Significant environmental victory on plutonium pit production for new nuclear warheads! The judge in federal court in Columbia, SC ruled on September 30, 2024 in a lawsuit on plutonium pit production, that NNSA violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in not considering all impacts at all DOE sites of proposed increases in pit production (core of all nuclear warheads), including disposal of plutonium waste. The lawsuit was brought by Savannah River Site Watch (Columbia, SC), Nuclear Watch New Mexico (Santa Fe, NM) and Tri-Valley CAREs (Livermore, CA), represented by the South Carolina Environmental Law Project (SCELP). The judge issued 3 documents:
“JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL ACTION,” Docket 1:21-cv-01942, September 30, 2024
“MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFFS AS TO CLAIM ONE AND DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE CLAIMS TWO, THREE, FOUR, AND FIVE FOR LACK OF STANDING,” Docket 1:21-cv-01942, September 30, 2024
“MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DEEMING AS MOOT IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPLETE OR SUPPLEMENT THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD,” Docket 1:21-cv-01942, September 30, 2024
SRS Order Mot Complete Record Sept 30 2024
Brian Schepens first declaration into the docket record, for NNSA, August 22, 2024: Schepens declaration NNSA SRS August 22 2023
Brian Schepens second declaration for NNSA, Sept. 19, 2024: SRS Supp Decl Schepens Sept 19 2024
FOIA response from DOE on plutonium pit aging plan, April 4, 2024 cover letter for request that took almost 3 years for a response (an unacceptable delay out of compliance with FOIA regulations!): FOIA 21-00276-R, Final Response Letter (FRL)
FOIA response, April 4, 2024 – heavily redacted “Research Program Plan for Plutonium and Pit Aging”: Doc 1. (U) Research Program Plan for Plutonium and Pit Aging, Report to Congress, NNSA, September 2021, 28 pgs._Redacted
—–
SRS Citizen Advisory Board madness – draft recommendation in favor of commercial spent fuel reprocessing at SRS, to be discussed August 15, 2023 at CAB committee meetings in Aiken, SC: Draft Rec – Fuel Rod Recycling-1 August 15 2023
FOIA response for CD-1 documents on the Versatile Test Reactor, sent February 7, 2022; first of several documents:
HQ-2021-00013-F First Partial Document Set_Redacted-1 rcvd Feb 7 2022
SRS on leakage of tritium from irradiated TPBARs: “Updated Estimate of Tritium Permeation from TPBAR Disposal Containers in ILV
(U)” – TPBAR leaked in E Area SRS 2020
——
FOIA response for Versatile Test Reactor monthly reports – ask for others than this:
December 2021 – Fiscal Year 2022: December 2021 Monthly Status Report Rev 2 FINAL
January 2022 – Fiscal Year 2022: January 2022 Monthly Status Report Rev 3 Final 2-28-2022
February 2022 update: February 2022 Monthly Status Report FINAL 3-23-2022
March 2022 update (said to be the last update in FY 22 as funding has been terminated): March 2022 Monthly Status Report R3 4-15-2022 FINAL
—————-
2010 presentation on SRS “Energy Park” – which was defeated: srsenergypark_9.28.2010
SRS Employment numbers for Fiscal Year 2020 – in response to SRS Watch FOIA request:
DOE letter to SRS Watch, received December 28, 2020, but dated October 20, 2020: SRO-2021-00044-F Clements final letterk-1
Employment, first quarter FY 2020: Headcount Report – FY20, Q1-1
Employment, 2nd quarter FY 2020: Headcount Report – FY20, Q2-1
Employment, 3rd quarter FY 2020: Headcount Report – FY20, Q3-1
Employment, 4th quarter FY 2020 (July -September 2020): Headcount Report – FY20, Q4-1
—–
Electrolytic Dissolving Overview and Potential Future Use in H Canyon, presented by Savannah River Nuclear Solutions to SRS Citizens Advisory Board’s nuclear materials committee, October 19, 2020
Electrolytic Dissolver H Canyon October 19 2020
—–
2020 Savannah River Site Plutonium Inventory Update, obtained on September 22, 2020 by SRS Watch, in response to a FOIA request:
plutonium inventory SRS 2020 FOIA rcvd Sep 22 2020
—–
Letter by SRS Watch to DOE requesting a Programmatic EIS on plutonium disposition, August 11, 2020:
Letter SRS Watch to DOE on need for PEIS on plutonium disposition August 11 2020
—–
“Data Call Response Supporting the SRS Pit Production EIS,” February 2020 – document was incorrectly left out of references in draft EIS on the SRS Plutonium Bomb Plant of April 2020 and was obtained by SRS Watch:
SRNS 2020 Data Call Responses (002) rcvd April 28 2020
—–
Letter by Secretary of Energy Dan Brouillette, June 29, 202o opposing the provisions in the NDAA: Secretary Brouillette Letter to Chairman Inhofe on NNSA language June 29 2020
Amendment by Senators Manchin and murkowski to strip out language related to DOD’s attempt to take over NNSA, June 2020: Manchin Murkowski #2361 – NNSA June 2020
—–
NNSA extends comment period on draft EIS on proposed SRS Plutonium Bomb Plant, in response to group and individual requests, April 21, 2020 letter to SRS Watch: Letter to SRS Watch draft EIS comment period extension NNSA April 21 2020
SRS Watch news release and comments by SRS Watch and others on draft EIS on pit production, June 3, 2020: https://srswatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/SRS-Watch-news-on-plutonium-pit-comments-June-3-2020.pdf
DOE’s nuclear bomb division, Final EIS on pit production: https://www.energy.gov/nepa/doeeis-0541-plutonium-pit-production-savannah-river-site-aiken-south-carolina
Comment by SRS Watch for the Formal NEPA Record before Issuance of the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Plutonium Pit Production at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, October 12, 2020, https://srswatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/comment-for-EIS-record-before-ROD-issued-October-12-2020.pdf
NNSA, Plutonium Pit Production Engineering Assessment (EA) Results, Kelly Cummins, May 2018: FINAL Pu Pit Production EA Results 05.14.18_Unclassified Cummins May 2018
Documents on proposed German spent fuel dumping at SRS:
FOIA response cover SRS JEN Nov 21 2019
FOIA response SRS JEN WFO agreement signed Sep 3 2019
FOIA response SRS JEN attachment unirradiated balls signed Oct 15 2019
FOIA response SRS JEN WFO attachment 2 irradiated balls signed Oct 15 2019
letter to DOE terminate SRS JEN agreement Feb 20 2020
WFO mod #7 FOIA rc vd April 7 2020
Institute for Defense Analysis (IDA) executive summary of report on plutonium pit production,delivered to Congress on Aeril 16, 2019 (full report contains UCNI and is not available but we have filed a FOIA request for it)– IDA executive summary linked here
—–
Filing by NNSA with federal court in Nevada, admitting that 1/2 MT of plutonium shipment from SRS to Nevada has taken place, January 30, 2019
—–
DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration’s October 10, 2018 letter to MOX Services terminating MOX construction, obtained by SRS Watch on October 12, 2018
NNSA’s MOX termination “notice” linked here
—-
DOE’s June 13, 2018 “Progress Report” on planning for removal of plutonium from South Carolina – filed with the federal district court in Columbia, SC on June 15, 2018
—-
DOE’s NNSA appeals “preliminary injunction” halting MOX termination, dated June 15, 2018 – linked here
DOE files
“MOTION TO STAY PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION PENDING APPEAL,” June 15, 2018 – linked hereDOE vacates partial stop work order on MOX project, dated June 11, 2018 – linked here
—-
“Preliminary injunction order” stopping MOX termination, by federal district court, Columbia, SC, June 6, 2018
Key document on nuclear weapons “pit” production at SRS and Los Alamos publicly released on Jun 4, 2018 as a DOE filing in federal court proceeding on the failed MOX project:
“Final Report for the Plutonium Pit Production Analysis of Alternatives,” October 2017, DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration
Cover letter: Lord letter attachment to calbos document-13
first section Analysis of Alternatives for pits October 2017
2nd section AoA Section 5.3.2.4.pdf-1.png
3rd section document-8.pdf.jpg
Full report: Analysis of Alternatives Final Report 10.17-1
Draft recommendations from SRS Citizens Advisory Boards Nuclear Materials Committee to full CAB and DOE, to be discussed at CAB meeting, June 6, 2017 in Aiken, SC – SRS Watch supports the recommendations
1. Recommendation against commercial spent fuel storage at SRS: linked here
2. Recommendation against import and dumping of German spent fuel at SRS: linked here
—–
DOE document with schedule for import of research and medical isotope spent fuel to SRS: “THE SIGNIFICANCE OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS DISPOSITION PATHWAYS TO ACHIEVE INTERNATIONAL NONPROLIFERATION OBJECTIVES,” September 4, 2014, at Eighth Annual RadWaste Summit
— document seems to be removed from the web but is linked here
—–
SRS Citizens Advisory Board (SRS CAB) “position statements,” July 26, 2016
— against German spent fuel import to SRS
— against interim storage of commercial spent fuel at SRS
—–
Draft positions for and against dumping of German commercial spent fuel at SRS – for July 12, 2016 Nuclear Materials Committee of the SRS Citizens Advisory Board, to be discussed and sent to SRS CAB for the July 25-26, 2016 meeting
draft statement against dumping at SRS
draft statement in favor of dumping at SRS
—–
Filings in South Carolina federal court proceeding for removal of plutonium from South Carolina, case brought by Governor Nikki Haley – documents from June 10, 2016:
NNSA filing “DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT”
Declaration of Allen Gunter, nuclear materials official, SRS
Declaration of Peter Hanlon, NNSA’s Office of Material Management and Minimization
Moniz letter to Gov. Haley, dated January 19, 2016
&
original filing of complaint by State of South Carolina, February 9, 2016
—
Gov. Nikki Haley to secretary of Energy Moniz, request to divert plutonium transport from Japan so as not to go to to SRS, March 23, 2016 – linked here
—–
Freedom of Information Act documents on MOX project bonus fee, received April 19, 2016
NNSA letter to Tom Clements, SRS Watch, April 19, 2016
Fiscal Year 2015 MOX Plant Award Fee Determination letter, December 17, 2015
FY 2015 Performance Evaluation of CB&I AREVA MOX Services, LLC
Contract No. DE-AC02-99CH10888
MFFF Award Fee 43-page narrative
SRS Watch FOIA request for MFFF award fee documents, December 11, 2015
—-
SRS Energy Park
– presentation on later-aborted energy park scheme to SRS CAB September 28, 2010 – removed from srs.gov website for political reasons
– spent fuel storage, reprocessing, SMRs all rolled into one glorious “U.S. Energy Freedom Center”
—-
For the record: SRS ill-conceived, illegal and aborted attempt at spent fuel storage, reprocessing & nuclear reactor park at SRS
SRS Environmental Bulletin – April 16, 2009
“EA being prepared for the proposed lease of SRS lands to the SRS Community Reuse Organization”
DOE has determined that an environmental assessment (EA) will be prepared to evaluate the potential environmental
consequences of the proposed lease of a 2,700 acre tract of undeveloped SRS lands to the SRS Community Reuse Organization (SRSCRO) for the development of an Energy Park. The purpose of the proposed action is to facilitate economic development in the Central Savannah River Area by allowing commercial entities to take advantage of the many
positive attributes of the SRS which make it well suited for alternative and nuclear energy activities. The scope of the
proposed action is limited to evaluating the impacts of leasing the SRS lands to the SRSCRO. The SRSCRO would work
to obtain tenant entities for the Energy Park, and appropriate NEPA review of the environmental impacts of constructing
and operating any alternative or nuclear energy facilities would be conducted when a specific proposal comes forward.
Notifications of DOE’s intent to prepare this EA were sent to the States of Georgia and South Carolina on April 8, 2009.
If you would like a copy of the predecisional EA when it becomes available, please contact:
Andrew R. Grainger, NEPA Compliance Officer
U.S. Department of Energy, Savannah River Operations Office
Building 730-1B, Room 3150, Aiken, SC 29808
e-mail: nepa@srs.gov
Fax/telephone 1-800-881-7292
linked here (not available on SRS.gov website)
—–
Draft “ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR GAP MATERIAL PLUTONIUM – TRANSPORT, RECEIPT, AND PROCESSING,” DOE/EA-2024,November 2015 – DOE refused to publicly release this document so SRS Watch is providing a public service to release it
—
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS (EISs) and ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS (EAs)
INVOLVING THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE (SRS) November 2015 – received from SRS on December 18, 2015
—-
DOE document listing inventory of US-origin and UK-origin plutonium and highly enriched uranium at the Fast Critical Assembly (FCA) at Tokai, Japan; total plutonium 291.4 kg, date not specified
“The Status of Plutonium Management in Japan,”
21 July 2015, Atomic Energy Commission; lists at total of 331 kilograms of foreign-origin plutonium at the Fast Critical Assembly (FCA) on page 7
—–
“HB-Line Phase III Safety Control Violation –
Reviw of the Event, Causal Analysis and Corrective Actions”
Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, December 1, 2015, to SRS CAB nuclear materials committee
—–
SRS schedule of release of NEPA documents – EA on German spent fuel dumping is still under review; list released November 19, 2015
—–
DOE FOIA documents on German spent fuel dumping at SRS, Summer/Fall 2015
– Memo stating no proliferation risk posed by AVR spent fuel in Germany, August 1, 2013
– Transport plant document, April 2013
– Risks to dumping scheme – presentation, July 2014
– List of myriad risks to dumping scheme
—–
DOE FOIA response cover letter of June 19, 2015, on German spent fuel import issue
SRS letter to German Bundestag member Sylvia Kotting-Uhl on German spent fuel issue, with “summer 2015” target date for release of draft environmental assessment
DOE memo affirming that German AVR gas-cooled reactor spent fuel poses no proliferation risk if it remains in Germany
DOE FOIA response letter to SRS Watch, May 7, 2015, affirming that no legal analysis has been prepared on German spent fuel import to SRS
SRS Watch letter to the Office of Environmental Management, April 21, 2015, requesting that the deal to import commercial spent fuel from Germany be terminated
Letter to SRS staffer from German Bundestag member Sylvia Kotting-Uhl, April 21, 2015, asking for the date of release of the DOE’s “draft environmental assessment” on the German deal
Savannah River Nuclear Solutions “work for others” agreement with Germany to investigate reprocessing of the AVR spent fuel at SRS, December 2012
DOE-Germany “Statement of Intent” to examine SRS as a “disposition” site for the spent fuel stored at Juelich, March/April 2014
—–
Aerospace Corporation redacted report entitled “Plutonium Disposition Study Options Independent Assessment,” April 13, 2105,
Greenpeace Germany legal analysis that export of German spent fuel to SRS is illegal, December 2014
—–
Final Surplus Plutonium Disposition Supplemental Environmental Environmental Impact State, Summary, obtained May 2, 2015
– no “preferred option” for MOX as was in draft document
—-
Agenda for SRS Citizens Advisory Board, March 23-24, 2015
linked here
Note presentation on March 24 by member of Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA): “Challenges at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant & Impacts on DOE Sites”
—–
DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) presentation on “Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor (SFR) Technology and Safety Overview,” February 18, 2015 – linked here
—–
Presentation by DOE’s Mark Senderling, WIPP Recovery Manager in DOE headquarters, to the SRS Citizens Advisory Board on January 27, 2015 on “Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Recovery Update” – linked here
—–
“Global Threat Reduction Initiative
Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel Shipments”
shipments to the US from 1996-present (last shipment was in December 2012, from Italy and Austria)
—–
DOE presentation “Environmental Management Cleanup Program Performance Measures Update,” Rich Olsen, SRS Planning Analyst, Office of Environmental Management, December 8, 2014 to the SRS Citizens Advisory Board’s Strategic and Legacy Management Committee in Aiken, South Carolina
—–
First the US Army gets use of land at SRS and now the State of South Carolina Military Department takes its shot. Is this the best use of public land owned by DOE (and not the Department of Defense)?
SRS Environmental Bulletin, October 7, 2014
Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) of a
Proposal to Permit 750 Acres at the Savannah River Site
(SRS) For Use by the State of South Carolina Military
Department (SCMD)
“The Department of Energy (DOE) has determined that an EA should be prepared to analyze the potential environmental impacts of a proposal by SCMD to permit the use of 750 acres at SRS for military training exercises and permanent facilities to support training. This determination has been made in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality regulations implementing NEPA, and DOE NEPA regulations.”
Los Alamos on “subcritical” nuclear weapons testing with plutonium
Real plutonium.
Real experiments. No nuclear yield.
Real important.
August 2014 document linked here
DEGRADATION OF CEMENTITIOUS MATERIALS ASSOCIATED WITH SALTSTONE DISPOSAL UNITS
Savannah River National Lab, November 2013
SRNL-STI-2013-00118
Revision 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Saltstone facilities at the DOE Savannah River Site (SRS) stabilize and dispose of low-level radioactive salt solution originating from liquid waste storage tanks at the site. The Saltstone Production Facility (SPF) receives treated salt solution and mixes the aqueous waste with dry cement, blast furnace slag, and fly ash to form a grout slurry which is mechanically pumped into concrete disposal cells that compose the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). The solidified grout is termed “saltstone”.
Cementitious materials play a prominent role in the design and long-term performance of the SDF. The saltstone grout exhibits low permeability and diffusivity, and thus represents a physical barrier to waste release. The waste form is also reducing, which creates a chemical barrier to waste release for certain key radionuclides, notably Tc-99. Similarly, the concrete shell of a saltstone disposal unit (SDU) represents an additional physical and chemical barrier to radionuclide release to the environment. Together the waste form and the SDU compose a robust containment structure at the time of facility closure. However, the physical and chemical state of cementitious materials will evolve over time through a variety of phenomena, leading to degraded barrier performance over Performance Assessment (PA) timescales of thousands to tens of thousands of years. Previous studies of cementitious material degradation in the context of low-level waste disposal have identified sulfate attack, carbonation influenced steel corrosion, and decalcification (primary constituent leaching) as the primary chemical degradation phenomena of most relevance to SRS exposure conditions.
In this study, degradation time scales for each of these three degradation phenomena are estimated for saltstone and concrete associated with each SDU type under conservative, nominal, and best estimate assumptions. The nominal value (NV) is an intermediate result that is more probable than the conservative estimate (CE) and more defensible than the best estimate (BE). The combined effects of multiple phenomena are then considered to determine the most limiting degradation time scale for each cementitious material. Degradation times are estimated using a combination of analytic solutions from literature and numerical simulation codes provided through the DOE Cementitious Barriers Partnership (CBP) Software Toolbox (http://cementbarriers.org). Task Technical Requests HLW-SSF-2013-0001, Rev. 3 and HLW-SSF-TTR-2013-0021, Rev. 2 define the scope of the analysis and certain input data.
For the SDU 2 design with a clean cap fill, the roof, wall, and floor components are projected to become fully degraded under Nominal conditions at 3855, 922, and 1413 years, respectively. For SDU 4 the roof and floor are estimated to be fully degraded under Nominal conditions after 1106 and 1404 years, respectively; the wall is assumed to be fully degraded at time zero in the most recent PA simulations. Degradation of these concrete barriers generally occurs from combined sulfate attack and corrosion of embedded steel following carbonation. Saltstone is projected to degrade very slowly by decalcification, with complete degradation occurring in excess of 200,000 years for any SDU type. Complete results are provided in Table 5-1 through Table 5-3. Additional results for the SDU 2 and SDU 6 designs are provided in Table 5-5 through Table 5-7 assuming the absence of the traditional clean cap fill. For the SDU 6 design, the roof and floor components are projected to fully degrade by 1413 years while the tapered wall fully degrades at 817 years for the thinnest section and 1827 years for the thickest section 2.
Nuclear Materials Measurement Impacts on Plutonium Storage and Disposition
Jeffrey S. Allender,* Christine M. Hadden,** R. Stephen Lee,* and Thomas J. Grim**
* Savannah River National Laboratory
Aiken, SC, USA
** Savannah River Nuclear Solutions
Aiken, SC, USA
July 2014
The Department of Energy requires accurate measurements of special nuclear material quantities and isotopics to support material control and accountability upon creation of an item. Usually the initial non-destructive assay measurements meet all requirements. However, at times the measurements must be repeated (e.g., verification measurements for intersite transfers) or more accurate measurements are required to meet a specific specification (e.g., a disposition program). Savannah River Site performs remeasurements to support feed characterization for the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility and to provide verification measurements for the plutonium and enriched uranium content in packages it has received for storage pending disposition. This paper describes key factors that impede accuracy in meeting the multiple program missions, including the presence of competing elements and isotopes; limited counting duration; and shielding in packages that were created decades earlier.
Path Forward
SRS has completed verification measurements on the highest priority items and continues to perform analyses on the lower priority items. Remeasurement of potential Alternate Feedstocks for the MFFF is suspended awaiting further definition of the project schedule. To a great degree, the factors influencing NDA special nuclear material measurements for the plutonium materials in DOE-STD- 3013 containers are well understood.
DOE-SRS document of June 24, 2014 being made public by SRS Watch on July 8, 2014:
by Maxcine Maxted,
DOE-SR Used Nuclear Fuel Program Manager
June 24, 2014 presentation at Public Scoping Meeting in N. Augusta, SC, where the majority of comments were against taking spent commercial nuclear power fuel from Germany. Note in the presentation that their is no final “disposition” of the high-level waste from the spent fuel. Rather, it gets stranded at SRS. Under US law, spent fuel is defined as high-level nuclear waste and must go to a geologic repsoitory, which SRS is definietly not.
Obtained under a FOIA request:
September 2010
This MOU has resulted in no apparent work as the GE PRISM reactor and “small modular reactors” in general have hit the wall. The GE PRISM, a sodium-cooled reactor fueled with plutonium, is going nowhere fast as there is no money to even conduct R&D and little interest in it. Reprocessing boosters have hoped to link spent fuel storage, reprocessing and fast reactors into their plutonium fuel cycle “dream” at SRS but their hopes have been dashed.
and Security RegulationsJeff Williams
Project Director, Nuclear Fuels Storage and Transportation
Office of Nuclear EnergyWorld Institute for Nuclear Security
June 10-12, 2014
May 2014
Applies to 457 110-tonne CASTOR casks containing 895,000 graphite balls of spent fuel, now stored at Juelich (AVR reactor) and Ahaus (THTR-300 reactor) . It’s unclear how SRS would manage radioactive graphite waste, which would have no final disposition path if imported (in a large number of shipments). Will any n. European ports be willing to handle sich a large amount of controversial waste?
March 2014
Singh, Surinder Paul; Gibbs, Philip W; Bultz, Garl A
SRS presentation on “Environmental Management Cleanup Program
Performance Measures Targets for Fiscal Year 2014,” April 22, 2014 – shows the number of vitrified
waste canisters filled through February 2014
cab be immobilized in DWPF vitrified waste canister (1% weight of vitrified glass) – by Savannah River National Lab, December 2010Reevaluation of
Vitrified High-Level Waste Form Criteria for Potential Cost Savings
at the Defense Waste
Processing Facility– also supports 18kg plutonium/DWPF canister concentration limit –
by Savannah River Remediation and Savannah River National
Lab, Waste Management 2013
Conference 2013,
February 24 – 28, 2013, Phoenix, AZ, USA
by Tom Clements, April 15, 2014
– see news release about the letters on home page
DOE Needs to Analyze the Root Causes of Cost Increases and Develop Better Cost Estimates”
February 13, 2014 – http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/660927.pdf
by Savannah River Remediation