ordered a review of its regulatory guidance in a March 11, 2013 order upholding the denial of a construction/operating license to UniStar Nuclear--a company owned by Electricite de France (EDF)--for the proposed Calvert Cliffs-3 nuclear reactor in Maryland on foreign ownership grounds.
Earlier this week, EDF announced that it is permanently leaving the U.S. nuclear power market and will no longer attempt to build new reactors here.
The four organizations which successfully intervened against the Calvert Cliffs-3 license--Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), Beyond Nuclear, Public Citizen and Southern Maryland CARES--were joined by 62 more groups in submitting the comments.
The comments said the NRC that the agency does not have the authority to allow 100% foreign ownership, whether direct or indirect, of a U.S. reactor project. The groups also warned the NRC that some of the areas it sought comment on appear to be an effort to undermine the law, which Congress has left intact since 1954.
The groups wrote, "In short, there is no need for greater clarity on the question of whether a corporation that is 100% foreign owned is eligible for an NRC license. It simply is not. The only legitimate questions are, for an entity that is less than 100% foreign owned, what is the standard for control or domination? "
An examination of the legislative history of the foreign ownership provision of the Atomic Energy Act conducted for NIRS revealed that Congress initially had proposed to ban any foreign ownership of more than 5% of a U.S. reactor. However, witnesses for the nuclear industry and other interests testified that it is difficult for publicly-traded companies to even know if they are as little as 5% foreign-owned, and suggested that the language be similar to the Federal Communications Act, which then--as it remains today--prohibited more than 25% foreign ownership of a broadcast facility. In response, Congress dropped a numerical cap and added the phrase prohibiting foreign "control or domination." No witness, and no Member of Congress, suggested that foreign ownership of more than 25% would ever be acceptable.
Over the years, however, the NRC has tried to interpret the Act as allowing a significant portion of foreign ownership, and its regulatory guidance has been inadequate to allow full examination "control or domination" issues in increasingly complex corporate structures.
The issue has come up again at the South Texas Nuclear Project, where intervening organizations have charged that the two nuclear reactors proposed there would be owned, controlled and dominated by the Japanese company Toshiba. The NRC staff agrees with the intervenors and issued a letter stating that a license cannot be granted for the project. An Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has scheduled a hearing on the matter in October.
The groups urged the NRC to bring its guidance into compliance with Congressional intent by taking three steps:
"We recommend that NRC's FOCD guidance be improved, and brought into compliance with the letter and intent of the Atomic Energy Act, by:
* Clarifying that majority foreign ownership, whether direct or "indirect," of a U.S. reactor project will always be grounds for rejection of a license application, and revising the guidance to reflect legislative intent by limiting foreign ownership to no more than 25% of a U.S. reactor project.
* Requiring Negation Action Plans in cases of significant minority foreign ownership (e.g. 5-25%), but refusing to consider them in cases of majority foreign ownership.
* Revising the guidance to address the increasingly complex nature of many of the corporate structures that have been proposed by license applicants in recent years.
The NRC therefore must thoroughly examine corporate structures submitted by applicants to ascertain whether foreign "control or domination" may be present. This includes not only the nature of ownership of the applicants themselves, but also ownership of Limited Liability Corporations and other subsidiaries associated with the project; whether, in cases where more than one company is involved (i.e. a joint partnership or similar structure) one of the partners involved is also an owner of one or more of the other partners; the financial stake of each of the partners in the project; the nature of financing for the project; the presence of other participants in the project (whether or not they may have a direct ownership stake) that may add to control or domination issues."
The comments prepared by NIRS and endorsed by 65 other organizations are available here: https://www.nirs.org/nukerelapse/calvert/foreignownershipcomments8213.pdf
This press release is available here: https://www.nirs.org/nukerelapse/calvert/foreignownershippr8213.htm
The NRC staff invited a panel to brief the staff on foreign ownership issues on June 19, 2013. NIRS' Powerpoint presentation to the NRC at that meeting is available here: https://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/licensing/Focd61913.ppt
The NRC has scheduled a webinar, with additional panelists, on the foreign ownership issue for August 21, 2013. Information is available here: https://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1320/ML13204A235.pdf
Nuclear Information and Resource Service is the information and networking center for people and organizations concerned about nuclear power, radioactive waste, radiation, and sustainable energy issues.
LATEST NEWS
'The GOP Promised to Make Life Easier for Working Families,' But Here's the Real Agenda
"Mike Johnson is committing to slashing Social Security and Medicare to get the speaker's gavel," said one progressive group.
Jan 03, 2025
As Republicans took full control of Congress this week and U.S. President-elect prepared to take office later this month, Democratic lawmakers renewed warnings about how the GOP agenda will harm working people and pledged to fight against it.
"Today, the 119th Congress officially begins. Our top priority over the next two years must be fighting for working families and standing up to corporate power and greed," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair emeritus of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said on social media Friday.
"While Republicans focus their energy for the next two years on giving tax breaks to the rich and cutting vital public programs, Democrats will continue working to lower costs and raise wages for all," Jayapal promised. "We'll always be fighting for YOU."
In addition to members of Congress being sworn in on Friday, nearly all Republicans in the House of Representatives reelected Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) as speaker and the chamber debated a rules package that Democrats have criticized since it was released by GOP leadership earlier this week.
"Their governance will be marked by consolidated power, scapegoated communities, and campaigns of punishment."
The package fast-tracks a dozen bills on a range of issues; they include various immigration measures as well as legislation attacking transgender student athletes, sanctioning the International Criminal Court, requiring proof of United States citizenship to register to vote in federal elections, and prohibiting a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, for fossil fuels.
"Speaker Johnson has said that the 119th Congress will be consequential. Today, both in Speaker Johnson's address and in the rules package the Republicans have passed, Republicans have shown us what the consequences of their leadership will be," Rep. Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.) said in a statement. "In their first order of business, Republicans advanced a legislative package that abuses the power of Congress to persecute trans children athletes, take federal funding away from sanctuary cities like Chicago and Illinois, scapegoat immigrants, erode voting rights, and put new criminal penalties on reproductive care providers."
"For the first time in history, they seek to make the speakership less accountable to the full body of legislators and to limit our ability to consider emergency bills," Ramirez noted. "Overall, they are using the rules to make Congress less transparent, less accountable, and less responsive to the needs of the American people. Their governance will be marked by consolidated power, scapegoated communities, and campaigns of punishment."
Speaking out against the package on the House floor, Jayapal said it "makes very clear what the Republican majority will not do in the 119th Congress," stressing that the 12 bills "do nothing to lower costs or raise wages for the American people."
These bills also won't "take on the biggest corporations and wealthiest individuals who profit from the high prices and junk fees and corporate concentration that's harming Americans across this country," she said. "Because guess what? These corporations and wealthy individuals are the ones that are controlling the Republican Party for their own benefit."
Jayapal highlighted the exorbitant wealth of Trump's Cabinet picks, just a day after the president-elect announced corporate lobbyist and GOP donor Ken Kies as his choice for assistant secretary for tax policy at the Treasury Department—which is set to be led by billionaire hedge fund manager Scott Bessent, as Republicans in Congress try to pass another round of tax cuts for the rich.
GOP lawmakers are also aiming "to make meaningful spending reforms to eliminate trillions in waste, fraud, and abuse, and end the weaponization of government," Johnson said in a lengthy social media on Friday. "Along with advancing President Trump's America First agenda, I will lead the House Republicans to reduce the size and scope of the federal government, hold the bureaucracy accountable, and move the United States to a more sustainable fiscal trajectory."
In other words, responded the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), "Mike Johnson is committing to slashing Social Security and Medicare to get the speaker's gavel."
Republicans have a slim House majority and Trump-backed Johnson was initially set to fall short of the necessary support to remain speaker, due to opposition from not only Congressman Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) but also Reps. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) and Keith Self (R-Texas). However, after a private conversation, Norman and Self switched their votes.
"Johnson cut a backroom deal with the members that voted against him so they'd flip their votes. So he will get gavel now. I'm sure in time we'll find out what he sold out just so he'd win," Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (D-Fla.) said on social media.
"What did Johnson sell out to become speaker? Social Security or Medicare? Or perhaps veterans?" he asked.
Citing a document circulated ahead of the vote by Johnson's right-wing critics that lists "failures" of the 118th Congress, the PCCC said: "Looks like all of the above. But his holdouts put Social Security in their first bullet of grievances."
After the vote, Norman and 10 right-wing colleagues released a letter explaining that, despite sincere reservations, they elected Johnson because of their "steadfast support of President Trump and to ensure the timely certification of his electors."
"To deliver on the historic mandate earned by President Trump for the Republican Party, we must be organized to use reconciliation—and all legislative tools—to deliver on critical border security, spending cuts, pro-growth tax policy, regulatory reform, and the reversal of the damage done by the Biden-Harris administration," they added.
Politicoreported that "House Republicans are hoping to start work on the budget targets for critical committees on Saturday—the first step in kicking off their ambitious legislative agenda involving energy, border, and tax policy."
According to the outlet:
"The Ways and Means Committee is just going to be able to draft tax legislation according to what the budget reconciliation instructions are," said House Ways and Means Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.), who will be leading the charge on extensions of... Trump's tax cuts.
"And so when the conference figures out what they want in those instructions, we'll be able to deliver according to those parameters," said Smith, when asked about the primary goal of a GOP conference meeting tentatively scheduled for Saturday at Fort McNair, an Army post in southwest Washington.
That followed Thursday reporting by The Washington Post that Trump advisers and congressional Republicans "have begun floating proposals to boost federal revenue and slash spending so their plans for major tax cuts and new security spending won't further explode the $36.2 trillion national debt."
As the newspaper detailed, 10 policies that Republicans have considered are tariffs, repealing clean energy programs, unauthorized spending, repealing the Biden administration's student loan forgiveness, shuttering the Education Department, cutting federal food assistance, imposing Medicaid work requirements, blocking Medicare obesity treatment, ending the child tax credit for noncitizen parents, and cutting Internal Revenue Service funding.
"The GOP promised to make life easier for working families," Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), the Democratic whip, said on social media in response to the Post's article. "Now, they want to slash your school budget, raise your grocery costs, and hike your energy bills—all to pay for billionaire tax cuts."
"We will not allow Republicans to cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and food assistance to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy," she added Friday. "No way."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Health Workers Plan Global Day of Action to Demand 'End to the Genocide in Gaza'
"After witnessing 15 months of relentless violence and destruction in Gaza, we can no longer carry on as if everything is normal," said organizer Doctors Against Genocide.
Jan 03, 2025
As Israel's 15-month annihilation of Gaza continues with intensified attacks on medical infrastructure and workers, an international coalition of advocacy groups is planning a
#SickFromGenocide global day of action on Monday "to take a stand against the targeted attacks on healthcare."
Organizer Doctors Against Genocide (DAG) and co-sponsors including Healthcare Workers for Palestine, Palestinian Youth Movement, Do No Harm Coalition, Labor for Palestine, Jewish Voice for Peace Health Advisory Council, and others are calling on healthcare workers around the world to take a day of mental health leave "to reflect on the immense moral injury of funding a genocide and engage the most important aspect of treatment: publicly demanding an end to the genocide in Gaza."
Monday's day of action is set to include a "Sick From Genocide" global vigil and pop-up clinics in cities across the United States, whose government gives Israel billions of dollars in weapons support each year.
"For 15 months, we have watched in horror as children and families have been obliterated by unrelenting attacks," DAG said in a statement Friday. "Hospitals, the bedrock of lifesaving care, have been turned into death traps. The recent bombing and burning of Kamal Adwan Hospitaland the arrest of our colleague, the pediatrician Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya,exemplify the deliberate targeting of healthcare workers and facilities—tactics designed to accelerate the annihilation and forced displacement of the Palestinian people in Gaza."
DAG member Dr. Rupa Marya—a University of California, San Francisco professor of medicine who's currently on paid suspension after questioning how to manage students coming to U.S. schools from a zone with an active genocide where military service is mandatory—told Common Dreams this week that healthcare professionals should "take a mental health break to grieve and take care of ourselves. Let's call in sick on January 6th. We are sick from genocide."
"We are burned out from 15 months of these images and our humanity being denied in our places of work, where we are being silenced, we are being framed as 'haters' for standing against a genocide," she advised.
"What we're asking people to do, is get your friends together, and start a pop-up clinic, set up a free clinic in the street," Marya continued. "Are other people sick from genocide? Come, we'll take care of you. Do people need free healthcare? Come, we'll take care of you."
"We need to demand that our institutions of care cut off relationships with a nation that is actively committing genocide," she asserted. "We need to demand that the United States stop sending arms to Israel. We send billions and billions of dollars to Israel to arm itself while we have people not getting healthcare in the United States."
"We have record numbers of people in the streets, many of them who have lost their homes because the most common cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States is medical debt," Marya noted. "So we can't even fund our own healthcare here, while we're sending money to Israel, where they have universal healthcare."
"Let's start showing people what a different healthcare system would look like based in a moral commitment to care, based on our love for our communities, and based on justice," she said. "That is the healthcare system that we need."
"Why are we spending our money destroying another people's healthcare when we can use that money to be taking care of our own here?"
Referring to last month's assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York City, Marya added: "And if you don't believe me, look what happened to that CEO. We don't want to see political violence here. We don't want people to have to get murdered for us to understand how desperate people are for healthcare."
"So," she asked, "why are we spending our money destroying another people's healthcare when we can use that money to be taking care of our own here?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Genuinely Weird' and 'WTF': Critics Denounce Meta's AI-Generated Profiles
"What is obvious from scrolling through these dead profiles," wrote 404 Media's Jason Koebler, "is that Meta's AI characters are not popular, people do not like them, and that they did not post anything interesting."
Jan 03, 2025
On the heels of Meta’s short-lived foray into celebrity lookalike AI chatbots, users around the internet have been unearthing AI-generated profiles created by Meta that are non-celebrity bots—and the reaction to them, to put it mildly, has been negative.
The Washington Post columnist Karen Attiah engaged in a back and forth with "Liv" an AI-generated Black "queer momma" who told the writer that her "creators admitted they lacked diverse references" when creating her personality. The bot, in reference to her programming, also said that the team that created her implied that white is the "default" or "natural identity."
"Not sure if Liv has media training, but here we are," said Attiah in a thread on Bluesky, where she attached screenshots of her conversation with the bot.
"This is genuinely weird and concerning," said Nina Turner, a senior fellow at the Institute on Race, Power, and Political Economy, of Liv.
According to The Verge, "Carter" an "AI-managed by Meta" profile that promises to give users dating advice, also elicited negative reactions. "Wtf is the point of this," wrote one commenter. "What the fuck does an AI know about dating?????" read another comment. Instagram pages for both Liv and Carter are no longer live.
While these AI-generated profiles only recently attracted a lot of attention, they've been around for awhile. A late December Financial Times piece about Meta's push into a range of AI-generated products, including one that helps users create AI characters on Instagram and Facebook in order to retain young users, created some confusion.
Connor Hayes, vice-president of product for generative AI at Meta, was quoted by the FT saying "we expect these AIs to actually, over time, exist on our platforms, kind of in the same way accounts do... They'll have bios and profile pictures and be able to generate and share content powered by AI on the platform."
According to 404 Media's Jason Koebler, "in the immediate aftermath of the Financial Times story, people began to notice the exact types of profiles that Hayes was talking about, and assumed that Meta had begun enacting its plan." In fact, these profiles have been around for over a year.
"There is confusion," Meta spokesperson Liz Sweeney told CNN. "The recent Financial Times article was about our vision for AI characters existing on our platforms over time, not announcing any new product."
"What is obvious from scrolling through these dead profiles," wrote Koebler, "is that Meta's AI characters are not popular, people do not like them, and that they did not post anything interesting."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular