*****************************************************************
03/22/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.70
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 Bush Credibility Problems on WMD Unravel Alliances, Threaten
2 Seattle Times: Books: 'Disarming Iraq': Memoirs of a weapons inspect
3 US: Miami Herald: No tough questions about WMDs
4 SF Chronicle: One year later
5 US: WorldNetDaily: The consequences of 'Mr. Bush's War'
6 US: WorldNetDaily: What do you mean 'we' were wrong?
7 UK Independent: Carter savages Blair and Bush: 'Their war was based
8 AFP: UN nuclear watchdog chief urges Iran to be 'transparent'
9 US: Secret U.S. Nuclear Wars
10 Hi Pakistan: ElBaradei for new rules to fight WMDs spread -->
11 Reuters: Al-Zawahri Says Al Qaeda Has Nuke Bombs -Biographer
12 Business Standard: Americas ally - Pakistan
NUCLEAR REACTORS
13 US: TMI at 25: Deadbeat Taxpayer
14 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Selectboard to meet with nuclear experts
15 US: FCW.com: Nuke agency shines bright in security
16 US: Reuters: UPDATE 1-Constellation's Md. Calvert Cliffs 1 nuke redu
17 US: ABC: A restart for nuclear power? -
18 US: Patriot-News: TMI 25 YEARS LATER
19 US: Patriot-News: TMI's uncertain legacy: How did it affect our heal
20 US: NRC: NRC Proposes $60,000 Fine Against Point Beach Nuclear Power
21 US: NRC: NRC Issues License for Diablo Canyon Independent Spent Nucl
NUCLEAR SAFETY
22 [DU-WATCH] World Uranium Weapons Conference Audio
23 [DU-WATCH] DU leads to sufferng in Iraq
24 [DU-WATCH] Interview on DU in Iraq
25 US: [DU-WATCH] Nevada: Air force on cleanup of DU
26 US: [DU-WATCH] America the bunker buster ...
27 [DU-WATCH] Citizens find Bush guilty of Afghan war crimes
28 [du-list] Soldiers accounts reveal new details: du rounds devestated
29 US: Contam workers
30 US: cotam worker
31 US: FT: Price-Anderson Act and nuclear plant safety in the US
32 US: NRC: KTL Roudebush Testing, Kansas City, MO; Order Suspending Li
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
33 US: Salt Lake Tribune: 'Taint funny
34 Las Vegas RJ: LETTERS: Advertisement misrepresents radiation risks
35 Las Vegas SUN: House panel to look into Yucca status
36 IOL: BNFL officials to address public meeting on Sellafield dangers
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
37 Rocky Mountain News: Recent incidents at Rocky Flats
38 DOE: DOE/Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee
39 Tri-City Herald: K Basins proposal not good enough
40 Las Vegas SUN: Greenspun: Act on principles
41 Rocky Mountain News: Recent incidents at Rocky Flats
42 Hanford News: Judge to rule on 'contractor defense'
43 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada
OTHER NUCLEAR
44 Google News Alert - nuclear
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 Bush Credibility Problems on WMD Unravel Alliances, Threaten
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:35:48 -0600 (CST)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jessica Smith or Trevor FitzGibbon,
Friday, March 19, 2004
Fenton Communications, 202-822-5200
Leader of US Anti-Iraq War Coalition Cites Unraveling
Of Bush Alliance as Leaders React to Deception on WMD
CALLS ON CONGRESS TO CENSURE PRESIDENT OR RISK
FURTHER EROSION OF U.S. CREDBIILITY ABROAD
TV Ad Will Begin Airing on Saturday Calling on Congress to Censure the
President
The rising chorus of complaints from allied world leaders about being
misled into the Iraq war underscores the need for Congress to hold the
president accountable for deceiving Americans and our allies to justify the
invasion and occupation of Iraq, said former Congressman Tom Andrews,
leader of Win Without War, the largest mainstream coalition of organizations
that opposed last years invasion of Iraq. Congress should censure the
president for distorting and manipulating the truth.
In a statement released yesterday, Polish president Aleksander Kwasniewski
said: I feel uncomfortable due to the fact that we were misled with the
information on weapons of mass destruction. The newly elected Prime
Minister of Spain said that President Bush, will have to reflect and
engage in some self-criticism, so that things like that dont happen again.
We cant win the war against terrorism without allies, and we wont have
any left if our presidents word cant be trusted, Andrews said. This is
becoming a matter of our national security.
Since the president wont admit error and take responsibility, Congress
should act to reestablish our international credibility. The best way to
restore the confidence of our allies is to pass a resolution that censures
President Bush, he added. We have to send a signal that our leaders can be
trusted in matters of war and peace.
This week Win Without War held a press conference with mothers of US
soldiers who served in Iraq, and delivered petitions for a censure
resolution signed by over 500,000 Americans. On Saturday, MoveOn.org, a Win
Without War member organization, will begin airing a TV ad calling for
censure.
####
---------------------
Jessica A. Smith
FENTON | Communications
1320 18th St., NW
Washington, DC 20036
202.822.5200 x234
www.fenton.com
[demime 0.98e removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name of clip_image001.gif]
*****************************************************************
2 Seattle Times: Books: 'Disarming Iraq': Memoirs of a weapons inspector
Sunday, March 21, 2004 - Page updated at 12:00 A.M.
By Bruce Ramsey Seattle Times editorial writer
Hans Blix, the U.N. weapons inspector who did not find any
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, has written "Disarming Iraq"
recounting the run-up to the U.S.-British invasion. Blix has gone
over his diary and documents, and relates his meetings with the
Iraqis, French President Jacques Chirac, British Prime Minister
Tony Blair, security adviser Condoleezza Rice, hearings at the
U.N. Security Council, and the push-and-pull among the French,
Germans, British and Americans. Historians will thank him.
Whether readers thank him may be another thing, because he has
written a dull book.
The man is simply too much of a diplomat. One of many incidents,
for example, is a meeting with National Security Adviser Rice.
Here is a key player. She has a definite attitude, a certain
focus, a manner. What does Blix tell us about her? That she "did
not react visibly" to one of his statements and that she "showed
little understanding" of a certain point. In two pages, that is
all.
Blix is better on the issues, the principal one being whether
Iraq had any chemical or biological weapons at all. At the time
he thought maybe they did.
"Disarming Iraq"
by Hans Blix Pantheon, $24
The Iraqis claimed that in the summer of 1991 they had poured all
the chemical and biological stuff into the ground. It was
shameful for them to have to disarm, and they did not invite any
inspectors to witness it or take pictures of it. They destroyed
all written accounts — so they said.
So how could Blix verify it? He couldn't. In the final weeks
before the war, the Iraqis give Blix names of some of the people
who did the pouring out. But what would oral testimony prove?
All the time, the Bush administration was saying that the weapons
are unaccounted for. That was right. But that didn't mean they
existed, Blix says.
The U.S. attitude was that of course these weapons existed, and
that the only way the Iraqis could come clean was to open up
their hiding places. With uncharacteristic bluntness, Blix
characterizes this attitude as "the witches exist; you are
appointed to deal with these witches; testing whether there are
witches is only a dilution of the witch hunt."
Before the war came several minor flaps. There was the episode of
the aluminum tubes, which were said to be for the manufacture of
a centrifuge, except that the Iraqis weren't building a
centrifuge; and the episode of the document about yellowcake
uranium, which was said to be for an enrichment plant, except
that the Iraqis didn't have an enrichment plant. Then it was
discovered that the document was forged. "A scandal," Blix says.
Well, yes. But who forged it, and to what purpose? That is what
we want to know, and he does not even guess the answer.
The justification for having a war in 2003 was chemical and
biological weapons. We haven't found them. But even a year later
it is difficult to be sure that they don't exist. There is a
problem of proving a negative.
Blix is almost sure that they didn't. The Iraqi scientists were
living so miserably, he says, that surely one of them would have
given away the secret for a pile of American dollars. Saddam's
sons were found that way. As for the theory that the weapons were
spirited off to Syria, Blix says that the traffic would have been
noticed. Besides, why would the Syrians accept such a "poisoned
chalice" with the U.S. Army at their door?
Blix does ask why, if there were no weapons of mass destruction,
America went to war. His answer is, first, that there was a
"deficit of critical thinking" in the Bush administration, which
wanted to believe Iraq had these weapons. His second answer is
the effect of the 9-11 attacks. He writes: "It is clear that the
U.S. determination to take on Iraq was not triggered by anything
Iraq did, but by the wounds inflicted by al-Qaida."
What does the whole experience have to say for the right of
preemptive war? On the book's last page, Blix arches his eyebrow
and says, that the invasion "did not strengthen the case" for it.
To a diplomat, that is probably a damning statement.
Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company
*****************************************************************
3 Miami Herald: No tough questions about WMDs
| 03/22/2004 |
BY EDWARD WASSERMAN
edward_wasserman@hotmail.com [edward_wasserman@hotmail.com]
Stripped to their basics, the far-reaching actions that our
country has taken in the past year seem bereft of logic: Under
the banner of avenging the attacks of 9/11, the United States
went to war against a ruler who had nothing to do with them, and
in the name of combating weapons of mass destruction, invaded a
country that had none.
Breathtaking, when you put it like that. But that isn't the way
these matters have been put. Instead, somehow, it all has been
made to make sense -- this swirl of Islamist terrorism, Iraqi
tyranny and hijacked airplanes, spiked with dread of germ
warfare, nerve agents and nukes.
Those elements don't really have much to do with each other. But
they've been crammed into a bogus unity in Bush administration
political rhetoric to justify open-ended vigilance at home and
fierce intervention abroad.
The problem isn't just polemical over-reaching by politicians. As
a sobering new report from the University of Maryland's Center
for International and Security Studies suggests, our news media
have casually bought into the same conceptual muddle,
particularly in reporting on weapons of mass destruction.
In an analysis of the work of 11 news organizations in three
periods during the Clinton and Bush administrations -- in 1998,
2002 and 2003 -- author Susan D. Moeller argues that the media
consistently defaulted to simplistic, illogical and misleading
categories that did more to advance the agendas of leaders than
to explain the world to their audiences.
Specifically, Moeller found, the media:
• Accepted without question the notion that ''weapons of mass
destruction,'' beloved as a rhetorical flourish, is a coherent
category of armaments; in reality, the components of this
supposed unholy trinity have totally different potencies, pose
markedly different threats -- and are in very different hands.
• Cooperated in linking these weapons to terrorism; in reality,
terrorist groups kill with bombs and box-cutters, and none has
ever used those WMD (apart from the Japanese cult that killed a
dozen people with sarin in the Tokyo subway in 1995.)
• Uncritically deferred to the incumbent administration when
deciding which weapons were ''deterrents,'' which ''nuclear
program'' was worrisome, which developments could be ignored.
Part of the problem lay with the conventions of news reporting,
which routinely give officialdom the edge in defining issues and
put administration statements, leaks, trial balloons and wishful
thinking at the lead of the story and the top of the newscast.
That problem was deepened by the media's presumption of
governmental competence in foreign policy and security matters,
whether assessing the Indian and Pakistani weapons tests in 1998
or North Korea's nuclear potential in 2002.
And it was all made worse by the cable age, 24/7 news cycle, in
which the latest high-level utterance, no matter how dubious,
still gets its turn in the headlines.
Accordingly, for the most part the media obligingly treated WMD
as a ''monolithic menace,'' Moeller writes. The incomparably
different destructive capacities of chemical weapons and H-bombs
were, by implication, made equivalent, and the whole murderous
assemblage treated ``as an integral element of the global
terrorism matrix.''
That proposition was key to the run-up to the 2003 invasion, when
Iraq's weaponry was repeatedly denounced as a potentially
calamitous threat to the United States. How? Which weapons,
delivered how? Would nuclear-tipped missiles be launched across
the Mediterranean and the Atlantic? Would smallpox be dribbled
across the Canadian border? Nobody asked, nobody told.
Nobody told
Besides, as the Maryland center's director, John Steinbruner,
notes in his foreword to the Moeller report, how could any
responsible U.S. military commander invade a country that he
genuinely believed had the capacity for massive retaliation --
without a clue as to where that capacity was and how to disable
it? Nobody asked, nobody told.
And now? We understand less about the world than ever. Our
leaders and our media joined Islamist terrorism, WMD and Saddam
Hussein in an imaginary union, from which they politely excluded
the Saudis, our friends, in defiance of all evidence. With
Hussein gone, we face terrorism resurgent and Madrid and
Casablanca ablaze, and an undiminished threat of nuclear
proliferation in which Russia and Pakistan, our friends, figure
prominently, and Osama bin Laden not at all.
Confused? That's preferable to a clarity based on falsehoods.
Edward Wasserman is Knight professor of journalism ethics at
Washington and Lee University.
*****************************************************************
4 SF Chronicle: One year later
Ruth Rosen [rrosen@sfchronicle.com] Monday, March 22,
2004
WAS THE WAR in Iraq inevitable?
That was the question that panels of distinguished journalists
and media critics implicitly addressed when they gathered at UC
Berkeley last week for an international conference titled "The
Media at War: The U.S. Invasion &Occupation of Iraq."
Joining them were Joseph C. Wilson, former ambassador to several
African countries, and Hans Blix, former U.N. weapons inspector.
All the participants seemed to agree that the Bush administration
had misled the American public about Saddam Hussein's weapons of
mass destruction as well as his ties with al Qaeda terrorists.
Many of the speakers also thought that much of the American print
and broadcast media -- uncertain whether such dangers actually
existed -- simply echoed the administration assertions.
If the media had been more critical and skeptical, would it have
made a difference?
A series of speakers tackled this thorny question. Most
surprising were remarks made by Joseph W. Wilson, whose op-ed in
the July 6, 2003, New York Times refuted the administration's
case that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from Niger.
Wilson's condemnation of the Bush administration, which will
appear in a forthcoming book, "Inside the Politics of Truth," was
remarkably unrestrained for a career diplomat.
If journalists had bothered to investigate the past, he argued,
they would have known that those advising the president about
foreign policy had written about the need to invade Iraq as early
as 1999.
He also criticized newspaper editorial boards across the country
for giving the Bush administration a free ride by supporting a
unilateral invasion and occupation for which only the most
flimsiest evidence had been provided.
After Secretary of State Colin Powell presented his evidence to
the U.N. Security Council, nuclear experts told Wilson, "Powell
has nothing." Why, then, asked Wilson, didn't reporters and
editorial boards interview these same nuclear experts, who knew
that the aluminum tubes had nothing to do with nukes and that
some of Powell's "evidence" was 10-year old data lifted by the
British from the Internet?
Most ominously, Wilson predicted that Iraq was soon headed toward
an internal civil war, an assertion repeated by most Arab
journalists. Yet, as he pointed out, the American media still
unquestioningly broadcasts Bush's reassurances that the situation
in Iraq is improving.
In a remarkable interview with Hans Blix, CNN's Christiane
Amanpour gave the formerly beleaguered weapons inspector an
opportunity to redeem himself before a sold-out audience of 2,000
persons.
Could the war have been prevented if the Bush administration had
been willing to give his team more time? Blix's answer was the
Bush administration was unwilling to accept that no weapons
existed. "They didn't listen to us. But other members of the
Security Council did." As a result, the United States went to war
without the support of the international community.
No evidence of nuclear weapons in Iraq existed in 2003, Blix
said. Yet National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice famously
warned, "We don't want the 'smoking gun' to be a mushroom cloud"
and both British Prime Minister Tony Blair and President Bush
seized upon the threat of nuclear weapons to mobilize public
support for the war.
One of the most fascinating discussions focused on embedded
journalists. Did they get it right or were they co-opted? Lt.
Col. Robert O. Sinclair of the U.S. Marine Corps candidly
admitted that the goal of the military was to "dominate the media
environment." The military, he said, was quite satisfied with the
media's coverage of the war.
But at what cost, asked a panel of journalists from the Middle
East? Where were the stories about how the bombing, looting and
violence affected the Iraqi people?
Many journalists, including Amanpour, Frontline's Martin Smith,
NPR's Deborah Amos and al Jazeera Maher Abdallah Ahmad agreed
that, above all else, the American media had failed to provide a
historical context for their reports. If they had, the American
people might have understood why the Iraqi people, having been
subjected to British colonialism after World War I, would never
accept a Western occupation.
It wasn't just journalists, however, who knew so little history.
Members of the Bush administration also failed to grasp the
importance of historical memory in the Middle East.
Could the war have been averted? I don't think so, given the
ideological commitment of those who are in power. But the
conference did serve to remind us why both the public and
journalists need to cultivate a skeptical mind and why, in the
end, history always matters.
E-mail Ruth Rosen at rrosen@sfchronicle.com
[rrosen@sfchronicle.com] .
©2004 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback | FAQ
*****************************************************************
5 WorldNetDaily: The consequences of 'Mr. Bush's War'
MARCH 22 2004
Posted: March 22, 2004
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
A year has elapsed since President Bush ordered U.S. forces to
invade Iraq. Since that March day, 2003, it has become clear as
crystal: Operation Iraqi Freedom was an unnecessary war.
Saddam had had no role in 9-11 or the anthrax attack, no plans to
attack us or to invade his neighbors. He was contained by U.S.
power and his own weakness. American planes had flown 40,000
sorties in 10 years over Iraq without losing a single aircraft to
hostile fire. And Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction.
It was a war of choice, "Mr. Bush's War," as the War of 1812 was
"Mr. Madison's War," the Mexican War was "Jimmy Polk's War" and
World War I was "Mr. Wilson's War." Neoconservatives who schemed
for a decade to have us invade, occupy and vassalize Iraq say we
liberated the country from tyranny, blew a hole in the phalanx of
hostile Islamic states and are building a democracy that will be
an inspiration to the Middle East.
Better still, we are positioned to use our power against Syria,
Iran and Saudi Arabia in the war against Islamo-fascism that is
the great cause of our generation.
John Pilger quotes Richard Perle in the Mirror two years ago:
"This is total war ... if we just let our vision of the world go
forth."
Whether the war was necessary or not, neocons say, it was a just
and wise war. Better that we fight now when we can readily
prevail than wait for Saddam or his sons to acquire atomic
weapons. Even if Saddam's weapons programs had not matured, we
could not take the chance, says President Bush. I did the right
thing. I take full responsibility. Deal with it.
Whether one agrees with Bush and Cheney, they are unapologetic.
They stand by the war. But what is the argument for John Kerry?
Had he been a principled anti-war candidate, we would have a
great debate over how best to cope with the soaring
anti-Americanism that is the spawning pool of terror. But we have
no debate.
For there is no party in Washington that speaks for those of us
who believe America should stay out of these religious and tribal
wars from Morocco to Malaysia where no vital U.S. interest is at
risk. There is only one vital interest in this region – oil, and
Iran and the Arabs must sell it to survive, no matter the regime
in power.
We will have no debate because John Kerry voted to give Bush a
blank check to take us to war. Under attack by Howard Dean, he
then pirouetted and voted to deny Bush the funds to consolidate
America's victory. Now he says he was misled. A profile in
opportunism.
Kerry calls to mind FDR's story told about the chameleon. When
they put it down on a brown rug, it turned brown. When they put
it down on a green rug, it turned green. But when they put it
down on a Scotch plaid, the chameleon died.
And so the big questions will go unaddressed.
Can the United States afford the cost in blood and treasure of a
Bush policy of preventive war, when the occupation of one Arab
country of 23 million has tied down half our armed forces and
cost $200 billion?
Can we maintain our imperial presence in 120 countries with an
Army of half a million men? Should we double the size of our Army
to maintain our commitments, or cut back on our commitments to
defend other nations' frontiers and fight other nations' wars?
Is the vast presence of U.S. forces in the Islamic world a
deterrent to terrorism, or an incitation to terror? Where hatred
of America is pandemic, is disengagement a wiser policy than
intervention? Has the war and occupation of Iraq reduced terror
or given jihadists a rallying cause? The Spanish might have some
thoughts on this.
With Iran and North Korea closer to a nuclear capacity than
Saddam ever was, was it wise to tear up alliances and tie down
our military ousting a dictator who, no matter how odious, was no
threat?
Given our budget deficits, the overextension of our military, our
isolation from allies and the opposition of Congress, is the Bush
policy of preventive war already a dead letter?
Finally, why do scores of millions of Arab and Islamic peoples
hate us and wish to see us humiliated in Iraq? At one time, we
were the most admired nation on earth. Is any of this our fault,
unpatriotic as that question may seem?
Patrick J. Buchanan was twice a candidate for the Republican
presidential nomination and the Reform Party’s candidate in
2000. He is also a founder and editor of the new magazine, The
American Conservative [http://www.amconmag.com] . Now a
political analyst for MSNBC and a syndicated columnist, he
served three presidents in the White House, was a founding
panelist of three national television shows, and is the author
of seven books.
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com, Inc.
*****************************************************************
6 WorldNetDaily: What do you mean 'we' were wrong?
MARCH 20 2004
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
Did you see David Kay's confession – "It turns out that we were
all wrong" – before the Senate Armed Services Committee about a
month ago?
Maybe you wondered who "we" were.
"We" certainly didn't include Kay's one-time boss at the
International Atomic Energy Agency, Hans Blix, who had come out
of retirement to chair the U.N. Monitoring Verification and
Inspection Commission.
"We" certainly didn't include Blix's successor at the IAEA –
Director General Mohamed ElBaradei.
So, what's this "we" stuff?
Well, you may remember David Kay's congressional testimony in the
months leading up to Operation Iraqi Freedom. Khidir Hamza
frequently appeared with Kay.
You remember Hamza, don't you? The "defector" who claimed to have
been in charge of the Iraqi nuke program? The author of "Saddam's
Bombmaker"?
Hamza was also a sidekick of Richard Perle – then chairman of the
Defense Policy Board – who vouched for Hamza's authenticity to
congressional and administration pooh-bahs.
The Hamza-Kay-Perle testimony was that the Iraqis were secretly
reconstituting the nuke program the IAEA had reported totally
destroyed. Iraq would have several nukes in a matter of months,
not years, and would likely give them to terrorists. The only way
to prevent you soccer moms from getting nuked in your jammies was
an immediate pre-emptive invasion of Iraq by the United States.
Now, the U.N. Security Council had been told back in 1998 that
the IAEA had not only destroyed everything "nuclear" that had
survived the Gulf War, but that:
+ There were no indications to suggest that Iraq was successful
in its attempt to produce nuclear weapons.
+ There were no indications to suggest that Iraq had produced
more than a few grams of weapons-grade nuclear material through
its indigenous processes. + There were no indications that Iraq
otherwise clandestinely acquired weapons-usable material. + There
were no indications that there remains in Iraq any physical
capability for the production of amounts of weapons-usable
nuclear material of any practical significance.
Four years later, on the eve of Operation Iraqi Freedom,
ElBaradei was able to assure the Security Council that there were
no indications to suggest that Iraq had even attempted to
reconstruct its nuclear programs, even for peaceful purposes.
The Hamza-Kay-Perle counter-testimony was that the IAEA under
Blix and ElBaradei had been, and would always be, ineffective.
Well, now we know the IAEA had been effective in Iraq. The CIA
didn't discover Saddam's secret nuke program in the aftermath of
the Gulf War. The IAEA discovered it, totally destroyed it and
the Iraqis never even attempted to reconstruct it.
So, the only question now is whether Hamza-Kay-Perle et al were
simply wrong – or deliberately lied.
Well, there was never any doubt about Hamza.
You see, Gen. Hussein Kamal – Saddam's son-in-law – had defected
to Jordan in 1995, carrying with him thousands of documents on
Iraq's "weapons of mass destruction" program. Kamal was
extensively interrogated by the CIA, and by Rolf Ekeus of the
U.N. Special Commission on Iraq and Maurizio Zifferero of the
IAEA Action Team.
Basically, Kamal claimed all Iraqi "weapons of mass destruction"
and the makings thereof had been destroyed.
Ziffereo asked Kamal about Hamza, who was then representing
himself to the CIA as having been in charge of Iraq's nuke
program.
Quoth Kamal: "He is a professional liar."
As we now know, Kamal told the truth.
So, the CIA has known all along that Hamza was a fraud.
Nevertheless, they allowed Hamza – and David Kay – to mislead
Congress right up until the eve of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Even when a genuine Iraqi nuke scientist – Imad Khadduri –
exposed Hamza, the CIA and the media elite paid little attention.
According to Khadduri, Hamza "did not, even remotely, get
involved in any scientific research – except for journalistic
articles – dealing with the fission bomb, its components or its
effects."
Hamza had been in Iraq's nuke program for a few months but was
"kicked out of the program at the end of 1987 for stealing a few
air-conditioning units from the building assigned to his
project."
Hamza "retired from the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission in 1989
and became a college lecturer, a stock market swindler and a
shady business middleman."
Where is Hamza – the "professional liar" – now?
According to David Kay – who was until recently in charge of the
CIA's hunt for those "weapons of mass destruction" that Hans Blix
and Mohamed ElBaradei correctly assured us didn't exist – Hamza
is now in charge of the CIA's rehabilitation and retraining
program for Iraq's former "nuke" scientists.
Physicist James Gordon Prather has served as a policy
implementing official for national security-related technical
matters in the Federal Energy Agency, the Energy Research and
Development Administration, the Department of Energy, the Office
of the Secretary of Defense and the Department of the Army. Dr.
Prather also served as legislative assistant for national
security affairs to U.S. Sen. Henry Bellmon, R-Okla. -- ranking
member of the Senate Budget Committee and member of the Senate
Energy Committee and Appropriations Committee. Dr. Prather had
earlier worked as a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory in California and Sandia National
Laboratory in New Mexico.
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com, Inc.
webmaster@worldnetdaily.com
*****************************************************************
7 UK Independent: Carter savages Blair and Bush: 'Their war was based on lies'
By Andrew Buncombe in Atlanta
22 March 2004
Jimmy Carter, the former US president, has strongly criticised
George Bush and Tony Blair for waging an unnecessary war to oust
Saddam Hussein based on "lies or misinterpretations". The 2002
Nobel peace prize winner said Mr Blair had allowed his better
judgement to be swayed by Mr Bush's desire to finish a war that
his father had started.
In an interview with The Independent on the first anniversary of
the American and British invasion of Iraq, Mr Carter, who was
president from 1977 to 1981, said the two leaders probably knew
that many of the claims being made about Saddam Hussein's weapons
of mass destruction were based on imperfect intelligence.
He said: "There was no reason for us to become involved in Iraq
recently. That was a war based on lies and misinterpretations
from London and from Washington, claiming falsely that Saddam
Hussein was responsible for [the] 9/11 attacks, claiming falsely
that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. And I think that
President Bush and Prime Minister Blair probably knew that many
of the allegations were based on uncertain intelligence ... a
decision was made to go to war [then people said] 'Let's find a
reason to do so'."
Before the war Mr Carter made clear his opposition to a
unilateral attack and said the US did not have the authority to
create a "Pax Americana". During his Nobel prize acceptance
speech in December 2002 he warned of the danger of
"uncontrollable violence" if countries sought to resolve problems
without United Nations input.
His latest comments, made during an interview at the Carter
Centre in Atlanta, are notable for their condemnation of the two
serving leaders. It is extremely rare for a former US president
to criticise an incumbent, or a British prime minister. Mr
Carter's comments will add to the mounting pressure on Mr Bush
and Mr Blair.
Mr Carter said he believed the momentum for the invasion came
from Washington and that many of Mr Bush's senior advisers had
long ago signalled their desire to remove Saddam by force. Once a
decision had been taken to go to war, every effort was made to
find a reason for doing do, he said.
"I think the basic reason was made not in London but in
Washington. I think that Bush Jnr was inclined to finish a war
that his father had precipitated against Iraq. I think it was
that commitment of Bush that prevailed over, I think, the better
judgement of Tony Blair and Tony Blair became an enthusiastic
supporter of the Bush policy".
Mr Carter's criticisms coincided with damaging claims yesterday
from a former White House anti-terrorism co-ordinator. Richard
Clarke said that President Bush ignored the threat from al-Qai'da
before 11 September but in the immediate aftermath sought to hold
Iraq responsible, in defiance of senior intelligence advisers who
told him that Saddam had nothing to do with the conspiracy.
With an eye to November's presidential elections, Mr Bush sought
on Friday to use the anniversary of the Iraq invasion to say that
differences between the US and opponents of the war belonged "to
the past".
Speaking at the White House, he told about 80 foreign
ambassadors: "There is no neutral ground in the fight between
civilisation and terror. There can be no separate peace with the
terrorist enemy."
But in the US and Britain, and elsewhere, there is growing anger
among people who believe the war in Iraq was at best a deadly
distraction and at worst an impediment to the war against
al-Qa'ida - diverting resources and energy from countering those
groups responsible for attacks such as the train bombings in
Madrid.
Over the weekend millions of anti-war protesters poured on to the
streets of cities around the world to call for the withdrawal of
US-led troops from Iraq. It was estimated that in Rome - which
saw the biggest crowds - up to one million turned out.
Mr Carter, 79, has recently published a novel. The Hornet's Nest
is centred on America's revolutionary war against the British.
That period had many lessons for the present day, Mr Carter said.
UK Independent Ltd.
*****************************************************************
8 AFP: UN nuclear watchdog chief urges Iran to be 'transparent'
WASHINGTON (AFP) Mar 21, 2004
Iran's government should be completely transparent with nuclear
inspectors to clear its name and prove the country's nuclear
program is solely for civilian use, UN nuclear watchdog chief
Mohamed ElBaradei said Sunday.
"Transparency is an absolute key if they want to clear their name
and for us to be able to conclude that the program is completely
for peaceful purposes," ElBaradei, the head of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said on CNN's "Late Edition."
Iran has been cooperating fully with the IAEA, but the discovery
of the extent of its program has created skepticism, he said.
ElBaradei said he hoped to touchdown in Iran "in the next couple
of weeks."
Iran's government has said IAEA inspectors can return to the
country on March 27, after originally postponing an early March
mission in order to protest against the agency's tough resolution
against the Islamic Republic.
"Iran had agreed to fully suspend its enrichment program as a
confidence-building measure, so we have to acknowledge we have
made a good headway along our effort to make sure that (the) Iran
program is completely for peaceful purpose," the United Nation's
inspector said.
"However, in the process we have discovered ... that this is a
sophisticated program, it's an extensive program and it's a
program that has been undeclared for over 15 years," he said.
"And in that context, as you understand, there's still a lot of
skepticism that something might still be hidden," he added.
ElBaradei, who took part in UN weapons inspections inside Iraq
prior to the US-led invasion, said inspections had dismantled
Iraq's nuclear program in
"We learned from Iraq that an inspection takes time, that we
should be patient, that an inspection can, in fact, work," he
said.
But Iraq should have been transparent with inspectors, he added.
"But one of the lessons that, if a country really wants to show
to the world that its programs are peaceful, weapons of mass
destruction program are peaceful, they ought to be transparent,
they ought to take a proactive approach."
WAR.WIRE
*****************************************************************
9 Secret U.S. Nuclear Wars
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 07:26:21 -0600 (CST)
Hi All,
This already happened but is important to be aware
of...
My Best,
David
////\\\\\
Kucinich to reveal details of secret U.S. nuclear wars
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 14, 2004
WHAT: Press conference
WHO: Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich and Dr.
Doug Rokke, PhD
WHERE: University of Illinois, Champaign Campus,
Illini Student Unit, Pine Room
WHEN: Monday, March 15th, 7:00 PM
Champaign, Ill. - Democratic Congressman and
presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich will hold a
press conference Monday to detail little-known
information about the nuclear content and
life-threatening effects of U.S. munitions that are
being used in Iraq and Afghanistan and which have been
used in other military conflicts beginning with the
1991 Gulf War.
Joining Kucinich will be Dr. Doug Rokke, PhD, retired
Army combat officer, and one of the world's leading
experts on the use of munitions containing radioactive
depleted uranium (DU). He served as a member of the
U.S. Army Medical Command's Nuclear, Biological, and
Chemical (NBC) special operations and teaching team
during the Gulf War. He is a confirmed casualty of
poisoning by DU, which has a half life of 4.5 billion
years.
Kucinich is expected to discuss the devastating health
consequences suffered by American servicemen and women
and their families and by civilians in Iraq,
Afghanistan, Kosovo, Serbia, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and
elsewhere because of DU munitions used by the U.S. and
other nations.
Kucinich is also expected to outline a plan to provide
medical testing and care to all military personnel,
veterans and others who have been exposed, as well as
demand that the U.S. and other responsible governments
perform complete environmental remediation wherever
military forces have used DU munitions.
"Depleted uranium weapons are an unacceptable threat
to life, a violation of international law, and an
assault on human dignity," says Kucinich. "We have an
obligation to do what is right for our servicemen and
women, for our children and our grandchildren, and for
all citizens of the world. We must ban the use of
depleted uranium in our military and worldwide; we
must provide medical care to all DU casualties; and we
must clean up all the places where weve used this
poison that has the power to kill for countless
generations, far into the future."
Contact: Matt Harris (o) 216.889.2004, (c)
216.403.3980,
press@kucinich.us; Nate Wilkes 602.221.6598
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
*****************************************************************
10 Hi Pakistan: ElBaradei for new rules to fight WMDs spread -->
March 22 2004
UNITED NATIONS - The head of the UN atomic watchdog agency
has called for international co-operation to devise new rules to
combat the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
In an interview on Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) television
Saturday, Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that nuclear
proliferation is now ‘a different ball game’ in which ‘either we
all will win or everybody would lose’.
‘The non-proliferation regime right now is absolutely under
growing stress,’ he said at the end of a three-day visit to
Washington, during which he conferred with President Bush and
other top US officials. ‘We are facing now the threat of
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, which is
everybody’s fight,’ Mr. ElBaradei added.
‘What we have seen with AQ Khan associates, the black market,
what we have seen with some of the al-Qaeda people interested in
nuclear weapons, makes it clear that this is a different ball
game and we have to revise the rules, and that really was the
focus of my discussion with President Bush Saturday,’ he added,
referring to the Pakistani scientist blamed for the spread of
nuclear technology to other countries.
‘I think the message I’m getting from Washington this week is
that we really need to put our heads together, not just the US
and IAEA, but everybody in the international system.’
Drawing an analogy with the fight against terrorism, he said
defeat would spell widespread doom. ‘It’s either we will win or
everybody would lose.’
Calling on the world community to look at the big picture, Mr.
ElBaradei declared, ‘There’s a lot of measures we need to take,
control of the nuclear material, better export control, better
authority for the Agency, less countries having enrichment and
reprocessing.’
Bush pressed for Iraq-9/11 link: Clarke
A former aide to President Bush on counter-terrorism has accused
him ignoring terrorism threats before the Sept. 11 attacks and
of making the United States less safe.
Richard Clarke, who headed a cyber security board, told CBS ’60
minutes’ in an interview aired Sunday he thought Bush had ‘done
a terrible job on the war against terrorism.’
‘I find it outrageous that the president is running for
re-election on the grounds that he’s done such great things
about terrorism. He ignored it. He ignored terrorism for months,
when maybe we could have done something to stop 9/11,” Clarke
told CBS.
In the aftermath of Sept. 11, he said, President Bush ordered
him to look for a link between Iraq and the attacks, despite
being told there didn’t seem to be one.
The Bush administration maintains that it cannot find any
evidence that the conversation about an Iraq-9/11 tie-in ever
took place.
The charge by his former top aide on counter-terrorism is an
embarrassment for President Bush as the election campaign heats
up. He is the second member of the Bush team to say that the
President was focused on Iraq even before the 9/11 attacks. His
Treasury Secretary, Paul O’neill, was the first to do so.
Clarke also tells CBS News that White House officials were tepid
in their response when he urged them months before Sept. 11 to
meet to discuss what he saw as a severe threat from al-Qaeda.
The No. 2 man on the president’s National Security Council,
Stephen Hadley, vehemently disagrees. He says Mr. Bush has taken
the fight to the terrorists, and is making the US homeland
safer.
Clarke says that as early as the day after the attacks,
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was pushing for retaliatory
strikes on Iraq, even though al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan.
Clarke suggests the idea took him so aback, he initially thought
Rumsfeld was joking.
He is due to testify next week before the special panel probing
whether the attacks were preventable.
His allegations are also made in a book being published Monday,
‘Against All Enemies.’
In the 60 Minutes interview and the book, Clarke tells what
happened behind the scenes at the White House before, during and
after Sept. 11.
When the terrorists stuck, it was thought the White House would
be the next target, so it was evacuated. Clarke was one of only
a handful of people who stayed behind. He ran the government
response to the attacks from the Situation Room in the West
Wing.
Clarke then tells Stahl of being pressured by Mr. Bush. ‘The
president dragged me into a room with a couple of other people,
shut the door, and said, ‘I want you to find whether Iraq did
this.’ Now he never said, ‘Make it up.’ But the entire
conversation left me in absolutely no doubt that George Bush
wanted me to come back with a report that said Iraq did this.
‘I said, ‘Mr. President. We’ve done this before. We have been
looking at this. We looked at it with an open mind. There’s no
connection.’
‘He came back at me and said, ‘Iraq! Saddam! Find out if there’s
a connection.’ And in a very intimidating way. I mean that we
should come back with that answer. We wrote a report.’
Clarke continued, ‘It was a serious look. We got together all
the FBI experts, all the CIA experts. We wrote the report. We
sent the report out to CIA and found FBI and said, ‘Will you
sign this report?’ They all cleared the report. And we sent it
up to the president and it got bounced by the National Security
Advisor or Deputy. It got bounced and sent back saying, ‘Wrong
answer. Do it again.’
Clarke was the president’s chief adviser on terrorism, yet it
wasn’t until Sept. 11 that he ever got to brief Mr. Bush on the
subject. Clarke says, prior to Sept. 11, the administration
didn’t take the threat seriously.
Clarke says Mr. Clinton ordered his Cabinet to go to battle
stations— meaning, they went on high alert, holding meetings
nearly every day. That, he says, helped thwart a major attack on
Los Angeles International Airport, when an al-Qaeda operative
was stopped at the border with Canada, driving a car full of
explosives. ‘He never thought it was important enough for him to
hold a meeting on the subject, or for him to order his National
Security Adviser to hold a Cabinet-level meeting on the
subject.’
Finally, says Clarke, “The cabinet meeting I asked for right
after the inauguration took place— one week prior to 9/11.’
In that meeting, Clarke proposed a plan to bomb al-Qaeda’s
sanctuary in Afghanistan, and to kill bin Laden. Hadley
staunchly defended the president.
‘The president heard those warnings. The president met daily
with George Tenet and his staff. They kept him fully informed
and at one point the president became somewhat impatient with us
and said, ‘I’m tired of swatting flies. Where’s my new strategy
to eliminate al-Qaeda?’
Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
11 Reuters: Al-Zawahri Says Al Qaeda Has Nuke Bombs -Biographer
Sun Mar 21, 2004 09:54 PM ET
SYDNEY (Reuters) - Al Qaeda's second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahri
claims the militant Islamic organization has bought briefcase
nuclear bombs on the central Asian black market, according to
Osama bin Laden's biographer.
Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir has told an Australian
Broadcasting Corporation television program, to be aired on
Monday night, that when he interviewed Osama bin Laden and
al-Zawahri in 2001 he asked whether al Qaeda had nuclear weapons.
Mir said al-Zawahri laughed and said: "Mr Mir, if you have US$30
million, go to the black market in central Asia, contact any
disgruntled Soviet scientist and a lot of dozens of smart
briefcase bombs are available.
"They have contacted us, we sent our people to Moscow, to
Tashkent, to other central Asian states and they negotiated and
we purchased some suitcase bombs," Mir quoted al-Zawarhi on the
ABC program "Enough Rope," recorded last Monday from Islamabad.
The Egyptian al-Zawahri, a doctor, is regarded as the brains of
al Qaeda and a key figure behind the September 11, 2001 attacks
on the United States.
Al Qaeda is suspected of having an interest in acquiring weapons
of mass destruction, whether nuclear, biological or chemical, but
no evidence of a program was found in searches of its bases after
the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Security experts say it is highly unlikely that bin Laden and his
al Qaeda network have got anywhere close to acquiring nuclear
weapon technology, but they do not rule it out.
Experts have long said it might be easier for al Qaeda to create
a dirty bomb -- a cocktail of non-fissile material and explosives
capable of creating damage -- but that would spread radioactivity
over only a limited area.
*****************************************************************
12 Business Standard: Americas ally - Pakistan
BS Magazine
Published : March 22, 2004
The US intends to give Pakistan a Major Non-Nato Ally (MNNA)
status. Others with this status are Argentina, Australia,
Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, New Zealand, South Korea,
Thailand and the Philippines. On Saturday India said it was
disappointed with this decision.
It was not made clear, however, whether the official
disappointment was with Pakistans new status or because it was
not informed in advance.
The US secretary of state, Colin Powell, had come visiting just a
couple of days previously to discuss the Indo-US relationship but
he kept mum on this MNNA decision.
Overall, too, the Indian reaction has been one of extreme
irritation. How could the US give this status to a country that
has just been caught selling nuclear weapons technology to Libya
and North Korea?
Surely, the US has security concerns about Pakistan that it does
not have with any of the others to whom it has given the same
status. Is this then the cynical price paid for Pak cooperation
in the hope of nabbing Osama bin Laden before voting day in the
US?
The issue must cause embarrassment to the government because Mr
Vajpayee had declared, during his summit meeting with President
Clinton in 2000, that India is Americas natural allya claim
that has never been reciprocated.
The point, though, is that India has usually been shy of getting
into military alliances, the sole exception (with the Soviet
Union in 1971) being forced on it by American alignment with
Pakistan.
And it is Pakistan that has more readily got into alliances with
the US: remember SEATO and CENTO. The Cold War is of course over,
but Pakistan remains a frontline state. Hence its usefulness to
the US, despite its generally dodgy behaviour.
Still, it is important to retain perspective, and to bear in mind
that the benefits to MNNAs are largely symbolic. MNNAs dont have
mutual defence and security guarantees that members of Nato have.
But they are eligible for priority delivery of excess defence
articles, stockpiling of US defence goods, purchase of depleted
uranium anti-tank rounds and participation in cooperative
research and development programmes.
They are also eligible for the Defence Export Loan Guarantee
(DELG) programme, which backs up private loans for commercial
defence exports. All of these will be useful to Pakistan, but
will not change the military balance with India.
Should India be miffed? Perhaps, but the important question is
whether the new relationship gives the US some control of
Pakistans nuclear weapons, or at least some say in how they
might be used.
If it does, it could mean an end to the kind of nuclear
sabre-rattling that Gen. Musharraf indulged in two years ago.
Equally, the chances of Pakistani nuclear secrets getting into
the wrong hands may now be less.
On its part, Pakistan now has an informal guarantee against
Indian attack which, given Indian superiority on the conventional
side, was its raison detre for developing nuclear weapons.
But whether this will make Pakistan a more responsible state
remains to be seen. If it does not, the US will surely face some
embarrassing questens,
Business Standard Ltd.
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002.
INDIA
Ph: +91-11-23720202-10. Fax: 011 - 23720201
Copyright & Disclaimer
editor@business-standard.com [editor@business-standard.com]
*****************************************************************
13 TMI at 25: Deadbeat Taxpayer
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:46:09 -0800
TMI at 25: A Legacy of Underemployment and Unpaid Taxes
March 22, 2004
Dear Editor:
The Journal has recently covered two important issues relating to our
community: outsourcing and tax reform. Unfortunately, staffing and the
annual tax assessments of Three Mile Island have steadily decreased since
the advent of deregulation.
On July 17, 1998 AmerGen announced that it reached an Agreement with
GPU to purchase TMI-1. According to AmerGen, their labor force has shrunk
from 804 (1998) to 643 (2002). Contract labor, including security, has
supplanted existing full-time positions, and the number of contractor and
subcontractor employees has grown from 65 (2000) to 103 (2002). The fact of
this matter is that the number of employees at TMI has decreased by 161.
These staffing numbers were also presented at the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission¹s (NRC) Annual Meeting in Middletown on April 9, 2003. AmerGen
representatives were present and included: Bruce Williams (TMI-1,
Vice-President); George Gellrich (TMI-1, Plant Manager); and, Ralph DeSantis
(Public Affairs Manager). All three remained silent and sat with their back
to the community during the public participation program.
However, the Company was quite vocal when it came time to pay their
property tax bill. AmerGen is currently disputing Dauphin County¹s $64.9
million assessment of TMI-1. According to TMI¹s owners, the plant is only
worth $5 million. This position is baffling given the Company's recent
purchase of British Energy¹s 50% share of AmerGen, (which includes TMI-1),
for $276.5 million.
Capacity uprates have increased the value of TMI since the plant was
sold. In 1999, at the time TMI changed ownership, its book value was $512
million.
However, in 1998 deregulation shifted power plants back to the local tax
rolls under the assumption that utilities would pay at least the same amount
had they been subject to real estate taxes. TMI¹s Appeal of the County¹s
property assessment is pending.
From 1998 through 2003, according to AmerGen, TMI¹s tax payments to
Dauphin County have steadily decreased: 1998: $506,956; 1999: $206,397;
2000: $129,171; 2000 through 2001: $146,940; and, 2002 through 2003
$146,940. The figures from 2000-2003 reflect an Interim Settlement Agreement
amount. AmerGen may actually pay less in future years if they win their
Appeal.
If an average citizen unilaterally devalued their property, sued the
county, and laid off employees as their capacity increased, they would not
be rewarded with the mantle of ³good neighbor².
Sincerely,
Eric Joseph Epstein,
EFMR Monitoring, Coordinator
213 S. Union Street
Middletown, PA 17057
#944-3007
ericepstein@comcast.net
*****************************************************************
14 Brattleboro Reformer: Selectboard to meet with nuclear experts
[http://www.reformer.com/]
March 22, 2004 Brattleboro, VT
BRATTLEBORO -- Two experts on nuclear energy will meet with the
Brattleboro Selectboard on Monday at 6 p.m. to give a
presentation on plant operation and on nuclear energy works.
Howard Schaffer III has worked extensively in the nuclear
industry since 1970 and has also worked as an independent nuclear
consultant. He is a member of the American Nuclear Society and
the Union of Concerned Scientists. Gerald Peterson is an emeritus
professor of physics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
The meeting was planned to assist the board in reviewing the
Vermont Yankee evacuation plan. It is open to the public.
*****************************************************************
15 FCW.com: Nuke agency shines bright in security
[http://www.fcw.com/vendorsolutions/army_ites_04/]
NRC, DOT explain big jumps in security grades
BY Diane Frank [dfrank@fcw.com]
March 22, 2004
RELATED LINKS
2003 Federal Computer Security Report Card
[http://www.reform.house.gov/tiprc/Hearings/EventSingle.aspx?Even
tID=652]
"Government gets 'D' on security" [FCW.com, Dec. 9, 2003]
"Evans on security: At least it's improving" [FCW.com, Dec. 12,
2003]
Managing an agency's information security is an ongoing
struggle, and it is virtually impossible to reach a completely
secure state. But two federal agencies have found a way to earn
better grades: If you teach them, they will lock systems down.
The Transportation Department and the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission took two of the biggest jumps to improve their grades
on the annual Computer Security Report Card issued in December
by Rep. Adam Putnam (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Government
Reform Committee's Technology, Information Policy,
Intergovernmental Relations and the Census Subcommittee.
The secret is simple: Teach everyone at the agency, from the
board room to the computer room, the importance of security and
practice the procedures to make it work.
NRC, in fact, received the only A with a score of 94.5 in 2003,
which moved the agency up from a C on the 2002 report card.
DOT had nowhere to go but up and still has a long way to go. In
2002, DOT received one of 13 Fs when it scored a 28. But this
year's grade improved to 69, which is a D-plus.
DOT's grade is still lagging, but Rebecca Leng, DOT's deputy
assistant inspector general for information technology and
computer security, said the department deserves kudos for the
jump because "we made them work very hard."
Agency inspector generals serve an important role under the
Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 as
independent reviewers. Security management improves considerably
when the inspector general's office works closely with the chief
information officer's staff to make improvements, Leng said.
"We have to make sure management understands that we still have
a lot of unfinished business...to make sure that we don't slip
on the security issue," she said.
NRC leaders also were critical in improving the agency's grade,
according to CIO Ellis Merschoff.
"It's a pleasure to be a CIO at an agency that recognizes the
importance of computer security and is willing to provide the
support and funds to carry it out," he said.
But there were specific actions that also helped NRC. The agency
instituted a four-level review structure for its systems and
programs, said Charlotte Turner, acting senior information
security officer. The checklist ensures that critical issues,
including security concerns, are addressed and fulfilled four
levels before gaining final approval.
The review structure starts with a branch manager-level focus
group, moves up to a division director-level council, then to an
office director-level senior advisory council and finally to the
executive director-level committee.
An important goal is to drum accountability into the business
staff that has direct responsibility for overseeing systems,
said Louis Numkin, one of the agency's three full-time security
officers.
"The owner actually runs the ship; we're there to guide them,"
he said.
NRC has instituted a security training and awareness program
that other agencies are copying, including the U.S. Mint and the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
The program focuses on the CyberTyger character created eight
years ago, which appears on everything from calendars to
first-aid items distributed at NRC. The character symbolizes
information security. Numkin said NRC conducts regular events to
make sure that everyone working at the agency, not just the IT
staff, understands the importance of security.
Both organizations use a standardized certification and
accreditation process, said Lisa Schlosser, DOT's associate CIO
for IT program management.
"Instead of trying to piecemeal [certification and
accreditation], we brought it to the departmental level with a
department-level team," she said. "One team, one methodology,
standardized templates."
//www.101com.com] ©2004 FCW.com is a product
of FCW Media Group, a division of 101communications
LLC
[http://www.101com.com] .
*****************************************************************
16 Reuters: UPDATE 1-Constellation's Md. Calvert Cliffs 1 nuke reduced
Mon Mar 22, 2004 08:11 AM ET
NEW YORK, March 22 (Reuters) - Constellation Energy Group Inc.'s
(CEG.N: Quote
[http://www.investor.reuters.com/FullQuote.aspx?ticker=CEG.N&targ
et=%2fstocks%2fquickinfo%2ffullquote] , Profile
[http://www.investor.reuters.com/CompanyOverview.aspx?ticker=CEG.
N] , Research
[http://www.investor.reuters.com/StockReports.aspx?ticker=CEG.N]
) 850 megawatt Calvert Cliffs 1 nuclear unit in Maryland was at
35 percent power early Monday after it tripped off line on
Saturday due to the loss of a feedwater pump, the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission said in a daily report.
The unit, in Lusby, Maryland, had been running at full power on
Friday, the NRC said in a previous report.
The unit is expected to ramp back up to full power before
shutting in early April for planned refueling and maintenance.
Based on past refueling outages at the plant, it is expected to
shut about April 9 for about 30 days for the outage.
One MW is enough to power 1,000 homes.
Meanwhile, the adjacent 850 MW Unit 2 continued to operate at
full power on Monday, according to the NRC's power reactor status
report.
Constellation Nuclear operates the nuclear reactors of its parent
company, Constellation of Baltimore, Maryland.
*****************************************************************
17 ABC: A restart for nuclear power? -
2004-03-22 - Atlanta Business Chronicle
[http://www.bizjournals.com/] » Atlanta » Contents »
EXCLUSIVE REPORTS From the March 19, 2004 print edition 25 years
after Three Mile Island
A restart for nuclear power?
Industry, government want to build new plants Mary Jane Credeur
Staff writer
Almost 25 years have passed since a partial meltdown at Three
Mile Island sent the fledgling nuclear power industry reeling and
led regulators to halt construction of new plants.
But now, nuclear experts say the necessary framework for new
nuclear plants is falling into place. American reliance on
nuclear energy is likely to grow significantly in coming decades
as stricter air pollution laws and rising natural gas prices
entice energy companies to invest in fuel that doesn't create
toxic emissions, said nuclear industry executives and academics.
Southern Nuclear Operating Co., a subsidiary of Atlanta-based
Southern Co. (NYSE: SO), currently operates six nuclear units in
Georgia and Alabama, with about 16 percent of all the energy in
its entire system coming from those nuclear plants.
"Nuclear is an important part of Southern Co.'s diverse fuel mix
... [and we] believe that new nuclear [plants] should remain an
option for consideration in the future," said Steve Higginbottom,
spokesperson for Southern Nuclear.
Higginbottom added Southern Nuclear has no immediate plans to
build or acquire new units, and is instead focused on running its
current units.
In other parts of the country, though, the Nuclear Energy
Institute policy group is advocating new nuclear plants.
Utility companies Entergy Corp. (NYSE: ETR), Exelon Corp. (NYSE:
EXC) and Dominion Resources Inc. (NYSE: D) have already applied
for early site permits at three locations -- one in western
Mississippi, one in central Illinois and one near Richmond, Va.
-- for possible nuclear plants.
"We're not looking to build one or two plants; we're talking a
couple of dozen plants over the next few decades," said NEI
spokesperson Steve Kerekes.
The nation's 103 nuclear plants now supply one-fifth of all the
electricity Americans consume -- the second-largest energy source
in the country behind coal -- and many of those plants are
running at 90 percent or greater capacity. In Georgia, 28.5
percent of all electricity comes from nuclear fuel. Federal
support
American energy consumption is projected to grow 30 percent
during the next 15 years, according to a 2001 report by the
National Energy Policy Development Group, which guides the
country's energy agenda.
Department of Energy officials have said they hope to bring at
least one new nuclear reactor on line by 2010, and they are
considering a licensing process that would shorten the nuclear
application cycle from 10-plus years to about 5 years.
Last year, the Senate supported $15 billion in federal loan
guarantees for new nuclear power plants, and a Senate energy bill
under consideration designates $3.8 billion for nuclear
subsidies, incentives and research. Several major Wall Street
investors have indicated they would consider financing new
nuclear plants.
Surveys by the Nuclear Energy Institute consistently indicate 60
percent of Americans favor the use of nuclear power.
"We've turned a big corner the last few years, from talking about
early [nuclear] plant closure or shutdowns to now adding new
plants because we need the capacity," said Gilbert Brown, a
professor in the nuclear engineering program at the University of
Massachusetts-Lowell, which has experienced an uptick in
enrollment in its nuclear program.
Brown believes a new nuclear plant will be built and fully
operational before the end of this decade, followed by the
construction of several additional plants during the next 20 or
30 years.
"With new financing, a little government support, prefabricated
designs and licensing within five or six years, now you're
talking about a potential business deal," Brown said.
He added new nuclear plants would propel the industry forward to
recover the "lost ground" from the Three Mile Island incident.
"We did all these projections and planned new plants in the
1970s, and then Three Mile Island happened and it scared the
pants off everybody and it set us back a long way," Brown said.
"It was a stunning moment in nuclear history, because it showed
us how much we didn't know and how much we hadn't planned for."
March 28, 1979
On the morning of March 28, 1979, a partial core meltdown
occurred at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant near Harrisburg,
Pa. On March 30, then-Gov. Dick Thornburgh ordered an advisory
evacuation around the Three Mile Island plant. Tens of thousands
of Pennsylvania residents fled the area in a panic.
In the decades that followed the worst nuclear accident in
American history, regulators have refused to grant any new
nuclear plant commissions, though they did allow partially built
plants to be completed and brought online.
Vivid recollections of the confusion and pandemonium surrounding
the Three Mile Island incident have stuck with many Americans who
vehemently oppose nuclear energy, said Charles Harman, professor
of mechanical engineering and materials science at Duke
University.
"A lot of people don't know how nuclear energy works and how safe
it is -- they just remember the panic," Harman said.
Most importantly, Harman said, the Three Mile Island incident
sparked a massive review and overhaul of the American nuclear
industry. The accident also led to the creation of the Institute
of Nuclear Power Operators, an Atlanta-based group that allows
nuclear companies to share information with each other.
"Because of Three Mile Island, the nuclear industry now has one
of the safest records of any other industry in the country,"
Harman said. "We've never had a nuclear casualty, not a one. And
we don't use the flammable materials they used at Chernobyl."
The commercial nuclear energy industry still faces many hurdles
to building new plants.
With price tags that often exceed $1 billion, nuclear plants can
easily cost three to five times more to construct than coal or
gas plants (though they are extremely efficient once built, since
the cost of nuclear fuel does not fluctuate). Environmental
opposition
Environmentalists don't like nuclear plants because they require
millions of gallons of water to cool the reactors, and the heated
water is usually dumped back into local rivers and streams,
disturbing natural habitats of fish and wildlife.
"Nuclear power is the most expensive way to boil water that's
ever been invented," said Stephen Smith, executive director for
the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, a nonprofit, nonpartisan
group that advocates energy efficiency and sustainability.
Anti-nuclear advocates also argue the plants would be prime
targets for potential terrorists.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission mandated security improvements
and additional training after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and
nuclear companies will have collectively invested nearly $1
billion by the end of 2004 meeting these new safety requirements,
according to the Nuclear Energy Institute. The FBI classifies
nuclear plants as "difficult targets" because of their security
and monitoring practices.
More pressing is the billions of dollars needed to finish
development of the national spent fuel repository at Yucca
Mountain in Nevada, and the tens of millions more required to
transport spent rods via truck or rail to Yucca Mountain.
Another issue is the age of the country's 103 nuclear plants, all
of which are 30-plus years old and will eventually need to be
decommissioned.
In recent years, about half of all nuclear plants have applied
for license renewals that would allow them to operate 20 or more
additional years.
Duke professor Harman predicts some sort of political "watershed
event" will occur within a few years, allowing licensing of
several new nuclear plants. The frequency of license renewals for
existing plants is a strong indicator regulators are open to the
idea, he said.
"The industry has done as much as it possibly can with the
capacity it has today," he said. "Nothing new can happen until we
start building new plants."
Reach Credeur at mjcredeur@bizjournals.com.
© 2004 American City Business Journals Inc.
*****************************************************************
18 Patriot-News: TMI 25 YEARS LATER
'I didn't really comprehend the effects'
IN HER OWN WORDS
Monday, March 22, 2004
Maxine Swider and her husband, Tom, had two boys when the
accident at Three Mile Island happened. One of those children,
Martin, developed pancreatic cancer and died on March 10, 1996.
He was 23.
We were living in Colonial Park. ... When [the accident occurred]
I was working at Villa Theresa, [a nursing home in Union Deposit]
and I didn't know enough about it to be really scared.
But people were leaving, so I took the boys to ... my hometown,
Lansford [near Jim Thorpe], and they stayed with their
grandparents. 
[http://ads1.advance.net/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.ads/www.pennlive.
com/xml/story/n/news/@StoryAd?x] After a week we brought them
back. Maybe if I had kept them away for longer, it wouldn't have
happened.
I didn't really comprehend what the effects could have been. Had
I realized it could do what it apparently has done I would have
kept him away a long time and not cared about school or anything
else. I just didn't have a clue, you know? Not at all.
[Marty] was a kid who had allergies. He was always at the doctors
for allergies or bones growing abnormally.
I thought about [TMI] all the time. I mean, the times he would
get sick and all the doctoring he did. Just about every time
something would crop up, I'd be afraid it was cancer.
He got sick in 1994. ... He got really sick on his honeymoon.
They came home, and he was just down. He had stomach pains and
nausea.
A month or two later, he and his wife ...[went to] an oncologist.
I kind of knew that it was a bad one right away, so I started
reading up on it. The survival rate [for pancreatic cancer] at
two years was only 2 percent.
I really do [believe TMI caused the cancer]. I do. ... People who
get pancreatic cancer are usually men that smoked and drank.
They're usually around 80 years old. The only thing he had in
common with other pancreatic cancer patients was that he was
Italian. It's a little bit higher with them.
... When he had his surgery ... the first thing that the surgeon
... said was had he ever been exposed to large doses of
radiation? And I said maybe. Because we lived near Three Mile
Island, and we were there.
And he said I've found two types of cancer, and that's very
unusual.
... None of the doctors around here had ever seen a young person
with pancreatic cancer. Never. None of them that I talked to.
... He knew. When you get cancer you wonder why the hell you have
it, especially if you are such a young person. You have to find a
reason.
Copyright 2004 The Patriot-News. Used with permission.
*****************************************************************
19 Patriot-News: TMI's uncertain legacy: How did it affect our health?
Monday, March 22, 2004 BY GARRY LENTON
Of The Patriot-News
After Debbie Baker gave birth to a son 24 years ago, she started
investigating a possible link between her baby's Down syndrome
and the radiation leak from Three Mile Island in 1979.
She has never found a satisfying answer.
Studies, including one based on 36,000 people who lived near the
island, have found no substantive links between the accident and
public health. But others suggest that some residents may have
been victimized by radiation.
[http://ads1.advance.net/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.ads/www.pennlive.
com/xml/story/n/news/@StoryAd?x]
No study, though, has produced the smoking gun that will give
people such as Baker the answer they have waited decades to hear.
The unanswered questions are TMI's longest-lasting legacy.
The accident changed Baker's life. She and her husband, Blaine,
and their daughter moved from their home in Fairview Park, five
miles from the plant in northern York County, to the Halifax
area. They moved again a few years later, to Camp Hill, to be
closer to services for their son.
After Brad's birth, Baker spent months in the state library
studying radiation and its health effects. What she learned
persuaded her to join a class-action lawsuit against then-TMI
owner Metropolitan Edison. The lawsuit was settled out of court
in 1985, and Baker received a cash payment, the amount of which
she is not permitted to disclose.
But the money wasn't what she wanted.
"I wanted my day in court," Baker said. And to this day, she is
disappointed that the case never went to trial.
"It would have been nice to know beyond a reasonable doubt," she
said.
Others wonder, too.
Irene Setlak of Chambers Hill lost her son, David, to colon
cancer three years ago. He had been a security guard at TMI.
"I feel that Three Mile Island really contributed to it," she
said. "Of course, I'm no doctor or scientist. I'm just his
mother."
Maxine Swider of Susquehanna Twp. lost her son to pancreatic
cancer. Martin Swider died three years ago, leaving behind a wife
and a newborn. He was 7 years old and living in Colonial Park
when the accident occurred.
"The first thing that the surgeon [asked] was had he ever been
exposed to large doses of radiation," Maxine Swider recalled.
The aftermath of the accident spawned many stories of rare
cancers, pets that delivered deformed litters and plants that
developed abnormalities. And each one fuels the doubt many feel
about the veracity of the government health studies.
"All of their [studies] said that there was not enough radiation
released to establish a cause," said Mary Ouassiai, formerly Mary
Osborn, an area resident who helped gather data for studies after
the accident.
She rejects that explanation.
Government officials "have something to cover up. The people here
don't," she said. "The key thing is the symptoms that people had.
They were classic radiation symptoms."
Radiation hard to measure:
Studies of the radiological effects of the accident have been
performed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Environmental
Protection Agency, the Department of Health, Education and
Welfare (now Health and Human Services), the Department of Energy
and the state of Pennsylvania.
Those studies estimate that 2 million people were exposed to 1
millirem of radiation. A standard chest X-ray would be about 6
millirems, according to the NRC.
But none of the studies found a link to the accident. The amount
of radiation released during the accident was too small,
officials said.
Critics said some instruments used to measure radiation releases
"maxed out" during the accident. The exact level of radiation is
not known, they said.
Nor were there enough monitors on the ground to capture spikes in
radiation that may have traveled in narrower bands carried by the
wind. If the accident were to occur today, more reliable
information would be available to researchers.
Radiation monitors are maintained by TMI's owner, Exelon Nuclear;
the EFMR Monitoring Group; the Citizens' Monitoring Network; and
the state Bureau of Radiation Protection.
The absence of reliable data makes tying a particular cancer to
TMI very difficult, said Joel Hirsch, director of epidemiology
for the state Health Department.
"The difficulty in any of these studies is that none of us walks
around with a meter on our shoulder to know what we have been
exposed to," he said.
It is nearly impossible for scientists to separate the effect of
1 millirem of radiation from the other cancer-causing elements
people are exposed to, such as pesticides, smoking and fumes from
paint or gasoline.
"The known science is not there yet," Hirsch said. "That is a
very difficult pill for any of us to swallow when we want to have
something to blame our particular health problem on."
Dr. Steven Wing, author of a study that found higher rates of
lung cancer in the population around TMI after the accident,
acknowledged the discomfort the public feels when scientific
studies are in conflict.
"The public has very high expectations for science," said Wing,
an epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill. "Unfortunately, a lot of the time, science has only a very
weak ability to address the questions that for people are most
important."
Infant deaths showed a rise:
One health impact of the accident is not in dispute:
psychological stress.
"There was an emotional impact, and it did have effects that
could lead to health consequences," said Dr. Andrew Baum, a
deputy director with the University of Pittsburgh Cancer
Institute who conducted a six-year study after the accident.
Baum's study, based on 120 area people, found higher
blood-pressure rates after the accident and some immunological
differences. The results could have been caused by stress or
radiation from the accident.
"We don't know," Baum said.
The state Health Department found that women who were pregnant at
the time of the accident used more sedatives, which could have
contributed to a rise in low-birth-weight babies, said Richard
Garvey, a spokesman for the department. The data show that the
effect was short-lived.
Winston Richards, an assistant professor of mathematics at Penn
State's Harrisburg campus, found a spike in infant deaths in
Dauphin County after the accident.
Using data collected by the state Department of Health, Richards
found that those deaths increased from 40 in 1978 to 57 in 1980.
The 43 percent increase has a very small chance of occurring
naturally, he said.
The death rates remained higher than expected for about 15 years.
They are only now returning to normal, Richards said.
The results suggest that something happened around 1979 to cause
the Dauphin County spike. But they don't prove that the trigger
was TMI, he said.
"We can't establish causality, but we can be suspicious," he told
faculty members and staff at Penn State's medical school last
month.
Whether the accident affected public health remains an open
question, Richards said. But it is not too late to try to answer
it, he added.
"I think more can be done," he said. "We live in a very dangerous
time, and we should have a sense of what happened."
GARRY LENTON: 255-8264 or glenton@patriot-news.com
Copyright 2004 The Patriot-News. Used with permission.
*****************************************************************
20 NRC: NRC Proposes $60,000 Fine Against Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant
News Release - Region III - 2004-01
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region III
No. III-04-013 March 19, 2004
CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663
Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov
[opa3@nrc.gov]
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed a $60,000 fine
against Nuclear Management Company for making changes without
NRC approval to the emergency plan at the Point Beach Nuclear
Plant that decreased its effectiveness. The plant is located
near Two Rivers, Wisconsin.
Between July 28 and December 16, 2003, the NRC conducted a
special inspection to review the utilitys corrective actions
for two findings of high safety significance in the auxiliary
feedwater system. The inspection involved a comprehensive review
of principal aspects of plant operations, including a review of
the plants emergency preparedness.
NRC inspectors found that between October 1998 and December
1999, changes had been made to the emergency action level (EAL)
scheme that reduced the effectiveness of Point Beachs emergency
plan without requesting and obtaining NRC approval. These
changes also resulted in use of a non-standard emergency level
scheme, which is used to properly identify the level of
emergency at a nuclear power plant and to determine the
appropriate actions that must be taken in response to the
emergency.
The failure to receive NRC approval before changing EALs that
decrease the effectiveness of the Emergency Plan is a
significant safety issue. The failure to submit the changes and
receive NRC approval prevents the NRC from performing its
regulatory function and potentially prevents the NRC from
ensuring the health and safety of the public, writes James L.
Caldwell, regional administrator for NRCs Region III in Lisle,
Illinois, in his March 17 letter to the Nuclear Management
Company.
During a predecisional enforcement conference conducted on
January 13 of this year, between the NRC and Nuclear Management
Company, to discuss the apparent violation, its significance,
root causes and the companys corrective actions, it became
apparent that the utility had failed to take appropriate
immediate correction action to restore the emergency plan to
compliance.
Subsequently, Nuclear Management Company has taken appropriate
action to restore the emergency plan to compliance and has
initiated a review of emergency plans at other nuclear power
plants operated by the company and to correct problems as they
are found.
The company has until April 16 to pay the fine or to protest it.
If the fine is protested and subsequently imposed by the NRC
staff, Nuclear Management Company can request a hearing.
The notice to the company of the proposed fine and the notice of
violation are available from the Region III Office of Public
Affairs and on the NRCs web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/enforcement/actions
/reactors/p.html#PointBeach.
Last revised Monday, March 22, 2004
*****************************************************************
21 NRC: NRC Issues License for Diablo Canyon Independent Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage Installation
News Release - 2004-03
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200
Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov
No. 04-034 March 22, 2004
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a license to the
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to operate an
independent spent nuclear fuel storage installation at its
Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant site in San Luis Obispo
County, California.
PG&E intends to transfer used nuclear reactor fuel that has
already cooled significantly from spent fuel pools at the Diablo
Canyon plant into dry casks. The new spent fuel storage
installation will provide sufficient additional interim spent
fuel storage capacity to support the continued operation of the
plants two reactors until the current operating licenses expire
(September 2021 for Unit 1 and April 2025 for Unit 2).
The installation will employ a version of the HI-STORM 100
dry-cask storage system, designed by Holtec International, Inc.,
and previously approved by the NRC. The system includes a steel
canister that can hold up to 32 spent fuel assemblies, an
overpack of concrete and steel to hold the canister and
provide additional shielding against radiation, and a transfer
cask used to move the loaded canisters from the plants
fuel-handling building to the storage site. The Diablo Canyon
installation can accommodate up to 140 storage casks anchored to
seven concrete storage pads.
The agency has also issued a Safety Evaluation Report for the
proposed spent fuel storage installation. The report summarizes
the NRC staffs analyses of potential effects on the
installation from a wide range of natural and man-made hazards,
such as flooding, lightning, fire, earthquakes, and explosions.
The report describes the NRC staffs conclusions that the
storage installation proposed by PG&E conforms with statutory
and regulatory requirements and will provide adequate protection
of public health, safety and the environment.
The license is effective for 20 years, and may be renewed.
PG&E applied for the license in December 2001. In addition to
safety reviews and an environmental assessment by the NRC staff,
the agency offered an opportunity for interested persons to
request a formal adjudicatory hearing on the application.
Several local individuals, agencies and citizen groups
petitioned to participate in such a hearing. The NRCs Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board held several sessions in California
to review the petitions, including one in March 2003 to hear
statements from members of the public. Ultimately, the Board
found in favor of the applicant and in August authorized
issuance of the license. That ruling was appealed to the
Commission, which upheld it in October. (Note: There is a
judicial challenge to the Commissions ruling pending in the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.)
The Diablo Canyon independent spent fuel storage installation
license, technical specifications, and Safety Evaluation Report
will be available through the NRCs ADAMS document management
system at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html,
with accession number ML040780107. For assistance in using
ADAMS, contact the agencys Public Document Room at 301-415-4737
or 1-800-397-4209. For more information about dry-cask storage
of spent nuclear fuel, see the NRCs Fact Sheet, at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/dry-cas
k-storage.html.
Last revised Monday, March 22, 2004
*****************************************************************
22 [DU-WATCH] World Uranium Weapons Conference Audio
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:05:53 -0600 (CST)
Media Advisory - March 22, 2004
The World Depleted Uranium/Uranium Weapons Conference, held in Hamburg, Oct
16-19, is now available for audio download and replay/airplay at
http://www.traprockpeace.org/depleted_uranium_hamburg03.html
You may also pre-order the Conference Reader through this link.
More than 200 participants represented 21 nations, including Iraq,
Afghanistan, Australia, Japan, Canada, Sweden, Ireland, France, Germany,
Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands, Austria, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Algeria,
Cuba, and Malta, UK and the US.
Over 35 speakers including scientists, medical professionals, Iraqi medical
and environmental professionals, independent researchers, international
legal experts, military professionals, a nuclear weapons lab whistleblower,
a prosecutor for the International War Crimes Tribunal for Afghanistan,
veterans and their families, civilians, NGO, and peace and
anti-globalization activists presented their most recent findings and issues
about the effects of these illegal weapons. Iraqi scientist, Dr. Souad
Al-Azzawi, received the internationally recognized Nuclear Free Future
Award and prize of 10,000 Euros on October 12, just prior to the Conference.
She presented her findings on environmental studies of DU contamination of
air, soil and water in southern Iraq from the 1991 Gulf War. For information
on the speakers, see http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de/speakers.htm
The evidence coming from the scientists, health professionals and legal
experts at this Conference is clear: "DU is causing significant health
effects worldwide, and it illegal under existing international law and
convention," concluded conference planner Marion K|pker, co-coordinator of
the German anti-weapons group Gewaltfreie Aktion Atomwaffen Abschaffen
(GAAA). "Now it's up to the activist community to force rogue governments
like the US and Britain to observe international law the same way they
preach it to other nations."
The Index at http://www.traprockpeace.org/depleted_uranium_hamburg03.html
is primarily audio, with links to 34 mp3 format files of presentations and
interviews that are downloadable. They may be copied for non-profit use,
replayed on computers, or burned to CD audio format for replay on CD players
or by radio stations. We encourage distribution to radio programs which are
free to use the material. In the few cases where audio was not available, we
have provided the text of presentations or other pertinent resources. In
addition, you will find select conference reports and a conference
photo-album.
The audio index, with related resources, was a collaborative effort of the
Conference and Traprock Peace Center.
For information on the conference, with conference reports and resolutions,
see http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de/
Charles Jenks, attorney at law
President of the Core Group
Traprock Peace Center
103A Keets Road
Deerfield, MA 01342
413-773-1633; Fax 413-773-7507
charles@mtdata.com
http://traprockpeace.org
[Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
23 [DU-WATCH] DU leads to sufferng in Iraq
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:40:22 -0600 (CST)
Kazuko Ito: Depleted uranium leads to suffering in Iraq
Asahi Weekly (Japan), March 19, 2004
http://www.asahi.com/english/opinion/TKY200403190179.html
Self-Defense Forces troops have been dispatched to Iraq, where
violence shows no signs of abating. It is debatable whether sending
the SDF to such a dangerous area constitutes an international
contribution that does not violate the Constitution.
And we have to face up to the issue of depleted uranium. Between
800 tons and 2,000 tons of depleted uranium ordnance were fired in
the Iraq war. Residual radioactivity from spent shells now contaminates
the entire nation.
As a prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan
formed under the initiative of a citizens' group, I surveyed
scientists' reports on how depleted uranium affects the living. In
October, I took part in an international conference on the subject
in Germany, where I was shocked to learn that depleted uranium
ordnance is causing irreparable damage to the people.
Depleted uranium, a byproduct of the production of enriched uranium,
is a highly toxic, radioactive substance with a half-life of 4.5
billion years. When shells made from depleted uranium are fired,
they discharge large quantities of radioactivity. If a human being
absorbs that radiation in the air or drinking water, contamination
continues within the body, damaging cells and triggering diseases
such as cancer or causing congenital abnormalities among the children
of people exposed to the radiation.
A declassified 1943 memorandum, addressed to a general and written
by a U.S. scientist who took part in the Manhattan project, explains
in detail the deadly effectiveness of the ``radioactive weapons''
that eventually became the model for depleted uranium ordnance.
Records kept by the U.S. Department of Defense that I have read
show that the U.S. military has been conducting studies on depleted
uranium, including animal tests, since 1974.
At the international conference in Germany, I spoke with Doug Rokke,
who led a project that examined the effects of depleted uranium in
soldiers at the Pentagon in 1994. According to Rokke, the project's
findings made clear to him how serious the effect of depleted uranium
is on humans. He urged that such weapons be banned, but his warning
was ignored by the military and the project eventually disbanded.
More than 200,000 U.S. soldiers returned from the Persian Gulf War
suffering physical disorders, and about 10,000 of them have died,
Rokke said. While certain vaccinations are thought to have had an
deleterious impact on their health, depleted uranium also contributed
to their health problems, he said.
Rokke asked whether Japan does not care if its soldiers now face
the same danger.
Was this danger taken into account when the government decided to
go ahead with the SDF dispatch?
Even more ominous is the effect depleted uranium will have on the
health of Iraqis. The southern city of Basra was bombarded with
depleted uranium shells during the Persian Gulf War. In recent
years, cancer and congenital abnormalities have risen sharply among
local children. An Iraqi doctor handed me a large number of photographs
of patients suffering from depleted uranium-related disorders. They
left me speechless.
If we sit back and do nothing to stop the spread of radioactive
pollution during this Iraq conflict, many more people will die. We
must put an end to the occupation, and advance Iraqi reconstruction
under the initiative of the United Nations as soon as possible, so
that international society together can prevent the ravages of
depleted uranium from spreading. Research on the contamination must
be done, remaining pieces of depleted uranium ordnance must be
collected and contaminated soil removed.
An Iraqi doctor told me: ``We don't want you to send us an army.
We want you to help us. We need more anti-cancer, antibiotic and
intravenous medications.''
Deploying SDF troops is expected to cost tens of billions of yen.
If all that money were instead put toward medical aid in Iraq, it
would help a great many more people. Japan, a country that endured
World War II's atomic bombings, has the medical skill and technology
to treat patients suffering from radioactive contamination. We
should put medical aid ahead of any other kind of assistance.
Many people are dying slow, quiet deaths because of their exposure
to depleted uranium pollution. What can Japan and the world do? To
start, the government should withdraw the SDF from Iraq and concentrate
on peaceful humanitarian relief, especially medical aid.
That, I believe, is the only honorable choice for Japan's international
contribution.
The author is a lawyer. She contributed this comment to The Asahi
Shimbun.(IHT/Asahi: March 19,2004) (03/19)
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
[Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
24 [DU-WATCH] Interview on DU in Iraq
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:02:48 -0600 (CST)
The interview can be seen
at:http://www.islamonline.net/livedialogue/english/Browse.asp?hGuestID=P70A9p
15/3/04
Good evening Jo,
You will be aware that the US and UK governments have now warned
their personnel in Iraq that they are in a harzardous health situation
due to the chemically toxic and radioactive depleted uranium (DU)
debris left from the munitions they used in the invasion of March-April
2003 and the residue of the same remaining from the 1991 Gulf war.
As you will know, this has been linked to so called Gulf war syndrome
and cancers, leukaemias and birth defects in Iraq and among 1991
war veterans, those in Afghanisatan and the Balkans, where these
weapons were again used. Many scientists say, as you will know,
that Du's pollution will outlive the life of the sun. It remains
radioactive for four and a half BILLION years.
Could you tell participants in this dialogue the warnings and advice
the Iraqi people are receiving in this respect from the US Authority,
the advice GO's such as yourself are receiving and the efforts made
to clean up this appalling hazard by the occupying forces - and
also warnings to people selling scrap metal which often comes off
tanks and vehicles hit bu DU and potentially life threatening.
I imagine the US and British Authorities must have huge warning
signs all over. Can you describe their pro-active initiatives in
this respect? I apologise for the length of this question.
Warmest greetings, felicity a.
Answer There is a huge tank cemetery near Daura where all the
burnt-out military hardware has been dumped, and there are children
working there, cutting pieces off the tanks for a small amount of
money, and there are no warnings at all. I asked one of the boys
if he'd been told anything at all about the dangers, and he said
some British journalists told him it might be dangerous, but he had
no other source.
There is a huge amount of fear about DU because the old Iraqi
government used to wield it as a sort of bogeyman, so people believe
that every niggle, every illness is caused by it, which is causing
huge suffering as well.
The Ministry of Health has been told that research into DU and its
effects is not a priority and no money has been allocated for it.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
[Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
25 [DU-WATCH] Nevada: Air force on cleanup of DU
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:02:43 -0600 (CST)
Pahrump Valley Times
http://www.pahrumpvalleytimes.com/2004/03/12/news/nts.html
March 12, 2004
Air Force plans to evaluate cleanup of depleted uranium MEETING
SCHEDULED MARCH 25 IN PAHRUMP
Nye County Department of Natural Resources and Federal Facilities
Director Les Bradshaw reported on Monday officials from the United
States Air Force will be in Pahrump at 6 p.m. March 25 to hold a
public meeting at the Bob Ruud Community Center. The topic is the
Air Force's intent to conduct an environmental assessment regarding
the cleanup of depleted uranium targets on the nearby Nevada Test
Site and Training Range.
In a summary published this week in the Federal Register, the
depleted uranium came from 30-millimeter armor piercing incendiary
rounds fired by A-10 pilots. The rounds contain "sub-caliber,
high-density depleted uranium penetrators" at the test site and
range.
The summary further states the assessment will be conducted in
compliance with several environmental authorities and is being done
to "determine the potential environmental impacts of removing targets
formerly used by A-10 aircraft to test the weapon.
According to the information contained in the Federal Register, the
Air Force will look at a number of potential disposal methods since
the range of damage to targets varies.
The Pahrump meeting is one of three planned for later this month
and is designed to receive public input "on alternatives, concerns,
and issues to be addressed in the environmental assessment."
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or
Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to
the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/Sj.0lB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
[Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
26 [DU-WATCH] America the bunker buster ...
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:05:29 -0600 (CST)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?
cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=World&cat=Osama_bin_Laden_and_al_Qaida
Once again, the Pashtun people are the convenient victims of
America's march to greatness and the legacy of democracy. We are so
proud of them using bunker busters to destroy the mud fortresses of
Afganistan. Musharif seeks rewards and gets Pakistan designated as
favoured nation status by white house this week. Can he turn up the
DNA of Ayman Al Zawahiri. Maybe Ayman's brother's (jailed in
Rawalpindi) DNA will suffice. Will they kill him or just take some
cells.
Opps! it looks like the fighters in Waziristan might not be the
dreaded Taliban/Al Qaeda after all. Could it be that its local
Afghans defencing against invaders. Could it be that the a mujahideen
that fought the Russ are now freedom fighters defending Pashtunistan
from the Amerikis?
[Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
27 [DU-WATCH] Citizens find Bush guilty of Afghan war crimes
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:02:29 -0600 (CST)
DEPLETED URANIUM SHELLS DECRIED
Citizens find Bush guilty of Afghan war crimes
By NAO SHIMOYACHI
Staff writer, The Japan Times: March 14, 2004
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20040314a5.htm
A citizens' tribunal Saturday in Tokyo found U.S.
President George W. Bush guilty of war crimes for
attacking civilians with indiscriminate weapons and
other arms during the U.S.-led antiterrorism
operations in Afghanistan in 2001.
The tribunal also issued recommendations for banning
depleted uranium shells and other weapons that could
indiscriminately harm people, compensating the victims
in Afghanistan and reforming the United Nations in
light of its failure to stop the U.S.-led operation
there.
The tribunal participants spent two years examining
Bush's role as the top commander in the war, making
eight field trips to Afghanistan and holding nearly 20
public hearings.
"Bush said that military presence in Afghanistan is
self-defense," said Robert Akroyd, a British lawyer
who served as one of the five judges.
"But under international law," he said, "a defendant
must pay great care to discriminate (between)
legitimate objects and civilians" in claiming that
one's act is self-defense, said Akroyd, former head of
legal studies at Aston University in Britain.
Bush failed to do so with the U.S. military's use of
"indiscriminate weapons such as the Daisy Cutter (a
huge conventional bomb), cluster bombs and depleted
uranium shells," he said.
Civilians and experts who have supported the tribunal
movement agreed to work for creation of an
international treaty that would prohibit the
production, stockpile and use of depleted uranium
rounds, like the Ottawa process that succeeded in 1997
in outlawing antipersonnel land mines.
Organizers said the tribunal on Afghanistan was the
latest attempt to try a head of state by the efforts
of citizens.
The history of citizens' tribunals dates back to the
1960s, when the British philosopher Bertrand Russell
and others tried to examine the acts of the U.S.
government during the Vietnam War.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/Sj.0lB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
[Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
28 [du-list] Soldiers accounts reveal new details: du rounds devestated US troops at An Nasiriyah
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:46:03 -0800
http://www.traprockpeace.org/du_friendly_fire.html
Soldiers' accounts reveal new details:
'depleted' uranium rounds devastated US troops at An
Nasiriyah
"It's bad enough to be shot, but to be shot with a
depleted uranium
round that basically turns you into a hand full of
mush."
- Col. Reed Bonadonna, field historian, talking to
NPR's Jackie Northam
Hear an clip (edited for brevity) containing the
Colonel's remarks
about DU. Listen also to the entire NPR reports (first
report deals
with 'friendly fire' incident).
On March 19, 2004 NPR aired the first of two reports
by Jackie Northam
on the experiences of US Marines in battle. 11 field
historians had
entered Iraq with Marine units and interviewed marines
after battle.
She was given access to 20 hours of interview tapes.
Her first report
concerns a battle on March 23, 2003 near An Nasiriyah,
during which an
A-10 repeatedly straffed US troops with 'depleted
uranium' rounds. As
reported by Jackie Northam, the Marine Corps says that
18 marines died
at An Nasiriyah that day but will not reveal how many
died from the DU
rounds.
It does seem clear though that previous assessments
undersestimated
Marine deaths from 'friendly fire' that day. Dan
Fahey, for example, in
his review of media accounts, reported the following
as part of his
assessment of DU use during Gulf War II:
23 March, near Nasiriyah A-10 fires on Marine Corps
vehicles attached
to 1st Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine
Expeditionary
Brigade. At least one vehicle, an armored assault
vehicle (possibly
AAVP7A1), is hit and penetrated by A-10 fire, killing
at least one
Marine and possibly wounding others. A total of nine
Marines and seven
vehicles were destroyed in this incident, although it
is believed Iraqi
forces caused the majority of the deaths and damage
during this
engagement. "The Use of Depleted Uranium in the 2003
Iraq War: An
Initial Assessment of Information and Policies," page
5. Dan Fahey,
June 24, 2003. [Fahey cited media sources for his
figures.]
Fahey's reporting of the belief that Iraqi forces
caused the majority
of the deaths and damage during the engagement appears
to this writer
to be a repeating of military spin. Listen to the
interviews (first
report) with soldiers soon after the battle. While the
military will
not disclose how many soldiers died that day from
friendly fire, that
is, from 'depleted' uranium rounds from the A-10, it
is clearly many
more than "at least one" as reported by Fahey, based
on US media
accounts. Sargeant Lonnie Parker said in the interview
said that they
lost the majority of their people from 'friendly' fire
that day.
Contrast the Fahey assessment with that of retired Air
Force Colonel
Sam Gardiner:
Gardiner writes: "A disheartening aspect of the white
flag story is
what is beginning to surface about what might have
been the real cause
of the Marine casualties near An Nasiriyah on March
23. Marines are
saying that nine of those killed may have been killed
by an A-10 that
made repeated passes attacking their position." Quoted
in The
not-so-friendly reality of US casualties, by David
Isenberg, Aaia
Times, Oct 22, 2003.
See also the Charlotte Observer, March 29, 2003
(questioning if 9
marines who were said to have been ambushed by Iraqi's
pretending to
surrender had actually been killed by 'friendly'
fire).
And for identification of individual soldiers killed
that day, see the
Washington Post, Faces of the
fallen,http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/iraq/casualties/
facesofthefallen.htm The Post reports that 18 marines
died in or around
An Nasiriyah that day, 12 due to an alleged ambush by
Iraqi soldiers
who reported to have pretended to surrender; and 6
"killed during
operations" on the outskirts of the city.
________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping"
your friends today! Download Messenger Now
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/FGYolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
29 Contam workers
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:46:04 -0800
Power Reactor Event Number: 40602
Facility: SUSQUEHANNA
Region: 1 State: PA
Unit: [1] [2] [ ]
RX Type: [1] GE-4,[2] GE-4
NRC Notified By: RONALD FRY
HQ OPS Officer: CHAUNCEY GOULD Notification Date: 03/21/2004
Notification Time: 16:03 [ET]
Event Date: 03/21/2004
Event Time: 12:32 [EST]
Last Update Date: 03/21/2004
Emergency Class: NON EMERGENCY
10 CFR Section:
INFORMATION ONLY Person (Organization):
HAROLD GRAY (R1)
Unit SCRAM Code RX CRIT Initial PWR Initial RX Mode Current
PWR Current RX Mode
1 N N 0 Refueling 0 Refueling
2 N Y 100 Power Operation 100 Power Operation
Event Text
THREE INJURIED NONCONTAMINATED CONTRACTORS WERE TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL.
"On 3/21/04 at 12:32 hrs a bucket truck working at the Unit 1 Cooling Tower
came in contact with a 230KV transmission line causing the loss of one off
site power supply to the plant. The 500 KV offsite circuit remained
energized during the event. A contract employee at the base of the truck was
thrown due to the electrical short. A contract employee in the bucket of the
truck was able to lower the bucket to the ground. A first aid crew was
dispatched to the location and an Ambulance was requested. The Ambulance
entered the site at 12:50 and at 13:02 the individuals were transported to
the local hospital. Due to the electrical transient in the plant, a contract
employee performing grinding activities lost control of the grinder and
injured his middle finger. This individual received first aid and was
transported to the local hospital by his supervisor. The individual injured
in the plant was surveyed by Health Physics prior to leaving the site and no
contamination was found. The Local Law Enforcement Agency was notified of
the Emergency vehicle being dispatched to the site. The State Emergency
Operations Center will be notified of the Emergency vehicle entering the
site."
The NRC Resident Inspector and local agencies were notified and the state
will be notified.
*****************************************************************
30 cotam worker
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:46:07 -0800
Power Reactor Event Number: 40602
Facility: SUSQUEHANNA
Region: 1 State: PA
Unit: [1] [2] [ ]
RX Type: [1] GE-4,[2] GE-4
NRC Notified By: RONALD FRY
HQ OPS Officer: CHAUNCEY GOULD Notification Date: 03/21/2004
Notification Time: 16:03 [ET]
Event Date: 03/21/2004
Event Time: 12:32 [EST]
Last Update Date: 03/21/2004
Emergency Class: NON EMERGENCY
10 CFR Section:
INFORMATION ONLY Person (Organization):
HAROLD GRAY (R1)
Unit SCRAM Code RX CRIT Initial PWR Initial RX Mode Current
PWR Current RX Mode
1 N N 0 Refueling 0 Refueling
2 N Y 100 Power Operation 100 Power Operation
Event Text
THREE INJURIED NONCONTAMINATED CONTRACTORS WERE TRANSPORTED TO THE HOSPITAL.
"On 3/21/04 at 12:32 hrs a bucket truck working at the Unit 1 Cooling Tower
came in contact with a 230KV transmission line causing the loss of one off
site power supply to the plant. The 500 KV offsite circuit remained
energized during the event. A contract employee at the base of the truck was
thrown due to the electrical short. A contract employee in the bucket of the
truck was able to lower the bucket to the ground. A first aid crew was
dispatched to the location and an Ambulance was requested. The Ambulance
entered the site at 12:50 and at 13:02 the individuals were transported to
the local hospital. Due to the electrical transient in the plant, a contract
employee performing grinding activities lost control of the grinder and
injured his middle finger. This individual received first aid and was
transported to the local hospital by his supervisor. The individual injured
in the plant was surveyed by Health Physics prior to leaving the site and no
contamination was found. The Local Law Enforcement Agency was notified of
the Emergency vehicle being dispatched to the site. The State Emergency
Operations Center will be notified of the Emergency vehicle entering the
site."
The NRC Resident Inspector and local agencies were notified and the state
will be notified.
*****************************************************************
31 FT: Price-Anderson Act and nuclear plant safety in the US
By John Quattrocchi
Published: March 22 2004 4:00 | Last Updated: March 22 2004
From Mr John Quattrocchi.
Sir, The tone of Ellen Kelleher's article "Senate delay keeps lid
on nuclear power" (March 12) bordered on sensational. When I talk
about nuclear insurance, I have no need to refer to "Armageddon",
so I have to assume that either the reporter or the editor felt
that need. In any event, there are some errors that really should
be corrected.
First, while I am sure we talked about the importance of the
Price-Anderson Act to insurers and to the nuclear industry, I
would not have said that the biggest threat to the nuclear
insurance industry is the delay in renewing the Price-Anderson
Act. Since the provisions of the act are "grandfathered" and
continue to apply to all existing reactor licensees, the renewal
of the act is particularly important for the next generation of
reactors. How then does the delay in renewal become "the biggest
threat to the nuclear insurance industry"?
Second, the reference to the Price-Anderson Act being a
government-subsidised insurance programme is incorrect. While the
article did not attribute that opinion to me, the reporter should
have attributed it to a source and should also have stated it as
an opinion and not as fact. In fact, a "subsidy" is generally
defined as a grant of money by a government to a private person
or organisation. In the Price-Anderson context, insurance
premiums are entirely paid by the nuclear industry.
Moreover, nuclear power plant operators have, in fact, paid
millions of dollars in indemnity fees to the government and the
government has never paid anything on behalf of those operators.
How then can the FT characterise the Price-Anderson Act as "the
government's subsidised insurance programme"?
John Quattrocchi, Senior Vice President, Underwriting, American
Nuclear Insurers, Glastonbury, CT 06033, US
© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2004. "FT" and
"Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times.
*****************************************************************
32 NRC: KTL Roudebush Testing, Kansas City, MO; Order Suspending License
FR Doc 04-6275
[Federal Register: March 22, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 55)]
[Notices] [Page 13336-13339] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22mr04-93]
(Effective Immediately) and Demand for Information KTL Roudebush
Testing (Licensee) is the holder of Byproduct Material License
No. 24-26628-01 issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC
or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR parts 30 and 34. The license
authorizes the possession and use of iridium-192 in sealed
sources for industrial radiography, and cesium-137 and
americium-241 in sealed sources for measuring physical properties
of materials, at temporary job sites of the Licensee anywhere in
the United States where the NRC maintains jurisdiction for
regulating the use of licensed material. The license identifies
Christopher V. Roudebush as the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO).
Mr. Roudebush is the President and owner of KTL Roudebush
Testing, and he serves as a Licensee radiographer. The license,
originally issued on November 20, 1995, was last amended on
January 16, 2004, and is due to expire on March 31, 2011.
On April 8, 2003, two NRC inspectors attempted to inspect the
Licensee's activities and inquired about radiography at temporary
job sites. The Licensee's RSO indicated that the Licensee might
be performing radiography work at the Kansas City Power & Light
Iatan Generating Station located in Weston, Missouri on either
Thursday or Friday (April 10 or 11, 2003). On the morning of
April 10, 2003, the inspectors again called the Licensee
inquiring about radiography at temporary job sites. A Licensee
employee, a radiographer's assistant, answered and stated that
the Licensee's staff had just finished radiography at a temporary
job site in Weston, Missouri, and was preparing to return to the
main office. Following the telephone conversation, the inspectors
drove to the Licensee's office at 1606 Cherry Street, Kansas
City, Missouri and waited for the work crew to return. When a
Licensee
[[Page 13337]] radiographer returned to the office, the
inspectors evaluated the Licensee's transport of the radiographic
exposure devices within the vehicle and discovered that one of
the devices was not properly secured in the vehicle and shipping
papers were not present.
When the RSO returned to the office, the inspectors conducted an
inspection of the Licensee's records that are required by 10 CFR
Part 34. During the inspection, the RSO presented the inspectors
with four records of the quarterly maintenance/inspection of
radiographic exposure devices. Two records were dated March 30,
2002, and two records were dated March 28, 2003. The records were
blank, other than the device identifiers and the dated signature
of the RSO. When questioned about the blank records, the RSO
stated that the 2002 maintenance/inspections were completed after
the dated signature and the resulting records were entered into
his office desktop computer. The RSO also stated that the records
for the maintenance/inspection of exposure devices for the second
through fourth quarters of 2002 were not available. The RSO
claimed that a Licensee employee had entered the information into
the computer and he was unable to retrieve these records. The RSO
also claimed that the employee may have removed these records
when he left the company under unfavorable conditions.
On April 14, 2003, one of the inspectors interviewed the former
employee by telephone. The former employee denied entering any
records of radiographic operations into a computer system
maintained by the Licensee and recalled the completed records
were normally handwritten. The inspection resulted in nine
unresolved items.
On April 21, 2003, the NRC Office of Investigation was asked to
look into concerns regarding potential willful/deliberate
violations of NRC requirements by the RSO. These concerns
included: (1) Deliberately falsifying exposure device records;
(2) deliberately providing incomplete and inaccurate information
regarding the performance of quarterly inspections; (3)
deliberately failing to perform quarterly inspections; (4)
deliberately failing to properly secure an exposure device during
transportation; and (5) deliberately violating the two- man rule
requirement at a temporary job site in Joplin, Missouri.
On September 16, 2003, the NRC was contacted by a former Licensee
radiographer's assistant, who informed the NRC that the RSO had
asked him after the April 2003 NRC inspection to falsify the
missing records and to manipulate the computer data so it would
not appear as if the records were backdated. After the former
Licensee employee told the RSO that he would not be able to
manipulate the computer data, the former employee stated that the
RSO hid the computer in the attic and subsequently destroyed the
computer after he was issued a subpoena for the computer
contents. The former Licensee employee also stated that the RSO
was hiring personnel with no previous radiography experience from
a temporary agency and the temporary personnel were not provided
with the required training or radiation dosimetry. On September
18, 2003, these concerns were provided to the NRC Office of
Investigations for inclusion in its ongoing investigation.
On October 23, 2003, an NRC inspection was conducted at a
temporary job site in Livingston County, Missouri. Based on the
results of this inspection, three violations of NRC requirements
were identified involving: (1) A failure to have shipping papers
readily accessible in the vehicle cab when the driver is not at
the vehicle's controls; (2) a failure to provide the emergency
response telephone number on the shipping papers; and (3) a
failure to amend the license to reflect a name change from PSI
Inspection, Inc. to KTL Roudebush Testing. On February 18, 2004,
the NRC Office of Investigation (OI) issued its report (Case No.
3-2003-009) and substantiated nine deliberate violations of NRC
requirements. Based on the results of the April 2003 inspection
and the OI investigation, the following deliberate violations of
regulatory requirements have been identified: 1. On April 10,
2003, October 28 and 29, 2002, and on several occasions between
October 2001 and January 2002, the Licensee's RSO, who is also
the President and Owner of KTL Roudebush Testing, deliberately
conducted radiography at locations other than a permanent
radiographic installation (temporary job sites), and the RSO/
radiographer was not accompanied by an additional qualified
individual who could observe the operations and was capable of
providing immediate assistance to prevent unauthorized entry, as
required by 10 CFR 34.41. 2. On April 10, 2003, and on October 28
and 29, 2002, the Licensee's RSO deliberately permitted
individuals to act as a radiographer's assistant before these
individuals had successfully completed the Licensee's training
program for radiographer's assistants, as required by 10 CFR
34.43(c) and License Condition 26.
3. On October 28, 2002, the Licensee's RSO deliberately permitted
an individual who was not wearing a direct-reading pocket
dosimeter, an alarming ratemeter, and either a film badge or a
thermoluminescent dosimeter, as required by 10 CFR 34.47(a), to
act as a radiographer's assistant.
4. As of April 12, 2003, the Licensee's RSO deliberately failed
to conduct inspections and routine maintenance of Licensee
radiographic exposure devices and associated equipment during the
first quarter of 2003, an interval exceeding three months, as
required by 10 CFR 34.31(b). 5. On April 8, 2003, the Licensee's
RSO deliberately provided inaccurate and incomplete information
to an NRC inspector regarding the maintenance of records of
quarterly inspections of radiographic exposure devices, required
to be maintained in accordance with 10 CFR 34.73. The RSO stated
that the required inspections had been conducted in calendar year
2002 and that electronic records of the subject inspections were
prepared by another named individual.
Transcribed sworn statements by one or more individuals indicated
that the Licensee never prepared the subject records, electronic
or handwritten, in calendar year 2002.
6. On August 5, 2003, the Licensee's RSO deliberately provided
inaccurate and incomplete information to an NRC Office of
Investigations Special Agent and deliberately did not afford the
Commission an opportunity to inspect records of quarterly
maintenance and inspections of radiographic exposure devices,
required to be maintained in accordance with 10 CFR 34.73. The
Licensee's RSO deliberately failed to provide information
requested in a subpoena for the hard disk drive data, including
any magnetic or optical media, floppy disks, zip disks, and
compact disks, pertaining to the Licensee's quarterly maintenance
and inspection logs for the year 2002. The Licensee's RSO stated
that he had thrown the computer in the trash because it was not
working. However, a licensee employee notified the NRC that the
computer was in the attic in August and was destroyed by the
owner, after the subpoena had been served.
7. On April 10, 2003, and between October 2001 and January 2002,
the Licensee's RSO transported on public highways a SPEC Model
150 radiographic exposure device (package), containing a nominal
142 curie iridium-192 sealed source, and the Licensee
deliberately did not block and brace the package such that it
could not change position during conditions normally
[[Page 13338]] incident to transportation, as required by 10 CFR
71.5(a) and 49 CFR 177.842(d). Specifically, two radiographic
exposure devices were transported in the back of a company truck
and one of the exposure devices was not properly blocked or
braced.
8. On April 10, 2003, the Licensee's RSO deliberately transported
a SPEC Model 150 radiographic exposure device, containing a
nominal 142 curie iridium-192 sealed source, by highway without a
shipping paper and the material was not excepted from shipping
paper requirements, as required by 10 CFR 71.5(a) and 49 CFR
177.817(a). 9. On April 10, 2003, the Licensee's RSO deliberately
transported a radiographic exposure device, containing a nominal
142 curie iridium- 192 sealed source, without its safety cover
installed to protect the source assembly from water, mud, sand or
other foreign matter, as required by 10 CFR 34.20(c)(3). The NRC
must be able to rely on the Licensee and its employees to comply
with all NRC requirements and to ensure that radiography is not
conducted unless all required qualified individuals are present,
have completed all required training, and are wearing all
required dosimetry (i.e., a direct-reading pocket dosimeter,
alarming ratemeter, and a film badge or a thermoluminescent
dosimeter). The failure to ensure that qualified individuals with
appropriate dosimetry are present during radiography is a
significant safety issue. The purpose of the second qualified
individual is to observe radiographic operations, to provide
immediate assistance to prevent unauthorized entry into areas
where radiography is being conducted, and to assist the
radiographer in case of an event involving the radiography
source. The purpose of dosimetry, in particular the alarming
ratemeter, is to provide information to the individuals involved
in radiographic operations that there is a substantial radiation
dose rate present, thereby allowing individuals to take
appropriate precautions to reduce their exposures and those of
the public.
In addition, the NRC must be able to rely on its licensees to
maintain accurate records and to provide information to the NRC
that is complete and accurate in all material respects. Based on
the violations described in Section II above, the Licensee has
deliberately failed to comply with NRC requirements, and has
deliberately provided inaccurate and incomplete information to
the NRC. These actions by the Licensee have raised serious doubt
as to whether the Licensee can be relied upon in the future to
comply with NRC requirements.
Consequently, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that the
Licensee's current operations under License No. 24-26628-01 can
be conducted in compliance with the Commission's requirements and
that the health and safety of the public, including the
Licensee's employees, will be protected. Therefore, the public
health, safety, and interest require that License No. 24-26628-01
be suspended. Furthermore, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, the
significance of the violations described in Section II above is
such that the public health, safety, and interest require that
this Order be immediately effective.
In addition to these deliberate violations which occurred within
NRC's jurisdiction, and upon which this Order is based, the
investigation conducted by the NRC Office of Investigations
determined that the following activities occurred in the State of
Kansas, an NRC Agreement State. On February 17 and March 6, 2003,
and on several occasions between May and October 2002, the
Licensee deliberately conducted radiography at temporary job
sites and the radiographer was not accompanied by an additional
qualified individual. On February 17 and March 6, 2003, the
Licensee deliberately permitted individuals to act as a
radiographer's assistants before they had successfully completed
the Licensee's training program for radiographer's assistants,
and these individuals did not wear a direct-reading pocket
dosimeter, an alarming ratemeter, and either a film badge or a
thermoluminescent dosimeter while conducting radiography.
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182 and
186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the
Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR Parts 30 and
34, it is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that License No.
24-26628-01 is suspended pending further order: A. All activities
authorized by License No. 24-26628-01 involving the use of
licensed material are hereby suspended pending further action by
the NRC. All other requirements of the license remain in effect.
B. All activities authorized by 10 CFR 150.20 involving the use
of licensed material in Non-Agreement States and areas of
exclusive federal jurisdiction are hereby suspended.
C. All NRC-licensed material in the Licensee's possession shall
immediately be placed in secured storage at the Licensee's
facility located at 1606 Cherry Street, Kansas City, Missouri.
D. Within 24 hours following issuance of this Order, the Licensee
shall notify Mr. Marc Dapas, Director, Division of Nuclear
Materials Safety, NRC Region III, or his designee, at telephone
number (630) 829- 9801 and advise him of the current location,
physical status, and storage arrangements of licensed materials.
A written response documenting this information shall be
submitted, under oath or affirmation, to the Regional
Administrator, NRC Region III, 801 Warrenville Road, Suite 255,
Lisle, IL 60532-3451 within seven days of receipt of this Order.
E. No material authorized by the license shall be ordered,
purchased, received, or transferred by the Licensee while this
Order is in effect.
F. All records related to licensed activities and materials shall
be maintained in their original form and must not be removed,
destroyed, or altered in any way.
The Director of the Office of Enforcement, the Director of the
Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, or the
Regional Administrator, Region III, may, in writing, relax or
rescind this Order upon demonstration by the Licensee of good
cause.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee must, and any other
person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to
this Order, and may request a hearing on this Order, within 20
days of the date of this Order. Where good cause is shown,
consideration will be given to extending the time to request a
hearing. A request for extension of time must be made in writing
to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and include a statement of good
cause for the extension. The answer may consent to this Order.
Unless the answer consents to this Order, the answer shall, in
writing and under oath or affirmation, specifically admit or deny
each allegation or charge made in this order and set forth the
matters of fact and law on which the Licensee or other person
adversely affected relies, and the reasons as to why the Order
should not have been issued. Any answer or request for a hearing
shall be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff,
Washington, DC 20555.
Copies of the hearing request also should be sent to the
Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001, to the Assistant General
Counsel for Materials
[[Page 13339]] Litigation and Enforcement at the same address, to
the Regional Administrator, NRC Region III, 801 Warrenville Road,
Suite 255, Lisle, IL 60532-4351, and to the Licensee if the
hearing request is by a person other than the Licensee. Because
of continuing disruptions in delivery of mail to United States
Government offices, it is requested that answers and requests for
hearing be transmitted to the Secretary of the Commission either
by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415- 1101 or by e-mail
to hearingdocket@nrc.gov [hearingdocket@nrc.gov] and also to the
Office of the General Counsel either by means of facsimile
transmission to 301- 415-3725 or by e-mail to
OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov [OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov] . If a person other
than the licensee requests a hearing, that person shall set forth
with particularity the manner in which his interest is adversely
affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set forth
in 10 CFR Sec. 2.309. If a hearing is requested by the Licensee
or a person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission
will issue an Order designating the time and place of any
hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such
hearing shall be whether this Order should be sustained.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee, or any other
person adversely affected by this Order, may, in addition to
demanding a hearing at the time the answer is filed or sooner,
move the presiding officer to set aside the immediate
effectiveness of the Order on the ground that the Order,
including the need for immediate effectiveness, is not based on
adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, unfounded allegations,
or error.
In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of
an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the
provisions specified in Section IV above shall be final 20 days
from the date of this Order without further order or proceedings.
If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been
approved, the provisions specified in Section IV shall be final
when the extension expires if a hearing request has not been
received. An answer or a request for hearing shall not stay the
immediate effectiveness of this order.
In addition to issuance of this Order suspending License No.
24- 26628-01, the NRC requires further information from the
Licensee in order to determine whether the NRC can have
reasonable assurance that in the future the Licensee will conduct
its activities in accordance with the NRC's requirements.
Accordingly, pursuant to sections 161c, 161o, 182 and 186 of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the NRC's regulations
in 10 CFR 2.204 and 10 CFR parts 30 and 34, in order for the NRC
to determine whether the license should be further modified or
revoked, or other enforcement action taken, the Licensee is
required to submit to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, within
20 days of the date of this Order and Demand for Information, in
writing and under oath or affirmation: 1. An explanation as to
why, in light of the findings set forth in Section II of this
Order and Demand for Information, that License No. 24-26628-01
should not be revoked.
2. If the Licensee believes that the license should not be
revoked, the Licensee, in its response, should address, at a
minimum, why the NRC should have reasonable assurance that the
Licensee, in the future, will ensure appropriate management
oversight of licensed activities such that licensed activities
will be conducted in accordance with regulatory requirements
(this shall include a description of who will be responsible for
assuring such activities are conducted in accordance with 10 CFR
parts 30 and 34 requirements).
Copies also shall be sent to the Assistant General Counsel for
Materials Litigation and Enforcement at the same address, and to
the Regional Administrator, NRC Region III, 801 Warrenville Road,
Suite 255, Lisle, IL 60532-4351.
After reviewing your response, the NRC will determine whether
further action is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory
requirements.
Dated this 11th day of March 2004.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl J. Paperiello, Deputy Executive Director for Materials,
Research and State Programs.
[FR Doc. 04-6275 Filed 3-19-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
33 Salt Lake Tribune: 'Taint funny
March 22, 2004
Sen. Curtis Bramble, R-Provo, who has been entrusted with the
enormously important position as co-chair of the task force
referring to the acronym HEAL (Healthy Environmental Alliance of
Utah) as standing for "Help Educate Anal Liberals" was taken "out
of context."
How could it be, when it clearly was not imbedded in any
context other than his asking employees of Envirocare what HEAL
stood for and then providing his disrespectful answer? If "out of
context" refers to anything, it refers to Sen. Bramble's being at
Envirocare and associating with the radioactive waste industry.
In being at an organizational meeting of this industry, Sen.
Bramble blatantly exposed a bias and a conflict of interest.
He also said he meant his statement "as a joke." There's
absolutely nothing funny about any aspect of this issue. HEAL is
a group of concerned citizens who put much effort in safeguarding
the health of the families of Utah. Bramble needs to be removed
from his position of leadership on the radioactive waste task
force -- no joke.
Elise Lazar
Salt Lake City
Copyright Salt Lake City Tribune
*****************************************************************
34 Las Vegas RJ: LETTERS: Advertisement misrepresents radiation risks
Monday, March 22, 2004
To the editor:
I am writing regarding an advertisement published in the Las
Vegas Review-Journal promoting the newspaper. The advertisement
-- "Six More Reasons to Read Your R-J" -- features a hand with
six fingers, and each finger is labeled Yucca Mountain. This
advertisement is baseless and objectionable.
Though your advertisement may not approach the ethical
shortcomings for which you indict your competitors at the Sun
(see Thomas Mitchell's Feb. 15 column), it does suggest that the
Review-Journal's readers should not expect balanced and objective
coverage on Yucca Mountain issues.
At a time when Nevadans are increasingly seeking a responsible
dialogue on this project, this advertisement relies on
decades-old, misleading stereotypes about radiation. The
supposition that radiation from Yucca Mountain may result in
genetic mutation among residents is reprehensible and not
supported by decades of scientific study on the site.
In reality, radiation often has positive effects on peoples'
lives. The majority of your readers likely have received medical
diagnosis or treatment using nuclear medicine or perhaps have
been alerted to fire in their home by the radioactive element in
a smoke alarm.
The advertisement is inappropriate and alarmist for a news
organization that purports to provide balanced and objective
reporting. Continued use of this advertisement would be a
disservice to your readers and your community. SCOTT PETERSON
WASHINGTON, D.C.
The writer is vice president, communications, of the Nuclear
Energy Institute.
Official arrogance
To the editor:
The federal government demonstrated its disrespect and arrogance
by holding a U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
and a House railroad subcommittee meeting, in Washington and Las
Vegas March 5, which served to promote nuclear energy subsidies
and the extension of the Price Anderson Act.
Why wasn't the House meeting widely advertised by the state of
Nevada and by our congressional delegation? I am a member of the
Clark County Yucca Mountain advisory committee and neither I nor
the other members were notified. Are we relying on nothing more
than the outcome of our court cases against Yucca Mountain and
have no other plan should they not succeed?
Nevadans should have had the opportunity to testify at both of
those meetings and there should have been discussion of the
transportation issue. The Department of Energy claims that rail
will be the primary means of transportation. It would have been
instructive to talk about the recent train wreck in Oklahoma,
which resulted in a fire. There could also have been a
re-examination of the Baltimore tunnel fire, where temperatures
could have breached a transportation cask.
Transportation of nuclear waste nationwide should have been
abandoned on Sept. 12, 2001, due to the risk of terrorism. Sound
science, and the fact that nuclear waste has been stored above
ground in casks since 1957, should be assurance enough that the
waste can remain there for 100 years.
These facilities should be hardened against attacks. It is too
risky to transport nuclear waste during wartime. A nuclear waste
transportation cask, when attached by a shoulder held shaped
charge weapon, is one half of a dirty bomb.
It is time for the Bush administration to lower the curtain on
the political charade and keep its promise to use sound science
to reject Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste repository. Homeland
security will also be served. FRANK PERNA LAS VEGAS
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
35 Las Vegas SUN: House panel to look into Yucca status
By Suzanne Struglinski
WASHINGTON -- A House subcommittee will address the status of the
Yucca Mountain project and pending legislation that alters how
the project gets money.
Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., plans to testify at the hearing
Thursday, spokesman Adam Mayberry said, but a final witness list
could not be confirmed by the House Energy and Air Quality
Subcommittee, which will hold the hearing.
"He looks forward to continue to make the case that Yucca is bad
for the nation," Mayberry said.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., has asked to testify but has not
heard back from the subcommittee yet, spokesman David Cherry
said. A representative from the Nuclear Waste Technical Review
Board, which has recently been critical of the project's status,
could also testify, Cherry said.
Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., also will be testifying, spokeswoman
Amy Spanbauer said.
The subcommittee was supposed to hold a hearing on the proposed
nuclear waste storage project the Energy Department has planned
for Yucca, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, last September but it
was postponed.
The Energy Department intends to submit a license application
for the project in December 2004 and, if approved, the site could
open for the first waste shipments by 2010. Critics hope pending
court cases could stop the project.
Beyond looking at the overall status of the project, the hearing
will examine a bill introduced by Energy and Commerce Committee
Chairman Joe Barton, R-Texas, that would tap directly into the
Nuclear Waste Fund, an account made up of fees paid by nuclear
utilities users.
The Energy Department wants $749 million from the fund to go
directly into the Yucca project and not through the usual
congressional funding process that would make it compete with
other programs for money.
The hearing will also look at a bill introduced last year by
Illinois Reps. John Shimkus, a Republican, and Bobby Rush, a
Democrat, that would remove at least $725 million from the
regular appropriations process for the Yucca program each year
and not subject it to spending caps placed on the appropriations
bill.
*****************************************************************
36 IOL: BNFL officials to address public meeting on Sellafield dangers
22/03/2004 - 07:55:28
British Nuclear Fuels, the company that owns Sellafield, has
reportedly accepted an invitation to a public meeting in Co Louth
to discuss the threat posed by the nuclear plant.
The meeting is due to take place in Castlebellingham on Friday.
BNFL will reportedly be represented by John Clarke, its head of
safety, environment and quality, Rex Strong, its head of
environmental management, and Richard Wakeford, its principal
research scientist.
© Thomas Crosbie Media, 2004.
*****************************************************************
37 Rocky Mountain News: Recent incidents at Rocky Flats
March 22, 2004
• March 26, 2003: Workers hook up air blowers to a ventilation
system without proper checking. Airflow was reversed and 23
workers contaminated.
• March 31: A badly taped air hose slipped loose and radioactive
contamination spread throughout a room. Two workers affected.
• May 6: Plutonium solution and chemical-soaked towels ignite
after being improperly dumped in a glove box. The fire occurred
in Building 371, which then contained all of the remaining
weapons-grade plutonium. Four firefighters affected.
• Feb. 5, 2004: The Department of Energy fines contractor
Kaiser-Hill $522,000 for safety violations that showed a
"significant lack of attention or carelessness," including
improper storage of plutonium and combustible materials in 2002
and the incidents of early 2003.
• Feb. 12: Workers pour too much filler foam into a tunnel under
Building 991 and the concentrated heat of curing turns into a
smoldering fire, destroying the foam.
• Feb. 13 and 16: Kaiser-Hill halts work for safety meetings.
*****************************************************************
38 DOE: DOE/Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee
FR Doc 04-6295
[Federal Register: March 22, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 55)]
[Notices] [Page 13291-13292] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22mr04-50]
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Advanced
Scientific Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC). Federal Advisory
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public
notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register.
DATES: Monday, April 5, 2004, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.; Tuesday, April
6, 2004, 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Hilton Washington Embassy Row Hotel, 2015
Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT: Melea Baker, Office of Advanced Scientific
Computing Research; SC-30/Germantown Building; U. S. Department
of Energy; 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.; Washington, DC
20585-1290;
[[Page 13292]] Telephone (301)-903-7486, (E-mail:
Melea.Baker@science.doe.gov [Melea.Baker@science.doe.gov] ).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of
this meeting is to provide advice and guidance with respect to
the advanced scientific computing research program.
Tentative Agenda: Agenda will include discussions of the
following: Monday, April 5, 2004 Introduction Remarks from the
Director, Office of Science Advanced Scientific Computing
Research Update Presentation and approval of the Committee of
Visitors (COV) report Presentation about the Cray X1 review
Presentation and approval of ``big issues'' report SciDAC code
comparison list and performance measures SciDAC PI meeting and
SciDAC plans Tuesday, April 6, 2004 OASCR plans for coordination
of networking activities (ESnet and new ORNL networking plans)
Multiscale mathematics initiative Advisory Committee Open
Discussion of Issues Public Comment Public Participation: The
meeting is open to the public. If you would like to file a
written statement with the Committee, you may do so either before
or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements
regarding any of the items on the agenda, you should contact
Melea Baker via FAX at 301-903-4846 or via e-mail
Melea.Baker@science.doe.gov [Melea.Baker@science.doe.gov] ). You
must make your request for an oral statement at least 5 business
days prior to the meeting.
Reasonable provision will be made to include the scheduled oral
statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of the Committee will
conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of
business. Public comment will follow the 10-minute rule.
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public
review and copying within 30 days at the Freedom of Information
Public Reading Room; 1E-190, Forrestal Building; 1000
Independence Avenue, SW.; Washington, DC 20585; between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays.
Issued in Washington, DC on March 16, 2004.
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-6295 Filed 3-19-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
39 Tri-City Herald: K Basins proposal not good enough
This story was published Monday, March 22nd, 2004
By Annette Cary Herald staff writer
A Department of Energy plan to start the long-delayed removal of
radioactive sludge from the leak-prone K Basins this spring may
sound good.
But the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board isn't buying the
plan.
DOE implies that the work it plans to begin soon will fulfill its
commitment to start the project. It's not the start at all,
counters the board.
"The board considers that the startup of a process that applies
only to a small fraction of the sludge -- and a smaller fraction
of the hazard posed by the sludge -- would not satisfy the
implementation plan commitment to begin sludge removal," wrote
John Conway, the board chairman, in a letter to Energy Secretary
Spencer Abraham. Congress created the board within the executive
branch of the federal government to provide independent oversight
of the nation's nuclear weapons complex.
DOE has a plan for the least contaminated -- but still dangerous
-- sludge, which is in one subcompartment of the K East Basin.
But it won't work for most of the highly radioactive sludge. No
plan has been released and approved by regulators to remove it.
The commitment to a date to start removing sludge was to serve as
an interim check that a process had been developed and systems
put in place to handle all the sludge, according to the board.
The start of the project is 14 months behind the latest schedule.
Regulators are requiring that most of it be removed in a little
more than five months.
The basins were built in the early 1950s with a design life of 20
years for temporary storage of spent nuclear fuel. But some fuel
has been stored in the indoor pools for nearly 30 years.
Much of the spent fuel was placed in the East Basin in open
canisters exposed to the water. Some of the fuel has corroded,
fallen apart and collected on the bottom of the basins to form a
sludge that contains uranium, plutonium and other radioactive
isotopes.
DOE considers the contaminated fuel, sludge and spent nuclear
fuel to be one of Hanford's most urgent threats to human health
and the environment.
But in a portion of the K East Basin, the North Load-Out Pit, the
sludge is less contaminated.
DOE plans to start removing that sludge first, which accounts for
about 12 percent of the sludge. There's also some similar sludge
in the K West Basin, but together they account for just 20
percent of the waste.
"The North Load-Out Pit has emerged as DOE's first choice for
removal because it poses the least hazard and is expected to be
the easiest to handle and dispose," Conway wrote.
The cesium concentration in the pit is approximately an order of
magnitude lower than the remainder of the K East Basin sludge,
according to the board. The uranium concentration is
approximately two orders of magnitude lower.
"Accordingly, the strategy being developed for the North Load-Out
Pit is not expected to be applicable to the remaining sludge in
the basins," Conway wrote.
Nick Ceto, EPA's Hanford project manager, cautioned that, "We
continue to be very frustrated there is no clear pathway for all
the sludge."
The safety board has asked DOE to provide a revised plan by April
30 that shows the plan for removing and disposing of each sludge
type in both basins and disposing of any irradiated fuel and fuel
fragments that may be found in the sludge. It's also asking for
revised milestones for the completion of sludge removal from the
basins, along with the interim steps needed to get there.
"The milestones should be realistic, resource-loaded and account
for time to perform adequate hazards analysis (and other tasks),"
the board said.
Fluor Hanford, the contractor doing the sludge removal at the K
Basins, had hoped to start sludge removal from the North Load-Out
Pit last week.
That was one deadline set by DOE in a series of steps Fluor
needed to complete to reclaim up to $2 million of fees it failed
to earn in 2003 because of delays in work to remove sludge from
the K Basins.
Fluor still plans to start the work this spring, said Judy
Connell, director of communications. An operational readiness
review is scheduled for April. Then DOE must conduct an
operational review, which is not yet scheduled.
According to a letter sent to the safety board in February, DOE
was considering options for what to do with the most hazardous K
East Basin sludge. It mentioned putting the sludge into
containers until treatment options are evaluated.
It also talked about grouting a portion of the sludge in place as
part of the basin demolition. The grouting option apparently
since has been abandoned.
Not only is the sludge highly radioactive, it's also difficult to
handle. It can't be picked up in a solid chunk. When touched, it
dissipates in the water.
The sludge from the North Load-Out Pit will be removed and put in
containers for treatment and packaging in a laboratory just north
of Richland in the 300 Area of Hanford. The containers of the
sludge likely will be sent to an underground storage site near
Carlsbad, N.M.
DOE originally had agreed to a completion date of December 1999
for removal of all the sludge in the K East Basin, but that
deadline slipped because of project management and engineering
issues, including changes in technical approaches to the issue.
The latest revised deadlines called for the start of sludge
removal by the end of December 2002.
Removal of spent fuel from the basins is on schedule. About 80
percent of the fuel has been removed. It all should be out by the
July deadline.
Now DOE needs to make a firm commitment to remove sludge on
schedule and ensure those commitments become contractual
obligations, according to the board.
"DOE is continuing to work with the Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board, and the office of the secretary has told us to
address all of their concerns," said Andrea Harper, spokeswoman
for DOE's Richland office.
© 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
40 Las Vegas SUN: Greenspun: Act on principles
March 19, 2004
Where I Stand -- Columnist Brian Greenspun: Act on principles
Brian Greenspun is editor of the Las Vegas Sun.
WEEKEND EDITION
March 20 - 21, 2004
I know what Hank would have done, but what would Mike have said?
Those are the two questions that should be asked most around my
house as life moves forward and we continue to try to do the
right things for our families, our communities and our country.
It isn't that most adults shouldn't be grounded in the right
vs. wrong department long before they reach the age where their
decisions have meaning, it is, rather, that when mentors are
available or, in this case, only the examples of their well-led
lives are present to guide us, we would be foolish not to pay
heed.
Since I have been a most fortunate fellow to have been able to
grow up, work with and be part of the lives of two real-life
heroes --- Hank Greenspun and Mike O'Callaghan -- I have
determined that my decisions, as freely and voluntary as they
are, should always be guided by their wisdom. That is a selfish
position, I know, but it is one that will cause fewer mistakes
on the big issues and provide benefit to so many others on the
little ones.
Mike was barely buried following a most fulfilling and deserved
funeral service when the first dilemma occurred. First the
set-up.
For the past 20 years, it has been the federal government's
desire -- aided, abetted and encouraged by the nuclear power
producers -- to find an answer to the nation's high-level
nuclear waste problem. Any answer will work, no matter how
outrageous or how dangerous it may be to people and other living
things, because it matters not to those who seek only to build
more plants and produce more waste.
Hence, the radioactive waste dump at Yucca Mountain. That's
just 90 miles north of Las Vegas, which just happens to be home
to 1.6 million Nevadans and a temporary home to 36 million
people from all over the world. In short, not a very safe place
for plutonium and other deadly substances that will outlive
everyone on the planet -- by a few hundred thousand years -- and
kill anyone who comes too close to the deadly substances. That
would be by land, by water or by air.
The only person who could have determined Nevada's fate with
regard to the Yucca Mountain dump was President George W. Bush.
By law, it was his and only his decision to make in 2001 whether
or not to pick Las Vegas as the city closest to the nuclear
waste bull's-eye for a time period that is the closest thing to
eternity on this earth.
Well, we all know what happened. First, as a candidate for the
presidency he told us that he would require science to pass on
the safety of Yucca Mountain before he ever made a decision that
put Las Vegans in harm's way.
After he was elected -- thanks to Nevada's vote which put him
over the top -- he caved in to the monied folks in the power
industry, ignored the science, which was, at best, incomplete
and shoved that dump so far down our throats that it was hard
for people in this state to speak of their outrage. In fact, the
most our good governor could do was be "disappointed"!
The gaming industry showed some feigned concern, lest their
bottom lines and taxes be disturbed, and most people who could
do anything about the problem found something else to talk about.
The rest of the people, the 1,599,000 people who live and work
here and depend upon the leadership to protect them from all
manner of harm, are stuck. They and their families may have to
pay the price for what the rest of us have failed, so far, to
stop.
In the meantime, the gaming industry, the banks, the doctors
and real estate moguls have coughed up almost $1.5 million to
re-elect the president. I assume their largesse is the way some
people say thank you to the person most responsible for all the
pain that may come to Las Vegas as a result of the nuke dump
coming to a place near us at warp speed.
My view, of course, is different. I don't believe in rewarding
enemies -- those are the people who think so little of you and
yours that they will lie to you on matters of life and death. I
don't think raising money for their re-election is the right or,
more importantly, the moral thing to do. And that is what caused
my dilemma.
I have a very good friend in the U.S. Senate who supported
Nevada's position against the nuclear waste dump right down the
line. At the end, though, his position got somewhat murky, to
the point that it could have caused confusion out here as to
whose side he was on in this great struggle. There was no doubt
in my mind because I know him, but even the slightest concern
among my friends that I would promote an anti-Nevada candidate
and there would be hell to pay.
So, I asked myself what would Hank do? And what would Mike say?
They would both do and say the same thing. When it comes to
Nevada's working men and women; Nevada's families and their
health and welfare; Nevada's economic livelihood -- that would
be plenty of tourists looking for a good time, not plutonium
illuminating their view of the Nevada desert -- then the answer
was simple.
Not only should those who have our worst interests at heart,
like President Bush and any other elected individual who sides
with the nuke industry against Nevada families, not get any of
our money, but they also shouldn't get our votes.
I know they would say that, knowing full well that both
believed that there were many issues to consider in any election
and that no one candidate would be right in all cases. But, when
it comes to the health and well-being of the people who live
here and the industry they are proud to work in, then there
could be no compromise. Those who want to send nuclear waste to
our state are the enemy. And we should not aid and abet them.
As President George Bush is fond of saying, "You are either
with us or against us." So for all the politicians coming to
Nevada in the future looking for our money and our votes, it
would behoove each of us to ask that simple question.
And we should have the courage to act accordingly.
*****************************************************************
41 Rocky Mountain News: Recent incidents at Rocky Flats
Agency sees safety breakdown at Flats
Watchdog group takes DOE to task for fire, violations
By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News
March 22, 2004
A federal watchdog agency has accused Department of Energy
officials at the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant of
being so lax that they missed the severity of a fire in a
building full of plutonium last May.
The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board said that the DOE,
which is supervising contractor Kaiser-Hill's dismantling of the
highly contaminated plant, allowed a "wholesale breakdown" in
safety. It also called the DOE's supervision of Kaiser-Hill
ineffective for failing to notice repeated safety violations.
After the incident in May, the DOE reported a small fire to the
safety board. Only after the board questioned inconsistencies in
the story did local DOE officials investigate and discover that
flames reached 15 feet and endangered the lives of workers, the
board said. It took the DOE 51 days to report that account to
the safety board.
As it turned out, the fire, inside a two-story metal box,
started in a pile of trash that included bottles of liquid
plutonium. Workers risked a potentially fatal radioactive flash
when they poured water on it to douse the flames.
Safety board Chairman John Conway said in an interview that he
believed DOE officials were ignorant of the fire's severity
rather than complicit in a cover-up.
"There wasn't enough DOE oversight to discover this," he said.
Numerous safety violations
Further investigation by the safety board found numerous serious
safety violations by Kaiser-Hill that had gone unnoticed by the
DOE. Another investigation of the fire, carried out in February
by Kaiser-Hill and independent experts, called for a complete
review of the company's ability to respond to a future
emergency.
DOE officials in Washington reacted to the safety board's
findings by admitting to "significant deficiencies" by both
local DOE officials and Kaiser-Hill. The DOE said it has begun
an independent review of the entire safety management system at
Rocky Flats, as requested by the board in a letter to the
secretary of Energy.
Kaiser-Hill spokesman John Corsi said, "We didn't meet our own
high safety expectations . . . We're committed to continuous
improvement, and we strive for zero incidents."
Joe Legare, the No. 2 DOE official at Rocky Flats, said, "The
criticism from the safety board was pretty strong . . . but we
learned a lot getting it."
He said it took 51 days to respond to the board's questions
because the DOE provided an in-depth reply. He also said there
was disagreement over the safety board's conclusions.
And where the safety board called Kaiser-Hill's safety
performance "unsatisfactory," Legare said: "Kaiser-Hill is doing
an excellent job with their safety record," with few workdays
lost to injury.
In the past year, Rocky Flats has seen a rash of potentially
dangerous incidents, including another small fire five weeks
ago.
The DOE recently fined Kaiser-Hill $522,000 for safety
violations. Kaiser-Hill is being paid $340 million for the
six-year project and is on track to earn a bonus of up to $120
million for finishing early and under budget.
The safety board is an independent federal agency created by
Congress in 1988 to watch over the nation's nuclear weapons
plants, which are run by the DOE.
Its concerns about Rocky Flats arose shortly after the May 6,
2003, fire and mounted over the summer and fall, culminating in
a scathing letter to the secretary of Energy in December.
The May fire involved a 20-foot-tall glove box, used to protect
workers from touching radioactive plutonium except through
leaded gloves.
The letter said that Kaiser-Hill dismantled the fire scene,
hampering investigators' attempts to discover the cause.
Only by examining photographs of materials removed from the
glove box did board investigators discover that they included
chemical-soaked towels and 4-liter bottles of plutonium
solution. Both plutonium and the cerium nitrate-soaked towels
can ignite spontaneously.
That combination was similar to the volatile mixture that was in
a glove box 35 years ago, which ignited the plant's most
dangerous fire. That accident, in 1969, occurred in a building
with 7,000 pounds of plutonium. Then, firefighters narrowly
averted a roof collapse, which could have allowed radioactive
plutonium dust to spread over Denver.
The fire last May was nowhere near as damaging and remained
inside the glove box. But the blaze alarmed safety officials
because it occurred in a building full of plutonium and thus had
the potential to be extremely dangerous.
It happened in Building 371, where Rocky Flats had collected the
remaining weapons-capable plutonium at the plant and was
packaging it for shipping to South Carolina for storage. Legare
declined to reveal how much plutonium was in the building that
day, saying that the information is still classified.
The fire started when workers began to dismantle the
20-foot-high glove box, which contained a dumbwaiter that once
was used to move plutonium from one floor of the factory to
another. They cut holes near the top, letting pieces of metal
fall inside.
Smoke drifted up the dumbwaiter shaft. Safety investigators said
they believe that the metal pieces fell onto old leaded gloves,
which had degraded and produced nitric acid. The impact ignited
them.
Big mistakes in fighting fire
Workers first tried pouring pints of water onto the fire - a
serious mistake, the safety board said. Water on plutonium can
cause a nuclear reaction that flashes intense radiation and can
be fatal to people nearby.
The workers then opened holes in the glove box to spray fire
retardant on the flames. But that was another mistake, the board
said, because it added air, fueling the fire.
Workers also turned the building fans to exhaust, which might
have released radiation to the atmosphere.
Rocky Flats firefighters, who are specially trained to fight
plutonium fires, didn't arrive for 11 minutes. That's because
workers called their boss instead of the fire department, the
board concluded.
While firefighters were en route, workers thought they had
doused the blaze and reported it out. But then the fire
reflashed, so firefighters arrived to find 15-foot flames.
Workers didn't immediately evacuate the building as required,
the board said. And they re-entered it while the fire was still
smoldering and before tests had been done for airborne radiation
contamination.
Four firefighters had to be decontaminated.
The board said the safety violations began even before the fire.
Kaiser-Hill said it did weekly inspections of all glove boxes to
make sure that no combustibles were left behind - but its staff
didn't find the trash left in the glove box that caught fire.
Some of it had been there since 1986.
Also, pre-fire radiation readings showed that the amount of
plutonium in the glove box had risen. The board said that should
have been a clue that plutonium trash apparently had been tossed
inside.
Victor Holm, head of the Rocky Flats Citizens Advisory Board,
said he was particularly concerned because the fire department
wasn't called immediately and the workers tried to douse it
themselves.
"The workers' probable motive was, 'If we can get this thing put
out, nobody will know about it,' " Holm believes.
DOE officials admitted that they had failed to supervise the
dismantling of the glove boxes in that building, because they
were concentrating on the packaging of plutonium elsewhere.
"We lost our edge on being vigilant here," said Paul Golan,
chief operating officer for environmental management at the DOE
in Washington. "I personally was disappointed it happened. We
are going to have to make sure it doesn't happen again."
Golan said he also has ordered a DOE-wide review of all past
plutonium fires to create a better prevention plan, because
these types of accidents could turn catastrophic.
The DOE site manager and the Kaiser-Hill building manager were
transferred. Officials at Rocky Flats said both rotations were
routine and had nothing to do with the fire.
Conway said he expects the final DOE report to discuss whether
safety problems were caused by a rush to finish the plant's
dismantling early and under budget, which would trigger a bonus
of up to $120 million.
Both Kaiser-Hill and DOE denied safety was being compromised by
the rapid pace. They said a serious accident was the biggest
threat to the schedule.
Corsi of Kaiser-Hill pointed to a staff report from the safety
board that found "no widespread evidence that work was overly
rushed."
Conway said he could not say if Rocky Flats had solved its
safety problems, because he has received only an interim
response to the board's complaints.
He also noted that Rocky Flats had another less dangerous fire
only about a month ago.
Meanwhile, the safety board eliminated its permanent staffer at
Rocky Flats last spring because its limited staff was needed at
other nuclear weapons facilities, Conway said. He said budget
limitations have kept the board's staff to 100, even though it
is authorized for 150.
*****************************************************************
42 Hanford News: Judge to rule on 'contractor defense'
[http://www.hanford-reach.com/]
This story was published Sat, Mar 20, 2004 By Annette Cary
Herald staff writer
SPOKANE -- A federal judge is expected to decide around the end
of the month whether past Hanford contractors may argue that
they cannot be held responsible for illnesses caused by
radiation releases from the nuclear reservation.
"It's a close call," said federal Judge William Fremming Nielsen
after hearing arguments Wednesday in Spokane.
Attorneys for World War II and Cold War contractors notified the
court last year that they plan to use the defense that they were
acting under federal direction when radioactive iodine was
released into the air to drift downwind during the production of
plutonium.
About 1,800 people have sued former Hanford contractors, saying
they developed thyroid disease, cancer or other illnesses from
exposure to releases from the nuclear reservation. Most of the
releases were of radioactive iodine, which concentrates in the
thyroid of people who ingest it.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs, often called downwinders, asked
Nielsen to prohibit the contractors from using the "government
contractor defense," or saying contractors only did what the
federal government told them to do.
"The iodine 131 emissions on which plaintiffs base their claims
are a direct consequence of decisions that the federal
government made during a time of national crisis," wrote
contractor attorneys in court documents.
Litigating against the contractor defense "would be a massive
undertaking," even though the defense does not have a sound
legal foundation, wrote downwinder attorneys in court papers.
"The court, the parties and ultimately the trier of fact would
be required to immerse themselves in obscure technical details
concerning operations at a massive industrial facility, during a
period of many years, over half a century ago," downwinder
attorneys wrote.
The issue could further delay resolution of a case that's
already more than a decade old, they wrote.
Downwinders believe the Price-Anderson Act passed by Congress
spells out how people injured by nuclear incidents may be
compensated.
It allows people to sue the government's nuclear contractors but
agrees to reimburse contractors for legal costs and damages.
Contractor attorneys argue the act does not exclude the
contractor defense or any other defense unless DOE declares an
"extraordinary nuclear occurrence." It never has declared an
extraordinary nuclear occurrence at Hanford or elsewhere.
They accuse downwinder attorneys of suing contractors after
attorneys concluded that they could not successfully sue the
United States.
In a 1988 Herald story, an attorney was quoted as saying, "We
have concluded the true culprit, the United States government,
is virtually immune from any lawsuits whatsoever."
"By suing the contractors, plaintiffs sought to do indirectly
what they admitted they could not do directly: press claims for
liability based on emissions that resulted from the
discretionary decisions of the federal government," contractor
attorneys wrote in court papers.
"Stripped to its essentials, defendants' argument comes to this:
The Price-Anderson Act is a nullity," countered downwinder
attorneys. "On defendants' theory, no nuclear weapons facility
contractor could ever be liable under the act. The court should
reject that absurd conclusion."
In other progress in the suit, both sides have met with a
court-appointed mediator in an attempt to work toward a
settlement without going to trial.
If the case does go to trial, the judge would like to try the
claims of about a dozen plaintiffs in an initial bellwether
trial that should provide guidance for settling the rest of the
claims. That trial is set for a year from now.
Copyright Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This
material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or
redistributed.
*****************************************************************
43 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada
FR Doc 04-6294
[Federal Register: March 22, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 55)]
[Notices] [Page 13292] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22mr04-51]
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Nevada Test
Site. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86
Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be
announced in the Federal Register.
DATES: Wednesday, April 14, 2004--6 p.m.-8 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Grant Sawyer State Office Building, 555 East
Washington, Avenue, Room 4412, Las Vegas, Nevada.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay Planamento, Navarro Research
and Engineering, Inc., 2721 Losee Road, North Las Vegas, Nevada
89130, phone: 702-657-9088, fax: 702-295-5300, e-mail
NTSCAB@aol.com [NTSCAB@aol.com] .
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Advisory Board is to make recommendations to DOE and its
regulators in the areas of environmental restoration, waste
management, and related activities.
Tentative Agenda: Board members will provide a briefing
describing their budget prioritization recommendations for the
fiscal year 2006 Nevada Site Office Environmental Management
budget submittal.
From 5 to 5:30 p.m. CAB members will present the CAB Roadshow, an
informational overview of the CAB's mission and activities.
Copies of the final agenda will be available at the meeting.
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
Written statements may be filed with the Committee either before
or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral
statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Kelly
Kozeliski, at the telephone number listed above. Requests must be
received 5 days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision
will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The
Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the
meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of
business. Each individual wishing to make public comment will be
provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public
review and copying at the Freedom of Information Public Reading
Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday,
except Federal holidays. Minutes will also be available by
writing to Kay Planamento at the address listed above.
Issued at Washington, DC on March 16, 2004.
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-6294 Filed 3-19-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
44 Google News Alert - nuclear
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 13:21:08 -0800 (PST)
INDIA a reluctant nuclear power: Sibal
Rediff - Mumbai,India
Tracing US-India relations, Sibal said the two nations had a long history
of differences, and the nuclear issue goes 'right to the root of them'.
...
See all stories on this topic:
RUSSIA'S Nuclear Boss Says Iran Plans Back on Track
Reuters - United States
... Reuters) - Russia's plans to finish an atomic reactor in Iran are back
on track after a pause that followed a tough new resolution on Iran by
the UN nuclear ...
See all stories on this topic:
NUCLEAR reactor workers claim damages for cancer
Jerusalem Post - Jerusalem,Israel
Some 17 nuclear reactor workers, together with families of workers who
died of cancer, petitioned the High Court of Justice on Sunday as part
of a long ...
See all stories on this topic:
‘ Al - Qaeda has briefcase nuclear bombs ’
Hindustan Times - New Delhi,India
The Al-Qaeda network claims to have bought ready-made "smart briefcase"
nuclear bombs on the black market in central Asia, the biographer of the
group's ...
See all stories on this topic:
BERLIN stalls over sale of nuclear plant to China
Financial Times - London,England,UK
The planned sale by Siemens, the German engineering group, of a nuclear
enrichment plant to China could collapse because of German government
reluctance to ...
See all stories on this topic:
FREE expression award for nuclear whistleblower
Index on Censorship - UK
... Award for Most Courageous Defence of Freedom of Expression to Mordechai
Vanunu, the Israeli whistleblower who revealed the scale of Israel's secret
nuclear ...
NUCLEAR Technology Proliferation: The Central Asian Connection
Tech Central Station - USA
... But Pakistan is also a source of concern because of its nuclear program,
and the specter of uncontrolled proliferation of atomic weapons technology.
...
REPORT: Al-Qaida Has Nuclear Weapons
WDRB - Louisville,KY,USA
... central Asia. According to the journalist Ayman al-Zawahri said the
terror group purchased some of the briefcase nuclear bombs. The ...
See all stories on this topic:
NEIGHBORHOOD reacts to nuclear weapons
WECT - Wilmington,NC,USA
There's no word if the ship carrying Libya's remaining nuclear weapons
is still docked at the North Carolina Ports in Wilmington. ...
See all stories on this topic:
NUCLEAR fears raised by spill
Dubbo Daily Liberal - Dubbo,New South Wales,Australia
A chemical semi-trailer crash on Thursday highlighted the risk of trucking
nuclear waste through Dubbo and other western towns, State MP Tony McGrane
said ...
This daily-once News Alert is brought to you by Google News (BETA)...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Remove this News Alert:
http://www.google.com/newsalerts/remove?s=92d1672a1b037a07&hl=en
Create another News Alert:
http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en
Try Google News:
http://news.google.com/
*****************************************************************
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more
information go to:
*****************************************************************