***************************************************************** 04/02/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.80 ***************************************************************** 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 FT: Pressure mounts on Iran to reveal nuclear activities amid US 2 Mehr News Agency: IAEA Director to Visit Iran on Tuesday 3 UPI: U.S. studied nuclear war in Korea in '70s - 4 Japan Times: Hirasawa exits post over secret talks with Pyongyang 5 US: UPI: Pentagon making case for new nukes 6 Security UN To Tackle Draft Resolution On Spread Of Wmds, President 7 RosBusinessConsulting: Moscow greets signing IAEA`s protocol by USA 8 Daily Times: Vajpayee tried to put a halt to nukes plan - Congress 9 Hi Pakistan: IAEA approached to verify nuke samples report --> 10 Hi Pakistan: Resistance to US-UK WMD resolution - NUCLEAR REACTORS 11 US: TCPalm: FPL reports 'unusual event' at nuke plant to regulatory 12 US: AP Wire: Hearings on FirstEnergy reliability at hand 13 Planet Ark: EU tells Blair to open nuclear plant to inspectors 14 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss Annual Performance Assessment of Limerick Nu 15 US: NRC: NRC Invites Public to Submit Nominations for the Advisory C 16 US: PL: A Milestone In Hysteria--Three Mile Island - 17 US: PPG: New nuke reactor design could revive defunct industry 18 US: PPG: Three Mile Island still casts shadow 25 years later 19 BreakingNews.ie: Nuclear plant decommissioning timetable brught forw 20 US: petroleumworld: US averted nuclear catastrophy 25 years ago 21 CBC Ottawa: Nuclear consultants earned $39.5M 22 US: abc7.com: SCE Fined for San Onofre Violations NUCLEAR SAFETY 23 US: Guardian Unlimited: Officials to Quit Sick Nuke Worker Program 24 US: USATODAY: Radiation lurks, but it's mostly harmless 25 Bellona: Zvezdochka dismantling two nuclear subs 26 US: KAKE: Radiation Scare 27 Janes: Iraq: the DU dust settles - 28 US: AU SMH: Town glows with nuclear pride - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 29 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: U.S. Has No Information Regarding NK's Re 30 Las Vegas RJ: Congressman criticizes DOE 31 UKAEA: End of an era in fuel manufacturing at Dounreay 32 UKAEA: Media invite 33 Bellona: ‘Euradwaste’ conference debates EU policy on radwaste 34 BBC: Dounreay run-down brought forward 35 US: Daily Nebraskan: Senators split on solution to budget crisis 36 Las Vegas SUN: Changes in Yucca funding sought 37 UKAEA: Clean-up programme worth £313 million to be driven forward by 38 US: WT&G: Army agrees to pay for removal, disposal of hazardous mate 39 Pahrump Valley Times: YUCCA MOUNTAIN NEWS 40 US: U.S. Newswire: TSA to Conduct Background Checks on Hazmat Driver 41 Scotsman.com: Dounreay to be decommissioned 13 years early NUCLEAR WEAPONS US DEPT. OF ENERGY 42 Tri-City Herald: K Basins accident concerns DOE 43 Oak Ridger: Engineering the future 44 Colorado Daily: Rocky Flats: a nice place to take the kids? 45 Oak Ridger: Says risk statements don't help public understand 46 FR: Hanford Waste Management comments by EPA 47 DOE: Office of Science; Biological and Environmental Research OTHER NUCLEAR 48 Google News Alert - nuclear 49 JS Online: Finding a future in fusion ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 FT: Pressure mounts on Iran to reveal nuclear activities amid US fears of weapons programme By Guy Dinmore in Washington Published: April 2 2004 5:00 | Last Updated: April 2 2004 5:00 International pressure is mounting on Iran to give a full account of its nuclear programme ahead of a visit to Tehran next week by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the United Nations safeguards agency. The US has told Mr ElBaradei that it suspects Iran has a clandestine uranium enrichment programme at undisclosed military facilities separate from the giant Natanz plant, which the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) first visited in February 2003. "Iran seems determined to pursue its nuclear weapons programme in an undisturbed and clandestine fashion, and so that it can more easily obtain critical nuclear technology that it needs for its weapons programme," John Bolton, US undersecretary for arms control, told Congress on Tuesday. Mr Bolton said Iran's "pattern of repeatedly lying to and providing false reports to the IAEA" cast serious doubts on the commitment it made to the foreign ministers of the UK, France and Germany last October to suspend its uranium enrichment programme and open all facilities to inspectors. A US official, speaking to the Financial Times on condition of anonymity, said the Bush administration was concerned that Iran had "dispersed" its uranium enrichment programme to small sites that were hard to detect. "Our concern has long been that enrichment for the military programme is being conducted at sites other than Natanz," he said. He declined to comment on a report in the Los Angeles Times last week, citing a western intelligence report, that said Iran set up a special committee late last year with the task of trying to hide nuclear evidence at nearly 300 locations round the country. Iran denied the report. It said it had declared all its nuclear activities to the IAEA and that all were of a civilian nature. Despite setbacks at the IAEA where the hardline US position has failed to draw broad support from the board of governors, Washington appears still determined to refer Iran's failure to meet its nuclear obligations to the UN Security Council for further action. Over the past year, findings by IAEA inspectors, helped by the confessions of Pakistan's nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, have forced Iran to divulge more about its programme than it had first acknowledged. The most recent IAEA resolution, passed in March, "deplores" Iran's omissions related to advanced P-2 centrifuge development. Mr Bolton also warned that inaction by the UN Security Council, in the event of continued non-compliance by Iran, would deal a blow to the Council itself. The US pressure has conjured comparisons among diplomats and analysts in Washington with the build-up to the war with Iraq early last year. This time, however, there is clear evidence that Iran has an advanced nuclear programme that could be adapted to military use. Senior US officials insist there are no US military plans being prepared for Iran. In private, however, hardline conservatives close to the administration say President George W. Bush may consider limited strikes against suspected nuclear facilities if he is elected for a second term in November and if Iran does not abandon the nuclear weapons programme whose existence it denies. For the moment, diplomats say the US is using the UK, France and Germany to apply direct pressure on Iran. The three European governments urged Iran on Wednesday not to go ahead with its planned facility in Isfahan that can convert "yellowcake" into uranium hexafluoride, the gas used as feedstock in the centrifuge enrichment process, and uranium metal, which can be used for laser enrichment. Mr ElBaradei sought to convince the Bush administration in a visit to Washington last month that Iran could only be persuaded to renounce its nuclear ambitions in the context of a wider agreement restoring normal relations with the US. © Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2004. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. Privacy ***************************************************************** 2 Mehr News Agency: IAEA Director to Visit Iran on Tuesday VIENNA, April 2 (Mehr News Agency) -- International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamed ElBaradei will visit Iran on Tuesday, April 6, IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming announced. Fleming told the Mehr News Agency that ElBaradei plans to hold talks about Iran’s nuclear program with Iranian officials during his one-day visit to Tehran. She said issues relevant to the IAEA’s verification of Iran’s safeguards agreement would be on the top of the agenda of the talks. Mark Gwozdecky, the director of the IAEA Division of Public Information, will also be part of the IAEA delegation visiting Iran, according to Fleming. MS/IS/HG End MNA ***************************************************************** 3 UPI: U.S. studied nuclear war in Korea in '70s - United Press International April 02, 2004 -- The U.S. Defense Nuclear Agency extensively studied possible use of tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield in North Korea during the late 1970s. The revelations appear in a study released this week to the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainability under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act. "Vulnerability of North Korean Forces, Vol. I: Evaluation of Vulnerability of North Korean Divisions to Tactical Nuclear Weapons," was produced by Science Applications Inc. in March 1978. The study concludes the use of nuclear weapons would be most effective against armored units attacking south of the DMZ, suggesting up to 30 airburst nuclear weapons could be deployed in an area only 9 miles from Seoul. The study indicates North Koreans may have deep-seated nuclear threat perceptions that have led to Pyongyang's efforts to acquire nuclear weapons today. ***************************************************************** 4 Japan Times: Hirasawa exits post over secret talks with Pyongyang Saturday, April 3, 2004 Negotiations may resume, besieged lawmaker hints Katsuei Hirasawa, parliamentary secretary to the home affairs ministry, resigned that post after drawing flak for a secret trip he made to China to apparently hold talks with North Korean officials about resolving the abduction issue, the ministry said Friday. Criticism of the apparently unauthorized trip by Hirasawa and Taku Yamasaki, both Liberal Democratic Party members, dominated political circles Friday, with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi saying intergovernmental talks should be the only channel for bilateral negotiations. But Yamasaki, who no longer has a Diet seat following his defeat in the November general election, told reporters upon returning from the two-day trip to Dalian, northeastern China, that he expects working-level bilateral talks between Japan and North Korea to resume soon. Yamasaki said that he and Hirasawa met with Jong Thae Hwa, North Korea's top negotiator in bilateral normalization talks with Japan. In December, Hirasawa visited Beijing with other Diet lawmakers seeking a resolution to the abduction issue. He met with Jong on that occasion too. Hirasawa telephoned LDP Secretary General Shinzo Abe on Friday night and told him that negotiations between the two countries may resume this month, according to sources close to the matter. Hirasawa, as a member of the House of Representatives with a key post in Koizumi's administration, has taken the brunt of criticism for the visit. The Cabinet approved his resignation as parliamentary secretary to the Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications Ministry the same day. He also offered to resign as head of the secretariat of the group of lawmakers looking in to the abduction issue. Cabinet members are concerned that Hirasawa's meeting with North Korean officials may lead Pyongyang to construe it as being formal contact with the Japanese government. The Democratic Party of Japan requested that the Lower House punish Hirasawa for leaving the country for personal reasons and without permission while the Diet is in session. Japan and North Korea resumed talks in February in Pyongyang, having experienced a hiatus since October 2002. But the countries have yet to arrange a schedule for the next round, after they held talks on the sidelines of six-way talks in Beijing on the issue of North Korea's nuclear program in February. Terror list directive WASHINGTON (Kyodo) Pyongyang must address the issue of Japanese abducted to North Korea if it wants the United States to remove its name from the list of terrorism-sponsoring countries, a senior U.S. official said here Thursday. The abduction issue is "one of the most important" elements in the designation of North Korea as a terrorism-sponsoring state, Ambassador Cofer Black, who serves as the administration's coordinator for counterterrorism, said in congressional testimony. After Black's testimony before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on International Terrorism, a senior U.S. official said the administration is well aware of the importance of the abduction issue. The official declined to say whether the abduction issue would be included in an annual State Department report on international terrorism to be released in late April. Previous reports made no reference to the abduction issue. Relatives of the abducted Japanese asked U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage to include the issue in the upcoming report when he visited Japan in February. The Japan Times: April 3, 2004 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 5 UPI: Pentagon making case for new nukes United Press International: By Pamela Hess Pentagon correspondent Published 4/1/2004 6:43 PM WASHINGTON, April 1 (UPI) -- A panel of independent advisers is counseling the Pentagon to develop smaller, specialized nuclear weapons using money saved from cutting back on the number of older nuclear warheads and their attendant maintenance costs. The Pentagon has already earmarked $500 million over the next five years for research into a "Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator," a nuclear missile that could burrow into underground bunkers to attack an enemy's nuclear or chemical missile programs. The program is controversial: The United States has not produced a new nuclear weapon in more than a decade, and has not tested its warheads with an actual explosion since 1992. Congress put significant restriction on spending for RNEP, requiring two separate approvals before Congress before a new weapon can be built. The Pentagon insists the weapon is needed. "Underground facilities are proliferating throughout the world," said Linton Brooks, the director of the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration, at a meeting with reporters Thursday. "Generic dictators are only deterred by (the United States) holding what they value at risk. They tend not to value their population but their instruments of power." Those instruments of power are likely to be hidden deep underground where a conventional military assault can't reach them. "We want to make it absolutely clear he doesn't have any invulnerable sanctuary," Brooks said. Brooks said the missile is intended to deter a dictator from developing his own nuclear capabilities in underground facilities. Militants are unlikely to be dissuaded from their nuclear ambitions no matter what weapons the United States has, Brooks said. The new missile is still in the investigative stages. Under the current concept, it would be encased in an extremely hard shell and detonate a explosions to sequentially break through layers of rock or concrete and then discharge its nuclear warhead. Because the warhead would, notionally, be buried, the radioactive fallout and collateral damage to surrounding civilian areas would be far less than a standard surface detonated nuclear weapon. There would be some fallout, however, Brooks told PBS in a television show to be aired April 2. "This will be a weapon that will still cause collateral damage. It will still cause fallout. It will still be a hugely serious decision. But it will be quantitatively and qualitatively different from conventional weapons," Brooks told "Now, with Bill Moyers." He said Thursday the United States would consider the "generic dictator's" population to be hostages that must be protected in a war. Taking out the dictator's capabilities underground might be the best way to do that, he said. "Do we want a future president to have a capability like this in his hip pocket? I don't know," Brooks said. But the question should be investigated, he insisted. "Let get me the money I've asked for and let me study the weapon," he said. "If we decide it is technically feasible, and the president decided to refine the design, then Congress has to approve that." If after it is designed, the White House wants to build it, Congress also requires that it have approval power for production, he said. Not everyone agrees the new weapon would be needed. Retired Air Force Gen. Chuck Horner told PBS he is not convinced. "I'm not necessarily in favor of developing a small penetrating low-yield nuclear weapon," he said, according to a transcript made available to United Press International. Horner, who commanded the air assault during the 1991 Persian Gulf war, warned that nuclear weapons carry "political baggage." "During the Gulf War, I said to myself, what would I use these weapons for? How would I use them? We weren't gonna do it, but I had to say to myself, if I was (going) to do it, what would I do? So I sat down with a nuclear planner. ... The only thing nuclear weapons were good for, really, was busting cities. And if we go around killing women and children in cities, we've lost the war." The new report from the Defense Science Board says that for a bunker-busting nuclear weapon to be a dissuading factor against a dictator with nuclear ambitions, that dictator would have to be convinced the United States would be willing to use the weapon. "We join others in judging that a credible force should include ... some nuclear weapons that cause much less collateral damage to achieve their desired effects against the highest priority targets," the report states. According to the report, the problem with developing this capability is one of both politics and money. "The problem is that the current plan embedded in the Stockpile Stewardship Program consumes virtually all available resources simply to sustain the aging stockpile of declining relevance," the report states. The United States has about 7,000 strategic nuclear warheads and has agreed with Russia to draw them down to about 2,000 over a course of several years. Those weapons have to be maintained and an expensive computer modeling program run to determine whether the weapons could be safely used if they were needed. "Changing this plan requires ... leadership from the Defense Department to state clearly and persuasively the specific requirements for a different nuclear stockpile," the report states. Brooks report to the Congress on the size and state of the nuclear stockpile is two weeks overdue. He said it is being reviewed by the Pentagon before being sent to the White House and then will go to Capitol Hill. Brooks also said nuclear material from old weapons currently stored at Los Alamos, N.M., would be moved to a facility in Nevada. The Los Alamos site could not be properly defended because it sits at the bottom of a canyon. "The material couldn't be secure there," Brooks said. One half the special nuclear material stored at Los Alamos will begin to be moved in September over an 18-month period. The Washington-based Project on Government Oversight said the move to the Device Assembly Facility at the Nevada Test Site will save the government about $30 million a year. POGO recommended the movement of the material for security reasons in October 2001. Copyright © 2001-2004 United Press International ***************************************************************** 6 Security UN To Tackle Draft Resolution On Spread Of Wmds, President Says Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 17:04:28 -0500 SECURITY COUNCIL TO TACKLE DRAFT RESOLUTION ON SPREAD OF WMDS, PRESIDENT SAYS New York, Apr 2 2004 5:00PM The Security Council is poised this month to discuss a draft resolution dealing with the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) to non-State actors, the Ambassador of Germany, which holds the presidency of the 15-member body for April, said today. Speaking at a press briefing on the Council's monthly <"http://www.germany-un.org/peace/council/presidency/program.html">work programme, Ambassador Gunter Pleuger predicted that the most politically sensitive discussion would concern the draft resolution on WMDs, around which a "positive groundswell" was forming to let the Security Council solve the problem through a resolution, which would be binding international law. Ambassador Pleuger noted that the fact that the five permanent Council members - China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States - had been working on the measure for the past five or six months showed that it was a very important question, and that it entailed several difficult and complex problems. He added that he believed Washington was "absolutely right" in saying there was a gap in international law pertaining to non-State actors. And because the traditional ways of adopting new international law - either by waiting for customary international law to develop or by negotiating a treaty or convention - took a long time, everyone felt that there was an "imminent threat" to be addressed and therefore could not wait for the customary way. The German Ambassador said he believed it was "the first major step" towards having the <"http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/">Security Council legislate for the rest of the UN membership. "It is important that not only the members of the Council but all [176] other members of the General Assembly have a chance to look at this resolution, because in the end it is not enough to adopt a Security Council resolution with legitimacy and acceptance. It is also important that the resolution is being implemented," he stressed. Meanwhile, the role of business in conflict prevention, peacekeeping and post-conflict peace building will be discussed at an open meeting on 15 April, Ambassador Pleuger said. The idea for the session originated from the German-led Security Council mission to Afghanistan last year, which saw the vital importance of the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) of former combatants in the peace-building phase. He stressed that while the DDR process required jobs to which the disarmed fighters could turn to, private business could not be forced to invest in post-conflict areas. "You have to create an environment conducive to luring private business into that area and contribute to stabilizing the economic and social situation and providing the jobs that will make it possible to demobilize and reintegrate combatants," the Council President said.

<"http://webcast.un.org/ramgen/pressconference/pc040402a.rm" style="text-decoration: none"> Video of the press briefing [43mins] 2004-04-02 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml ***************************************************************** 7 RosBusinessConsulting: Moscow greets signing IAEA`s protocol by USA [The St. Petersburg Times] RBC, 02.04.2004, Moscow 18:09:13.Moscow satisfied with the fact that the US senate had ratified the IAEA`s additional protocol to the agreement on guarantees, Russian Foreign Ministry reported. Russia believes this protocol will enhance the transparence of national nuclear programs and therefore contributes to the international nuclear nonproliferation regime. Russia insists on the universal application of the protocol and works in cooperation with other countries to achieve this target, the Foreign Ministry stressed. This document is being prepared to be submitted to Russian lawmakers. All rights reserved. © 1995-2003 RosBusinessConsulting (095) 363-11-11 All rights reserved © 1995-2000 RosBusinessConsulting ***************************************************************** 8 Daily Times: Vajpayee tried to put a halt to nukes plan - Congress Saturday, April 03, 2004 NEW DELHI: In an attempt to influence voters in the forthcoming polls, the Congress on Friday alleged that Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee was against the resumption of the Indian nuclear programme in 1979 which was frozen after nuclear explosions in 1974. Mr Vajpayee was foreign minister at the time in the Morarji Desi’s government. “Mr Vajapyee and Mr Desi’s ruled against resuming the nuclear programme but they were overruled by a majority of three cabinet ministers consisting of Charan Singh, Jagjivan Ram and HM Patel,” Congress spokesman Kapil Sabil quoted former JIC chairman K Subramanyam as saying at a function held recently. BJP spokesman Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi was swift to react. “These documents are a secret and therefore anyone trying to make it public is doing so at the cost of national security,” he said. “Should the nuclear button be in control of an Indian or a foreigner,” he retorted angrily. The foreigner he referred to was Sonia Gandhi. Mr Sibal said that India would not have made nuclear explosions in 1998 if Mr Vajpayee had succeeded in his attempt. He said Mr Vajpayee should explain publicly as to why he tried to put a stop to the Indian nuclear programme. —Staff Daily Times - All Rights Reserved and hosted by WorldCALL Internet Solutions [http://www.wcis.com.pk] ***************************************************************** 9 Hi Pakistan: IAEA approached to verify nuke samples report --> April 02 2004 BRUSSELS: Urging that any reference to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors should not be "misconstrued" or "overemphasised", the Vienna-based nuclear watchdog has indicated its decision to continue requesting, through diplomatic channels, for permission for visiting relevant nuclear facilities in Pakistan to take environmental samples required to determine whether the highly enriched uranium contamination found in Iran originated from Pakistan. A senior Pakistani diplomat in Vienna, according to a source close to the IAEA, contacted the agency’s headquarters seeking verification of a recent report quoting the agency’s spokesperson Melissa Fleming that the IAEA had requested Pakistan to cooperate in two areas, including permission for taking environmental samples from Pakistani nuclear installations. The IAEA statement, last week, created a stir in Pakistan with opposition accusing the government of succumbing to the international pressure and compromising on the nation’s nuclear programme. European media is particularly seen tantalising to get the transcription of the IAEA’s spokesperson Melissa Fleming’s last week’s responses to The News. The IAEA, during this diplomatic contact, not only averred the stated position of the agency’s spokesperson, but also maintained that the nuclear inspectors were referred to specifically in connection with the agency’s request for taking environmental samples from nuclear facilities in Pakistan and what IAEA spokesperson said was in conformity with IAEA Chief ElBaradei’s views. Citing a report, the source quoted Elbaradei as saying: "Pakistan has been cooperating, but I still need more cooperation from them in allowing ‘environmental sampling’ to compare centrifuge components of a type sold through an international black market to Iran." "The agency does not take any time to clarify if its views are misrepresented. There was no suggestion of clarifying this particular report or sending an e-mail message, whatsoever, to the writer of the report at any stage of the recent contacts between the IAEA and Pakistani mission in Vienna", the source said, adding: "The Pakistani diplomat, during this contact with the IAEA, reiterated the stated Pakistani position underscoring Pakistan, as a non-NPT nuclear state, was not obliged to allow the IAEA to visit any of its nuclear installations." Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 Hi Pakistan: Resistance to US-UK WMD resolution - By Thalif Deen --> April 02 2004 UNITED NATIONS: The United States and Britain are facing strong resistance over their attempt to hastily rush through the Security Council a proposed resolution aimed at preventing terrorists and other "non-state actors" from trafficking in and acquiring weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The opposition comes not only from most of the 10 elected, non- permanent members of the council but also from an international coalition of over 2,000 peace activists, anti-war groups and members of civil society representing 85 countries. "The entire resolution was drafted and discussed behind closed doors by the five veto-wielding permanent members (the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China) with hardly any inputs from us," a Third World diplomat representing one of the council's elected members, told IPS on Wednesday. The five permanent members of the council are also the world's only declared nuclear states. The diplomat, who refused to be identified, said most of the elected members do not want to be rushed into taking a decision. "We are told it took five months for the Big Five to finalize the draft. Perhaps it could take another five months for us to study and decide on it. We are in no hurry," he added, conveying virtually the collective voice of the 10 elected members. The 10 are Angola, Chile, Germany, Pakistan, Spain, Algeria, Benin, Brazil, the Philippines and Romania. Ambassador Abdullah Baali of Algeria said last week, "non- proliferation is better dealt with through treaty negotiations, not Security Council mandates. It would be a mistake to do it through the Security Council." But he said his government would support the draft, with reservations. US Ambassador John Negroponte has insisted the proposed resolution would not "supersede, undercut or undermine existing disarmament and non-proliferation regimes". The United States has said it would like to see the resolution adopted as soon as possible, maybe within weeks. Washington had suggested a deadline of March 31- seven days after the five-page resolution was formally presented to the Security Council. Both Russia and China have also expressed reservations over the proposal's language, but have not said they will oppose the resolution. "There are many council members who are concerned with the resolution and concerned with the lack of transparency on the initial negotiations," Susi Snyder of the UN Office of Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, told reporters on Wednesday. John Burroughs, executive director of the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy, thinks a decision on the draft resolution will be delayed because of strong resistance from council members, none of who want to be publicly identified. Burroughs told IPS there is a "lot of dissatisfaction" among the 10 elected council members over the plan. Still, he added, the United States and Britain might not find it difficult to get the nine votes needed to adopt the proposal. "I think they would prefer to have consensus among all 15 members on such an important resolution," added Burroughs, who is also a member of the Global Council of the Abolition 2000 Global Network to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons. In a letter to the 15 members of the Security Council, Abolition 2000 says, "while the proposed resolution affirms support for multilateral treaties on nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, it refers only to prevention of proliferation, and is silent, rhetorically and substantively, on ending deployment of existing weapons and on the imperative of disarmament." The resolution is flawed, it says, because it fails to acknowledge the disarmament obligation under the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty and to identify measures to reduce and eliminate nuclear arsenals. "Proliferation of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, and their potential acquisition by terrorists, will never be effectively addressed so long as nuclear weapons are highly valued by major powers," the letter said. If the resolution is adopted, the coalition added, it would also represent a far-reaching assumption of authority by the Security Council to enact global legislation requiring each state to modify its national legal system and policies. The coalition includes the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, the International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy, the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, the Global Resource Action Centre for the Environment, Atomic Mirror and the Western States Legal Foundation. Jayantha Dhanapala, a former UN under-secretary-general for disarmament affairs, told IPS that the Security Council has not often addressed the subject of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). "That it should do so now in the limited context of the proliferation of such weapons to non-state actors must be welcomed," he added. "However," said Dhanapala, "the credibility of the proposed resolution would have been greatly enhanced if the logical connection between non-discriminatory non-proliferation and verifiable disarmament was acknowledged." -Dawn/The Inter Press News Service. Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 11 TCPalm: FPL reports 'unusual event' at nuke plant to regulatory commission [The TCPalm.com Network] • Palm Beach News By Will Greenlee staff writer April 2, 2004 HUTCHINSON ISLAND — A valve was left open following a maintenance test at the St. Lucie Nuclear Plant, causing excess flow of radioactive water, a spokeswoman said Thursday. Although the "unusual event" caused no injuries, it was reported to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Wednesday evening, Florida Power &Light Co. spokeswoman Rachel Scott said. "There are very strict controls regarding the amount of water that is allowed to flow from the reactor coolant system outside of that system," Scott said. "The plant was maintained in a safe condition throughout this unusual event." One of the plant's two reactors was shut down March 21 for maintenance and refueling, which occurs about every 18 months. A valve that allows reactor coolant to flow into a waste management system was left open after a test. "The reactor coolant (radioactive water) was flowing into the system when it should not have been," Scott said. "That valve should have been closed." She said the valve was left open due to "human error." "All of this was contained in the systems that are designed to handle the reactor coolant system, so there was zero impact on personnel or public safety," she said. - will.greenlee@scripps.com [will.greenlee@scripps.com] Contact TCPalm.com at feedback@tcpalm.com | Subscribe | Site ***************************************************************** 12 AP Wire: Hearings on FirstEnergy reliability at hand | 04/02/2004 | MARC LEVY Associated Press HARRISBURG, Pa. - The reliability of three companies owned by FirstEnergy Corp. will be the subject of public hearings this month as Pennsylvania regulators look into whether electricity service to 1.2 million homes and businesses has been substandard. If the investigation finds that the reliability of the utilities - Pennsylvania Power Co., Metropolitan Edison Co. and Pennsylvania Electric Co. - has slipped below standards, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission will set up a corrective plan. Any customer who wants to testify can show up before the meeting and sign up, said utility commission spokesman Eric Levis. The hearings begin Tuesday and run through April 15. The state's Office of Consumer Advocate is encouraging customers of the three companies to testify about their experiences with the length of power outages, the companies' response to restoring power and any problems with the maintenance of power lines, poles or trees growing around them. "There have been problems in much of the FirstEnergy territory, so it's important - to the extent that people can - to let the commission know what their experience has been," said Irwin "Sonny" Popowsky, the state's consumer advocate. The FirstEnergy companies are working to improve reliability, said Scott Surgeoner, a spokesman for the Akron, Ohio-based FirstEnergy. He cited the replacement of a 1 1/2-mile underground cable near Reading that has been the source of some outages. "We have made improvements in reliability over the past couple years, but still have a ways to go," Surgeoner said. "We're tackling (problems). Some of this isn't an overnight kind of thing. It takes time. Work with us and bear with us." The territory of the three utilities stretches to each state line, including some of the state's medium-sized cities and many rural areas. FirstEnergy acquired Metropolitan Edison and Pennsylvania Electric when it merged with New Jersey-based GPU Inc. in 2001. It also owns several power plants in Pennsylvania, including Bruce Mansfield Station, a huge coal-fired plant in Beaver County, and the nearby Beaver Valley nuclear power plant. Last year, FirstEnergy was implicated in the nation's largest power outage ever. A U.S.-Canadian task force investigating the Aug. 14 outage that affected 50 million people pointed to the failure of a FirstEnergy computer system that monitors electricity flow in causing the blackout. It also said the company allowed trees underneath transmission lines to grow too tall, triggering several outages when the lines sagged. That led to a series of transmission-line failures that knocked out more than 263 power plants across the Midwest, Northeast and Ontario, the report said. FirstEnergy has criticized the report as incomplete and maintains that it shouldn't be singled out because there were other problems in the Midwest power grid. Pennsylvania was largely protected from the cascade of blackouts when systems run by the Mid-Atlantic grid operator, PJM Interconnection, shut down connections along Pennsylvania's borders. ON THE NET FirstEnergy Corp.: [http://www.firstenergycorp.com] Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission: [http://www.puc.paonline.com] Office of the Consumer Advocate: [http://www.oca.state.pa.us/] ***************************************************************** 13 Planet Ark: EU tells Blair to open nuclear plant to inspectors FRANCE: April 2, 2004 STRASBOURG, France - The European Union told Britain to clean up its controversial nuclear plant Sellafield on Tuesday or face fines, losing patience with London's refusal over decades to allow full safety inspections. In a faint echo of British Prime Minister Tony Blair's bid to gain access to Iraq's nuclear facilities, the EU executive said Britain had failed to allow EU inspections to make sure nuclear material did not end up in nuclear weapons. "The UK operator British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) has failed to comply with the...rules concerning accounting for nuclear material and the access of Commission inspectors to nuclear material to check the nature and quality and quantity of the material," European Commission chief spokesman Reijo Kemppinen told a news conference. The Commission, which polices nuclear safety across the 15-nation bloc, has asked Britain to devise a plan to clean up Sellafield by June 1, extending London's deadline by an extra month than originally planned. The problem centres on B30, a series of reinforced concrete ponds that store radioactive waste under water at the Sellafield plant. "It is impossible to determine accurately the quantities of material stored and on the spot inspections cannot take place because of the high level of radiation and poor visibility in the part of the facility concerned," the Commission said in a statement. If state-owned BNFL does not comply with the decision, the Commission could fine the company. Greenpeace welcomed the decision, saying the 50-year old B30 ponds contained 1.3 tonnes of plutonium, posing a major risk for workers and people living nearby. "The UK Government and BNFL have prevaricated for years despite the fact that they knew there was a huge problem," said Greenpeace nuclear campaigner Jean McSorley, adding that the Commission should have acted 14 years earlier. REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 14 NRC: NRC to Discuss Annual Performance Assessment of Limerick Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region I - 2004-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-04-017 March 31, 2004 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov] Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Exelon Nuclear on Thursday, April 8, to discuss the results of the agencys annual assessment of safety performance at the Limerick nuclear power plant. Exelon operates the twin-reactor plant, which is located in Limerick, Pa. The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at the Limerick Township Municipal Building, 646 W. Ridge Pike in Limerick. Before the session is adjourned, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public on the plants safety performance, as well as the role of the NRC in ensuring safe operation of the facility. The performance period to be discussed is January 1 to December 31, 2003. In addition, NRC staff will provide a brief overview of how the agencys Reactor Oversight Process works. A letter sent from the NRC Region I Office to plant officials addresses the performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/lim_2003q4.pdf [PDF Icon] . Overall, the Limerick plant operated safely and met all cornerstone objectives during the period. (Cornerstones are program areas where NRC measures plant safety performance.) Therefore, at this time the NRC plans to conduct only baseline inspections at the site through September 30, 2005. With regard to security issues, the NRC has issued several orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and improve guard force readiness since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The agency has also conducted inspections to review the implementation of these requirements and has monitored the action of plant operators in response to changing threat conditions. The NRC will continue security inspections during 2004. Current performance information for the Limerick Unit 1 plant is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LIM1/lim1_chart.html. Current performance information for the Limerick Unit 2 plant is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LIM2/lim2_chart.html. Last revised Friday, April 02, 2004 ***************************************************************** 15 NRC: NRC Invites Public to Submit Nominations for the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards News Release - 2004-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 04-019 February 9, 2004 candidates for appointment to its Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS). The ACRS was established by Congress to provide the NRC with independent expert advice on matters related to the safety of existing and proposed nuclear facilities and on the adequacy of proposed reactor safety standards. The Committees work currently emphasizes safety issues associated with the operation of 103 commercial nuclear power plants in the U.S.; the pursuit of a risk-informed and performance-based regulatory approach; review of license renewal applications; risk-informed revisions to reactor regulations; power uprates; transient and accident analysis codes; materials degradation issues; use of mixed oxide and high burn-up fuels; and technical issues related to advanced reactor designs. The ACRS membership is drawn from a variety of engineering and scientific disciplines needed to conduct broadly based reviews for these facilities, as well as proposed standards and criteria and related research activities. At this time, the Commission is specifically seeking individuals who have at least 15 years of experience in the areas of nuclear engineering, probabilistic risk assessment, and/or plant operations. Candidates with pertinent graduate-level education will be given additional consideration. Individuals should have a demonstrated record of accomplishments in the area of nuclear reactor safety. Candidates are selected to provide a balanced technical base consistent with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Because conflict-of-interest regulations restrict the participation of members actively involved in the regulated aspects of the nuclear industry, the degree and nature of any such involvement will be weighed. Each qualified candidates financial interests must be reconciled with applicable federal and NRC rules and regulations prior to final appointment. This might require divestiture of securities issued by nuclear industry entities or discontinuance of industry-funded research contracts or grants. A résumé describing the educational and professional background of the applicant, including any special accomplishments, professional references, current address, and telephone number should be provided. Candidates must be U.S. citizens. All candidates will receive careful attention. An indication of the candidates ability and willingness to devote the time required (about 80 - 100 days per year) should also be provided. Applications will be accepted until March 15. Résumés should be sent to the attention of Ms. Sherry Meador, Administrative Assistant, Operations and Support Branch, Mail Stop T2E-26, ACRS/ACNW, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001, or e-mail sam@nrc.gov [sam@nrc.gov] . Last revised Friday, April 02, 2004 ***************************************************************** 16 PL: A Milestone In Hysteria--Three Mile Island - PittsburghLIVE.com Friday, April 2, 2004 By John Jennings [jjennings@tribweb.com] MANAGING EDITOR Friday, April 2, 2004 This week marks 25 years since the Three Mile Island accident sent the nuclear power industry into a tailspin from which it has never fully recovered. Since that week, no new nuclear power plant has been constructed in the United States, and it is almost inconceivable that one would ever win approval. For most people, Three Mile Island is synonymous with disaster and death, thanks mainly to the movie The China Syndrome, a Jane Fonda/Michael Douglas soap opera vehicle which was released by an astounding coincidence shortly before the incident. On March 28, 1979, events began at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant that eventually had Pennsylvania's new governor, Dick Thornburgh, seriously considering the evacuation of all of central Pennsylvania. Probably the fact that no plans for such an evacuation existed anywhere was the sole reason that it wasn't ordered. (However, an estimated 144,000 residents near the nuclear power plant did leave their homes for a few days.) Unit 2 of Three Mile Island had only been on line for three months when events began to fall apart at about 4 a.m. March 28. No one really knows what happened, but operator error definitely was part of the problem, and later investigators said the operators were poorly trained. A water pump failure was the first, triggering piece of the domino effect, cutting off cooling water from the superhot uranium fuel that boils water in a nuclear reactor, making team to drive generator turbines. When the water was cut off, the uranium melted, burning through the fuel rods that could have been withdrawn to shut off the accident. The resulting radioactive mass destroyed much of the core of the reactor and almost burned through the containment vessel. If that had occured, there in-deed would have been a catastrophe. However, plant workers were able to restore water and bring down the temperature. For five days, the world feared that the reactor fuel would burn through the containment vessel at the Three Mile Island site near Harrisburg, unleash radiation into the atmosphere, maybe even explode like an atomic bomb. Those with garish imaginations fueled by the movie even feared that the super-hot fuel would burn down and clear through to, well, China. The Tribune-Review's Harrisburg correspondent, Dennis Barnbagello, was given his option to stay at the scene or evacuate, and in true newsman fashion elected to continue covering what could have been the biggest story ever. Rumors flew around like dust in the wind, and the crisis reached its height on the third day, when those rumors claimed that radiation was being released uncontrolled. In fact, it was a controlled release meant to ease pressure inside the unit. What's remarkable about the Three Mile Island incident is the public's perception of it as an enormous disaster that cost many human lives and wreaked havoc in the eastern United States. In fact, no lives were lost, no one was even injured, and no negative effect on public health from radiation was ever shown. University of Pittsburgh researchers, in a 20-year followup study, found no overall increase in cancer rates among those who lived within five miles of Three Mile Island, compared with those farther away. The only demonstrated health effects from the incident was a generally higher rate of stress from the hysteria. Over the next 12 years, cleanup of Unit 2, which was almost completely destroyed by the accident, took almost a billion dollars and nearly bankrupted GPU, its owner. Unit 2 still stands, mainly encased in concrete. Unit 1, its twin in the Susquehanna River, still operates safely. Unit 2 is owned by FirstEnergy Corp., which, ironically, was blamed for triggering last summer's blackout which darkened much of the northeastern U.S. That blackout demonstrated how precarious our supply of electricity is, yet how dependent we are on that supply. We need all sources of electricity we can get, from wind power to nuclear generation, and yet the permanent effect of Three Mile Island is to cut us off from a cheap, reliable means of its production. John Jennings can be reached at jjennings@tribweb.com [jjennings@tribweb.com] or (724) 459-6100, ext. 10. Images and text copyright © 2004 by The Tribune-Review ***************************************************************** 17 PPG: New nuke reactor design could revive defunct industry By DON HOPEY Pittsburgh Post-Gazette April 02, 2004 - There hasn't been an application to build a nuclear reactor filed in the United States since the accident at Three Mile Island, but Westinghouse is banking that its newest "cookie-cutter" design will revive the market that melted down 25 years ago. The Pittsburgh-based company boasts its AP1000, which uses a new passive safety technology that relies on gravity instead of pumps, is simpler, safer and faster to build. The design uses existing advanced, pressurized water reactor technology that can generate 1,117 megawatts of electricity - in the ballpark of existing nuclear plants - yet requires 50 percent fewer valves, 35 percent fewer pumps, 80 percent less piping and 70 percent less wiring. "That means there's less to buy, less to maintain," said Vaughn Gilbert, a Westinghouse spokesman. "And the chance of an accident is much less than the existing plants. These reactors can automatically shut down if there is a problem, even without anyone around." The technology places tanks of water above the reactor core and uses gravity instead of pumps and motors to supply cooling water. It also allows the reactor cooling system to operate independently of an alternative power source in the event of an emergency. Westinghouse also has developed the reactor so that its components can be built in a factory and then assembled on-site, much like a modular home. This "cookie-cutter" process produces a reactor with more uniform parts and one that is faster to build on site. "It was designed in cooperation with our customers, both in terms of safety and economics," Gilbert said. "It's unbelievably safe and cost-competitive. Since it will be pre-licensed, it will take only 36 months from ground-breaking to operation." Over the past four years, interest in nuclear power generation has risen as the cost of fossil fuels - coal, oil and natural gas - and concern over climate change and global warming has increased. Nuclear plant operating costs also have been going down, allowing nuclear power to approach cost-competitiveness with other types of power generation. Ed Cummins, a Westinghouse nuclear plant designer, said the initial cost of the AP1000 was approximately $1.3 billion, about two to three times the construction costs for a new gas or coal-fired electric generating facility, but the fuel would be cheaper. Cummins said the company expected to receive final design approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in September, a major step toward federal design certification, which could come by July 2005. He said markets for new nuclear plants existed in China, Korea, Finland, Russia and India, and eventually in the United States. "In the U.S., it will come because it will be economical," Cummins said. The Bush administration is pushing nuclear power and wants to see a new plant ordered in the country by 2010, but decisions on whether to build nuclear power plants ultimately will be made by Wall Street financiers who heretofore have shown little faith in investing in nuclear power. Gilbert said it was likely that any nuclear power plant built in the United States would be constructed at the sites of existing plants because the space is available and such a facility has gained local community acceptance. But Eric Epstein, a leader of the TMI Alert Group in Middletown, Pa., said that theory of community acceptance didn't hold up in the communities around Three Mile Island. "There's still 720 metric tons of nuclear waste at TMI Unit 1. How are they going to remove that so they can build a new reactor in that footprint?" Epstein said. "And TMI 2 is still a high-level radioactive site. ... They can design what they want, but I just think they have to deal with the mess they've already created before they move on." Cummins said that issue would be settled within the next three to five years when the nuclear waste disposal site at Yucca Mountain receives its federal license as a spent fuel storage facility. "What to do with it is a national policy decision that's about made," he said. "The policy will be that it's safe to dispose of lightwater reactor spent fuel at Yucca Mountain for 10,000 years if it's properly encapsulated." (Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, http://www.shns.com.) ***************************************************************** 18 PPG: Three Mile Island still casts shadow 25 years later By DON HOPEY Pittsburgh Post-Gazette April 02, 2004 ROYALTON, Pa. - Twenty-five years ago, a series of mechanical malfunctions and human errors led to a partial core meltdown at the Three Mile Island Unit 2 reactor and the uncontrolled venting of at least two major plumes of radioactive gas into the atmosphere. The accident had a devastating impact on the nuclear power industry - the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has not reviewed an application to build a new nuclear power plant in the United States since. And it triggered fear, panic, confusion and anger among thousands of people in Central Pennsylvania who lived in the long shadow of the cooling towers and beyond. Jane Seller, who still lives about 22 miles west of Three Mile Island in Carlisle, Pa., remembers being worried 25 years ago about a core meltdown and how that might cause long-lasting devastation of the region. "It was very scary," said Seller, 70. "The fact that we didn't have a total meltdown was lucky. We found out later it was worse than we thought." What she thought in the days after the accident was captured for posterity by Lonna Malmsheimer, a professor of American studies at Dickinson College in Carlisle who, along with two dozen professors and students, interviewed more than 400 people in Carlisle and communities around Three Mile Island in the weeks after the accident. Those audiotaped interviews, kept confidential for 25 years as promised, are now being released by the school. In her interview, Seller, then 45 and the mother of two preteen children, said she took the threat posed by the accident seriously, although her children did not. By Friday morning, two days after the accident, she was so concerned about a meltdown and radiation exposure that she began getting ready to leave the area. Pillows, prescriptions and toothbrushes were packed and put in the car. "I realized that all the women sitting next to their radios were losing their minds," she said in the interview. "That was really a bad thing to do. We should have been doing our wash or something." Seller and her children did leave Carlisle that Friday for her mother's summer home in Northern Pennsylvania but stayed away only a day. They were among approximately 200,000 who left their homes, some for days or weeks. Looking back on the accident now, Seller said, she remembers feeling angry. "A meltdown could have made that valuable, beautiful countryside uninhabitable for years and I couldn't understand how that could be allowed," she said. "It didn't feel healthy to be there and I still don't feel good about it. "It certainly isn't Chernobyl," Seller said, referring to the fatal nuclear plant accident in 1986 near Kiev, Ukraine. "But I still think the nuclear industry is problematic because no one has figured a good thing to do with the nuclear waste." Across the road from TMI, a stone's throw from the digital radiation monitor, is a blue and yellow highway marker erected by the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission in 1999, the accident's 20th anniversary, that attributes the accident to "technical malfunctions and human error." But the real causes were more complicated. And today, questions persist about the true cause of the malfunction, how it was handled and what health effects it caused. TMI Unit 1 was brought "on line" by General Public Utilities Nuclear and its plant operator, Metropolitan Edison, in September 1974. The controlled nuclear reaction created heat to boil water that produced steam to turn a turbine which began producing electric power. TMI Unit 2 came on line in December 1978, behind schedule and grossly over budget. It had been operating for 90 days when the accident occurred. According to an official Nuclear Regulatory Commission report released earlier this month to mark the anniversary, a malfunctioning pressure relief valve in the reactor's cooling system caused a loss of coolant and the core to overheat. The intense heat - the core temperature rose to well over 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit - damaged the reactor and collapsed its 177 fuel rods into a mass of debris and twisted sticks. At least 15 million curies of radiation was released into the atmosphere, according to the NRC, but some independent investigators put the radiation releases three to six times higher. NRC Chairman Nils Diaz, speaking at the March 3 NRC meeting, said the accident was preventable if plant procedures had been followed. "That these measures were not taken has less to do with the technology than with human error driven by a lack of understanding," Diaz said, "or, at times, a profound misunderstanding of what was taking place in the core in the first few hours of the accident." What Diaz and the NRC didn't say, according to Three Mile Island Alert, an anti-nuclear organization that opposed construction of the nuclear plants, is that Metropolitan Edison plant operators had been falsifying reactor leak rates to the NRC for weeks before the accident. "It was an historical crime," said Eric Epstein, a Holocaust historian and chairman of Three Mile Island Alert, "and we're in a battle now over memory." Preserving that memory are federal court records that show Metropolitan Edison struck a plea bargain with the Department of Justice in February 1984 to settle the leak rate falsification case. The utility pleaded guilty to one count and no contest to six others in an 11-count indictment. It was fined $45,000 and required to establish a $1 million fund to assist the state Emergency Management Agency in formulating an emergency preparedness plan for a 20-mile zone around the plant. "The community was held hostage and we all experienced psychological terrorism," Epstein said. "No one who lived through it will ever be the same. We find ways to deal with it. The cooling towers are in our back yard where we live, marry, parent and work. They still cast a shadow." TMI Unit 2 was drained of its fuel and contaminated water in the early 1990s. It will not be decommissioned until TMI Unit 1 is shut down. The Unit 1 reactor was restarted in 1985 and is licensed to operate through April 2014. (Don Hopey can be reached at dhopey(at)post-gazette.com.) (Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, http://www.shns.com.) ***************************************************************** 19 BreakingNews.ie: Nuclear plant decommissioning timetable brught forward 2/4/2004 - US National security adviser Condoleezza Rice will go before the federal panel reviewing the September 11 attacks next Thursday, it has been announced. Anti-abortionist convicted of abusing Northern Ireland girl An associate of two men who murdered abortion doctors in the 1990s was convicted of molesting a Northern Ireland teenager at a home he ran for troubled girls and women in the US. Israel may move against Arafat: Sharon Israel might move against Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, who has been confined to his West Bank headquarters for more than two years, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said. Harrington struggles in Atlanta Five days after one of the best performances of his career, Padraig Harrington found himself struggling to find the same adrenalin today. Nuclear plant decommissioning timetable brught forward 02/04/2004 - 6:41:13 AM The timescale to finish decommissioning the Dounreay nuclear plant in Scotland has been brought forward by 13 years, its operator announced today. A new management team and a £313m (€469m) clean-up programme have meant the work will now be finished by 2047, said the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA). The former experimental reactor establishment in Caithness is being decommissioned at an estimated total cost of £4bn (€6bn). It was also announced earlier this week that the facility had manufactured its last batch of nuclear fuel. Dounreay site director Norman Harrison, said: “Nobody in western Europe has more experience of managing the safe decommissioning of nuclear sites than UKAEA. “This is underlined by the commitments we have made to the government to accelerate the decommissioning of Dounreay in a way that continues to be safe, secure and environmentally responsible.” He added: “The job we have started at Dounreay has generated new business opportunities for companies in Caithness and Sutherland to become expert in the skills in decommissioning and has attracted some of the world’s largest engineering, environmental and project management companies to this area. “It is good news for the environment and it is good news for local contractors.” The accelerated programme, contained in a Near Term Work Plan, has been submitted by UKAEA to the Department of Trade and Industry as well as its successor body, the proposed Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. The plan includes speeding up the immobilisation of hazardous liquid waste, the destruction of more than 1,000 tonnes of hazardous liquid metal used as reactor coolant and the isolation of the waste shaft four years earlier than previously forecasted. © Thomas Crosbie Media, Friday, April 02, 2004. ***************************************************************** 20 petroleumworld: US averted nuclear catastrophy 25 years ago [http://www.petroleumworld.com] By Pascal Barollier AFP WASHINGTON Petroleumworld.com 04 02 04 Twenty-five years ago, 100,000 people poured onto the roads of Pennsylvania fearing a nuclear disaster at the Three Mile Island power plant located between Washington and New York. Today, it is the fear that terrorists might try to blow up a nuclear plant that has Americans jittery. The Three Mile Island incident began on March 28 1979 when in the middle of the night an alarm sounded in the control room of reactor Number Two. Two days later, the incident reached its peak when a radioactive gas bubble threatened the environment. On April 1, the bubble began to shrink under the 900 megawatt reactor's dome, and President Jimmy Carter visited Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and the plant to reassure the public. No one died in the incident, which started with a failure in a non-nuclear section of the plant, according to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The main feedwater pumps stopped running after a mechanical or an electrical failure, preventing steam generators from removing heat, according at an NRC report. The turbine and reactor Number Two shut down automatically. Pressure in the nuclear part of the plant immediately began to increase. A valve opened to reduce pressure, but it failed to close as it was supposed to when the pressure subsided. The control station never received a signal indicating that the valve remained open. Coolant escaped from the valve through the pressurizer, causing the reactor's core to overheat. The control station's indicators did not show that the core's coolant level was too low. Unaware of this problem, technicians worsened the condition by taking steps that reduced the core's coolant level. Since there was no adequate cooling, the nuclear fuel overheated to the point of causing the rupture of metal tubes that held the fuel. Fuel pellets began to melt before technicians were able to reduce the temperature. Luckily, although the plant suffered a "severe core meltdown, the most dangerous kind of nuclear power accident, it did not produce the worst-case consequences that reactor experts had long feared," according to the NRC report. A Chernobyl-type disaster -- in which massive amounts of radiation were spread into the atmosphere in the Ukraine in 1986 -- was averted. Today, one-fifth of US energy derives from nuclear power, 25 years after the country avoided a catastrophe. No new plants have been ordered and Congress has only timidly proposed nuclear power as an alternative source of energy to modernize a fragile sector. Last year, one-fourth of the US northeast lost electricity after a massive power failure. Since the September 11, 2001, attacks in New York and Washington, nuclear plants are considered among the most likely targets of terrorists who want to cause mass casualties. Every alert leads the security services of the country's 103 nuclear plants to prepare for the worst, while fighter jets are mobilized to stop hijacked planes from crashing into a reactor. AFP 01/04/04 16:34:21 Copyright © AFP 2004, All rights reserved /Publisher-Producer:Elio Ohep. Contact Email: [http://webmaster@petroleumworld.com] Legal Information. CopyRight © 2002, Elio Ohep.- All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 21 CBC Ottawa: Nuclear consultants earned $39.5M Last Updated | Apr 2 2004 03:39 PM EST TORONTO - Ontario's former Tory government paid $39.5 million for work on the province's ailing nuclear reactors that remains unfinished to this day, according to documents obtained by CBC News. Carl Andognini, Eugene Preston, Warren Preston and Michard Machon were hired in 1997 to supervise refurbishments of nuclear reactors at the Bruce and Pickering A generating stations. By the time the American consultants went home in 2000, the four had been paid $39.5 million. That figure included $17.5 million in severance payments. However, much of the work they were hired to do remains uncompleted. Three reactors at the Pickering facility are still not up and running, and work on the project is years behind schedule and billions over budget. + FROM DEC. 4, 2003: Nuclear repairs run billions over budget The contract details were revealed in documents released Friday to CBC News through a Freedom of Information Act request. Energy Minister Dwight Duncan said he was disgusted by the terms of the consulting contracts, which were signed by the province's former Conservative government. "This is an obscene abuse of the people of Ontario that was sanctioned by the Harris-Eves government," Duncan said. Copyright © CBC 2004 ***************************************************************** 22 abc7.com: SCE Fined for San Onofre Violations last updated: 4/2/2004[ align=] SAN CLEMENTE — Southern California Edison will pay $210,000 for failing to have funds available for closure of the hazardous waste facility at the San Onofre nuclear plant and potential liability, regulators said today. The California Department of Toxic Substances Control reports the settlement stems from SCE's failure to set up and demonstrate "financial assurance" from Jan. 16, 2001 through March 12, 2002. State law requires that assurance funds be available to pay for closure of the hazardous waste facility at the proper time, and to pay for third-party claims that may arise from the facility's operation. The agency said $139,506 of the money is a penalty, and $23,992 is to reimburse its costs. The remaining $46,502 will help pay for environmental enforcement and training programs for regulators, prosecutors, firefighters and law enforcement, according to the CDTSC. ***************************************************************** 23 Guardian Unlimited: Officials to Quit Sick Nuke Worker Program Saturday April 3, 2004 1:01 AM By NANCY ZUCKERBROD Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - Two Bush administration officials in charge of a widely criticized program that is supposed to help sick nuclear weapons workers are leaving their jobs, the Energy Department announced Friday. The agency announced the resignations of Undersecretary Robert Card, the department's third top official, and Assistant Secretary Beverly Cook, who reports to Card, in news releases. The two officials took the brunt of criticism from lawmakers this week after it was disclosed that a $74 million program to aid workers sickened from on-the-job exposure to toxic chemicals had paid out a single claim, $15,000, to one worker. ``The fact of the matter is that they want to spend time with their respective families,'' Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis said of the resignations. David Garman, the department's assistant secretary for renewable energy, was named acting undersecretary replacing Card. Congress established the sick worker program in 2000. Its job is to collect workers' records, help them navigate state compensation systems and ultimately cover the costs of claims awarded against government contractors. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, accused the department of overpaying its contractor, New Orleans-based Science and Engineering Associates, to run the program. Card denied Grassley's accusation at a hearing last Tuesday. Responding to the resignations Friday, Grassley said, ``It's important that the department find people who can now move this program forward.'' Grassley and several other lawmakers had recommended moving the program to the Labor Department, which runs a separate effort for compensating weapons plant workers sick from radiation exposure. The lawmakers have cited the massive backlog the Energy Department faces as it tries to process roughly 22,000 claims filed since the law took effect. As of Tuesday, only 372 claimants had heard whether their illnesses were job-related. Energy officials say they can shorten the backlog if Congress agrees to changes. A House committee this week endorsed a request from the agency to spend an extra $30 million atop the roughly $26 million being spent on the program this year. The Energy Department also wants Congress to lift a cap on fees paid to doctors who help assess worker claims. Most of the claims are from people who worked for contractors at Energy Department facilities in these states: Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, New Mexico, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee and Washington. Both Card and Cook also oversaw the development of a proposed rule that the Energy Department withdrew under pressure in February. It would have let contractors at nuclear facilities pick which safety rules they should follow. Card is no relation to White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card. ^--- On the Net: Energy Department's Office of Worker Advocacy: http://tis.eh.doe.gov/advocacy/ Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 24 USATODAY: Radiation lurks, but it's mostly harmless Posted 4/2/2004 12:00 AM Updated 4/2/2004 10:57 AM ANDREW KANTOR Radiation lurks, but it's mostly harmlessThis week marks the 25th anniversary of the partial meltdown of Unit 2 of the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant. You can find all you want to know about the incident from the Discovery Channel, but it seemed a good segue into talking about radiation. Since the 1950s, the word "radiation" is a scary one  it brings to mind terms like "fallout" and "cancer." Radiation is invisible, it kills, and there's no way to escape from it. Radiation is bad. But that's the problem: "Radiation" is a broad term, and most radiation isn't bad at all. Light bulbs emit radiation. So does your cell phone, microwave oven, and the candles at your dinner table. But people with agendas  whatever they are  will sometimes use the term as a scare tactic because they know the kind of visceral reaction it can get. 'Beware the electromagnetic radiation from overhead power lines!' or 'Can radiation from your cell phone cause brain damage?' Scary stuff if you don't know the details. Bits and Pieces First off, there are two kinds of radiation: particle and electromagnetic. And there are two kinds of particle radiation  alpha and beta particles  that are emitted by various substances like thorium, radium, and plutonium. Neither is particularly strong; they don't travel far from their source. Alpha particles are even too weak to penetrate skin, although if you ingest them they can cause a lot of damage. When something like Three Mile Island or Chernobyl happens, the danger is that substances that emit alpha or beta particles will end up airborne and people will breathe them in. Having plutonium or cesium particles in your lungs allows the alpha or beta particles they emit to wreak havoc with your cells and their DNA. The most common source of alpha radiation is radon, which occurs naturally all over the place. In fact, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement says that more than half of the average American's radiation exposure comes from radon in the soil. That's why you hear about having your home checked for the stuff [http://www.epa.gov/iaq/radon/rnactionmonth.html] . Some smoke detectors use americium, another alpha-particle emitter, which is why you're warned to dispose of your old detectors properly. (Remember, alpha particles can't penetrate skin, so standing near your smoke detector isn't dangerous. Just don't eat it.) Beta particle-emitters like iodine-131 and strontium-90 are more common and often found in certain medical treatments. They're dangerous when you're close to them because they can penetrate skin at close range (my nephew couldn't sit on my father's lap after my dad's cancer treatment), but unless you're in the habit of playing around with abandoned industrial or medical equipment you don't have to worry. You're unlikely to bump into a major source of beta radiation just walking down the street. (Except for folks in Kiev, that is.) Particle radiation comes from objects that emit it  bits of plutonium in the air after a nuclear meltdown, or simply radon in the soil. The other kind of radiation  electromagnetic or EM radiation  is all around us, coming from lots of different places. Everybody Wave [A hunter with his shotgun] A rough guide to EM radiation. The bad stuff — ionizing radiation — is towards the top. You can break down radiation into two categories, and it's crucial you know the difference. There's ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation is bad. It has enough energy to damage cells by knocking around electrons; it's that sort of stuff that can damage your DNA and cause cell mutation. Non-ionizing radiation is, with apologies to Douglas Adams, mostly harmless. (More on that in a moment.) Both alpha and beta particles, by the way, are ionizing. Looking around your house you'll find a lot of sources of EM radiation, and most of it is non-ionizing. The light from your table lamp is EM radiation. So is what comes from your monitor or any candles you have burning. Visible light is radiation. Your cordless phone emits EM radiation  radio waves  to talk to the base station. So does your cell phone. Your AM/FM radio is intercepting EM radiation from local stations. Even if you don't have an antenna, you're constantly bombarded by EM radiation sent by television stations and CB and shortwave radios. (All of these are often called radiofrequency or RF radiation.) Your microwave oven uses non-ionizing radiation to vibrate molecules of water in your food to cook it. Contrary to what you might have heard, being exposed to microwaves isn't dangerous; it's not ionizing, and the worst it can do is cause a burn. We're exposed to microwaves all the time, in fact. You know MCI, the communications company? "MCI" stands for "Microwave Communications Inc.," because the company planned to use microwave towers to transmit phone calls. Now microwaves are one of several ways phone companies transmit your voice. Most of the sources of radiation around your house are non-ionizing and safe  light bulbs, microwaves, portable phones, and so on. But you're also exposed to ionizing radiation. You can't help it. The sunlight shining through your window is full of ionizing ultraviolet (UV) radiation. The glass of the window stops the more harmful UV rays (commonly called UV-B), but lets all the UV-A radiation in. If you're outside, you're exposed to those UV-B rays which cause sunburn and, by damaging your skin's DNA, can cause skin cancer as well. But that's a small price to pay for a nice tan! (UV-A rays won't cause sunburn, but they are ionizing and can also cause skin cancer. And you won't even get a tan out of them.) [A hunter with his shotgun] Microwave towers like this one dot the landscape, transmitting phone calls. X-rays are also a form of ionizing EM radiation, which is why you should avoid them whenever possible. (MRIs use non-ionizing radiation and strong magnetic fields, which makes them much safer.) I said earlier that non-ionizing radiation is "mostly harmless." The thing is, no one is willing to say for sure that long-term exposure to large doses of EM radiation is completely safe. And by "large doses" I mean the kind you'd get by sitting in front of a big TV transmitter, day in and day out, not the kind you get just from using your cell phone a lot. What's made the news, though, are high-voltage power lines and the electromagnetic fields they generate. Are they safe? The answer is: probably. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, and Department of Energy conducted a five-year study on the effects of what are called extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF-EMF) that ended in 1998. The study's report said that "the scientific evidence suggesting that ELF-EMF exposures pose any health risk is weak." (Still, I wouldn't buy a house under a power line, for no other reason than it would be that much tougher to sell the thing even if a 50-year study said they were safe.) Getting away from it all Radiation  ionizing radiation  is everywhere. Minerals in the soil, besides emitting alpha and beta particles, also emit some gamma rays. Getting a little farther from home, every time you take a plane flight you have less protection from the earth's atmosphere and magnetic field. That leaves you more exposed to cosmic rays, which are pretty much at the top of the ionization scale when it comes to EM radiation  they're nasty stuff. Last year, when intense solar flares were bombarding us, some long-haul flights switched to a lower altitude to protect both the planes' electronics and the passengers' DNA. There's no way to escape radiation, ionizing or non-ionizing. There are radioactive particles in our bodies and in the food we eat. Radiation comes from the sun above and is in the ground below. Living in the wilderness and eating only the food you grow or hunt doesn't help; according to the Health Physics Society we are each exposed to six times more natural radiation than artificial. If you're feeling paranoid, there are ways to avoid radiation. Keep out of the sun, and slather on the sunscreen when you're outside regardless of the season. Avoid medical X-rays. Don't fly, and live someplace at a low elevation. Have your home tested for radon. But even with all this, you still can't get away. In fact the government, always eager to help, offers a handy calculator for computing your own radiation exposure [http://www.epa.gov/radiation/students/calculate.html] . Enjoy. Andrew Kantor is a technology writer, pundit, and know-it-all living in Columbus, Ohio; he's also a former editor for PC Magazine and Internet World. Read more of his work at kantor.com [http://www.kantor.com/] . His column appears Fridays at USATODAY.com. © Copyright 2004 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. ***************************************************************** 25 Bellona: Zvezdochka dismantling two nuclear subs First in the history of the shipyard its dock chamber accommodated two 949 project nuclear submarines Granite. 2004-04-02 11:11 Two nuclear submarines – K-206 Murmansk and K-525 Arkhangelsk were placed at the Zvezdochka’s dock chamber for dismantling, Regnum reported. In the end of January Arkhangelsk was divided in two parts, then the bow was transferred under the roof of workshop no.15, while the afterbody remained in the dock chamber. Such a separation operation of the gigantic submarine hull has never been done before by any company in the world, Dvina-inform reported. Arkhangelsk (order 605) was built at the Sevmash plant in Severodvinsk, Arkhangelsk region, and joined the Russian navy in October 1981. K-525 went 70 thousand miles during 800 operational days. The submarine reached the maximum depth 600m in 1983. Arkhangelsk regularly “watched” the NATO navy exercises during the cold war, although today a NATO member, Great Britain, pays for K-525 and K-206 scrapping in the frames of the G8 program "Global Partnership against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction”. Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] , President: Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no] Information: info@bellona.no [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 26 KAKE: Radiation Scare [http://www.kake.com/ Cara Kumari Several roads are closed for an hour in one Wichita neighborhood, because of a radiation scare. It happened near the intersection of North Gordon and Newell. The streets within a one-block radius of the intersection after emergency crews found radioactive material in a pipe at a home. Roger Rouleau hauls scrap metal, and the pipes are part of his load. Rouleau says, "I went to go to the metal place and they turned me down because of radioactivity so I went to another one so I went to another one and they turned me down again so I ended up getting ahold of the health department here." Firefighters, the HazMat crew, and Emergency Management also responded. The streets were closed for an hour, just to be safe. Emergency Managment officials say the pipes contained low levels of alpha radiation, but there was never any danger. Sedgwick County Emergency Management Director Randy Duncan says, "The material involved in this is a naturally occuring radioactive material which is associate with typical oil field operations. So there's really not anything to worry about." Gray MidAmerica TV Interactive Media, LLC ***************************************************************** 27 Janes: Iraq: the DU dust settles - Jane's Naval Forces [http://www.janes.com] 02 April 2004 Following the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, the incidence of radioactive contamination on Iraqi territory is being linked to the use of depleted uranium (DU) in munitions used by Coalition forces. JID's weapons specialist reviews the continuing political fall-out for Washington and its allies. DU has created controversy since it was used in the 1991 Gulf War. Activists and veterans' groups blame US weapons containing DU as the prime cause of 'Gulf War syndrome', an elusive combination of maladies that has affected more than 50,000 US veterans. Iraqi medical authorities also claim that increases in child cancers and birth defects were caused by DU contamination from tank battles on farmland west of Basra. The Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC) estimates the amount of DU used in the 2003 war at 1,700 tonnes, deployed in fighting vehicles, tanks, and aircraft. According to a UMRC research team, DU rounds used by US and British forces may have subjected parts of the country to high levels of radioactive contamination. The team's preliminary tests showed that air, soil and water samples contained 'hundreds to thousands of times' the normal levels of radiation. Tanks used in the battle for Nasiriyah examined by the UMRC team were found to be emitting several hundred times the background level of radiation. Depleted uranium - U-238 - is a waste by-product of uranium enrichment and is 40 per cent less radioactive than natural uranium, but remains radioactive for 4.5 billion years. DU is used in munitions because its density is 1.7 times that of lead; ignites and burns on hitting a hard target, acting as a self-sharpening penetrator; and has exceptional performance against armoured targets. Its hardness also makes it ideal for use in armour plating. Following the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, the incidence of radioactive contamination on Iraqi territory is being linked to the use of depleted uranium (DU) in munitions used by Coalition forces. JID's weapons specialist reviews the continuing political fall-out for Washington and its allies. DU has created controversy since it was used in the 1991 Gulf War. Activists and veterans' groups blame US weapons containing DU as the prime cause of 'Gulf War syndrome', an elusive combination of maladies that has affected more than 50,000 US veterans. 288 of 769 words --> [End of non-subscriber extract.] The full version of this article is accessible through our subscription services. Please refer to the box below for details. Jane's Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 28 AU SMH: Town glows with nuclear pride - World - www.smh.com.au [Sydney Morning Herald Online] By Andrew Jacobs in Snelling, South Carolina April 3, 2004 The people of this pine-shaded expanse of Carolina low country have a message for the nuclear power plants and hospitals of the nation: send us your spent reactors, your irradiated medical implements, any detritus still glowing with radiation. "We hear the word 'nuclear' and it's a good thing," said Tim Moore, the mayor of the poor, sparsely populated town. "We're happy to have the stuff. It doesn't scare us one bit." For more than 30 years, Snelling has eagerly housed one of the oldest and most active graveyards for atomic waste. The 97-hectare site, operated by Chem-Nuclear Systems Inc, is the only place in the United States licensed to take retired steam generators and pressure vessels, and the only one where the 39 states east of the Rockies can send the most radioactive of low-level waste. The nuclear waste business has been good for Snelling. It receives 40 per cent of its budget from taxes on the site and dumping fees. Chem-Nuclear employs 60 people, most of them locals. "I think everyone would agree that we're an asset to the state and the community," James Latham, Chem-Nuclear's vice president for operations, said. Like most people who live or work in Snelling, Mr Latham is proud of the place. "Whatever you do, don't call it a dump." Of course, not everyone is thrilled about it. The site has been repeatedly slated for closing, but state legislators have always found a way to keep it open over the opposition of environmentalists. Burying nuclear waste in some of the most waterlogged terrain in the country is simply bad science, environmentalists say. Although the more highly radioactive waste is sealed in plastic casks inside concrete vaults, neither the vaults nor trenches in which they sit are waterproof. Once covered with soil, the pit is topped by an impermeable seal, although water can enter the trench from the sides. "It's absolutely the most primitive nuclear waste technology you could imagine," said Bob Guild, an environmental lawyer who is filing a legal challenge to the state's most recent attempt to expand its capacity. "Your average county garbage dump has higher standards than this place," he said. But residents who live near the site had nothing negative to say about Chem-Nuclear. . "I'd love to get a job there if I could," said Judy Moody, 28, who recently lost her $9-an-hour job at a vending machine plant. Chem-Nuclear is a good neighbour: it established a public park and each year the company sponsors a baseball team and donates to the American Cancer Society. Those close ties between corporation and community worry some critics. Phil Leventis, a state senator, said the company had co-opted local residents and state legislators. "This is a case study of how a company can make a fortune, plough a little back into the political landscape, and get an incredible benefit," he said. New York Times Copyright © 2004. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 29 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: U.S. Has No Information Regarding NK's Reprocessing of Updated Apr.2,2004 15:18 KST North Korea had time to reprocess its nuclear fuel rods in the past six months but it is unknown whether the country actually carried out what is considered a step towards its nuclear drive. This is according to U.S. Forces Korea commander General Leon J. LaPorte and U.S. Pacific Fleet commander Admiral Thomas Fargo. At a U.S. House Armed Forces Committee session Fargo said he does not have sufficient information to tell if North Korea did in fact reprocess its spent fuel rods during the last six-month period. The admiral added, however, that the North's military posture was under close scrutiny and that he believes the current threat of a war on the Korean peninsula is not any greater than it was two years ago. Arirang TV ***************************************************************** 30 Las Vegas RJ: Congressman criticizes DOE Friday, April 02, 2004 Department called `too timid' in claiming funds for Yucca repository By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham came under growing pressure in Congress on Thursday to seek more funding for a nuclear waste repository in Nevada. A senior Michigan congressman charged the Energy Department has been "too timid" when it comes to claiming fees that utilities have set aside in a special fund for the Yucca Mountain Project. Congress controls the fund, but the Energy Department is seeking a bill that would reclassify a portion of the pot so lawmakers might find it easier to spend larger sums on nuclear waste. But Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., said DOE needs to get the entire fund freed for its use. Dingell fired questions at Abraham during an energy budget hearing. "You have to protect these funds or they will be dissipated," Dingell said. Lawmakers will be increasingly tempted to spend the money on other things, even though the fund was established expressly for the Yucca project, he said. Dingell's prodding reflected growing frustration among lawmakers from states where nuclear waste is generated and stored. They want to speed its delivery to a desert repository. Advocates for utility ratepayers also support the changes. Dingell said customers in Michigan have contributed $500 million in fees to the waste fund since it was created in 1983. On the other hand, lawmakers who handle budget matters have resisted the changes, saying they will increase the federal deficit and complicate congressional accounting. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said this week he sympathizes with DOE, but "I am not optimistic that this reclassification can be accomplished." Officials from Nevada also oppose the DOE bill, saying it will make it easier for the government to bury nuclear waste in the state. The fund has collected about $20 billion, and about $6 billion has been spent so far. The balance was $14.46 billion at the end of 2003. DOE managers have said they fear without legislation allowing the accounting changes, they will be unable to secure enough money to keep the Yucca program on schedule to a planned 2010 repository opening. Department officials have told Congress they will need $8 billion between 2005 and 2010 to prepare the Yucca site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, construct portions of a repository complex, and build a railroad line through rural Nevada. But they also have said they don't think they need the entire waste fund reclassified at this time in order to meet their goals. Abraham did not reply directly to Dingell's comments on Thursday. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 31 UKAEA: End of an era in fuel manufacturing at Dounreay 31st March 2004 Ref: 2004/19 Contact: Colin Punler, 01847 806080 The last batch of nuclear fuel to be manufactured at Dounreay was completed today, signalling the end of an era in the supply of fabricated uranium elements to research reactors around the world. Known as D1202, the sites fuel fabrication plant was the first active facility to commence operation at Dounreay in January 1957. Tomorrow, work will start to clean out and decommission the plant. The plant manufactured some 10,000 fuel elements using a series of precision mechanical processes to turn billets of uranium metal and aluminium into fuel elements of the highest quality. The elements were used to fuel research reactors in Britain and abroad that tested how different materials perform when exposed to radiation. They also produced isotopes for industrial and medical uses. Many of these reactors, including Dounreays Material Test Reactor, are now closed and the UK Atomic Energy Authority took the decision in 1998 not to seek any new work for D1202. The last outstanding order, from SCK-CEN, operator of the BR2 research reactor at Mol, Belgium, was finished today. The 20-strong D1202 workforce will now be redeployed on other duties at Dounreay, including the clean-out and decommissioning of the fuel fabrication plant. Site director Norman Harrison said: The workforce of D1202 can be very proud of the quality of their workmanship over the years and the contribution they have made to scientific, industrial and medical research, not just in the UK but around the world. 'Their international reputation for quality and professionalism is one we aim to mirror in how we go about decommissioning the site.' John Gibson, manager of D1202, said: 'I know there is sadness among the staff about the end of fuel fabrication and the loss of skills they have built up over the years. But equally there is optimism about the future in decommissioning and the opportunity to re-establish their reputation as world-leaders.' Ends Notes to Editors 1. Dounreay was Britains centre of fast reactor research and development from 1955 until 1994. 2. D1202 opened in January 1957 to manufacture fuel for the Dounreay Materials Test Reactor and its sister reactors at the UKAEA site at Harwell, Oxfordshire. This design of research reactor was exported to other countries, and the fuel for them was also manufactured in D1202. 3. The uranium billets used to manufacture fuel at Dounreay came from the adjoining uranium recovery plant. Further work is planned to recover other uranium held at the site and return it to reactor operators as billets. 4. Decommissioning of D1202 is expected to take until 2008 to complete at an estimated cost of £3 million. 5. A gratis colour photograph of the last fuel element being handed over by Norman Harrison to Patrick Vertongen of AIB-Vincotte, the Belgian nuclear inspection organisation, on behalf of SCK-CEN, is available on request from UKAEA. To request transmission, please contact Pauline Maclean on 01847 806083. 6. The Dounreay Site Restoration Plan was published by UKAEA in October 2000 and describes approximately 1500 projects required to decommission and restore the environment of the site at a cost in the region of £4 billion. 7. UKAEA is spending £140-150 million a year to decommission Dounreay, of which approximately £100 million a year is let in contracts. Decommissioning Dounreay is worth an estimated £80 million a year to the economy of the Highlands in general and Caithness and north Sutherland in particular. For more information, please contact Colin Punler, Communications Manager, Dounreay on 01847 806080 or 0776 4164812. Outwith normal office hours (0800-1615hrs) telephone 01847 802121 and ask for the Duty Press Officer. Copyright© UKAEA 2003 ***************************************************************** 32 UKAEA: Media invite 31st March 2004 806080 Ref: 2004/17 Contact: Colin Punler, 01847 806080 On Friday, 2 April 2004, UKAEA will be publishing a summary of its Near Term Work Plan for the decommissioning of Dounreay. The plan details the programme of work worth £313 million that will be carried out over the next two years, and is the basis of UKAEAs commitments to the Governments Liabilities Management Unit and the proposed Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. Norman Harrison, director of UKAEA Dounreay, invites the media to attend briefing sessions being held in Inverness and Thurso on Thursday, 1 April 2004. The briefings are embargoed until 0001hrs on Friday, 2 April 2004. The briefing will include the acceleration of the overall site restoration plan, the acceleration of specific projects, and the outcome of consultation on the disposal of active solvents and oils. The briefing sessions are: + 0900hrs at the Macleod Room, Marriot Hotel, Inverness on Thursday, 1 April 2004 + 1400hrs at the Small Lounge, Pentland Hotel, Thurso on Thursday, 1 April 2004 If you wish to attend either of the briefings, please notify Pauline Maclean on 01847 806083. Ends For more information, please contact Colin Punler, Communications Manager, Dounreay on 01847 806080 or 0776 4164812. Outwith normal office hours (0800-1615hrs) telephone 01847 802121 and ask for the Duty Press Officer. Copyright© UKAEA 2003 ***************************************************************** 33 Bellona: ‘Euradwaste’ conference debates EU policy on radwaste and public acceptance of nuclear challenges LUXEMBOURG—The European Commission’s proposed “Nuclear Package,” which contains a raft of suggestions regarding nuclear legislation within European Union, will not be adopted prior to the May 1st enlargement of the EU, it was announced at the Euradwaste ‘04 conference earlier this week. Bellona's Nils Bøhmer (third from right on the panel) at the 'Euradwaste' conference in Luxembourg this week. Soizick Martin, 2004-04-02 18:19 The sixth European Commission, or EC, Euradwaste conference, held on March 29 to April 1, brought together a number of EU authorities, nuclear industry experts and NGOs to debate not only the Nuclear Package, but to discuss methods how better to address issues of communication and cooperation between the authorities and the general public about nuclear issues—particularly that public located in the vicinity of radioactive waste storage facilities. The European Commission, or EC, has recently moved its nuclear offices from Brussels to Luxembourg, where the conference took place from March 29th to April 1. Nuclear energy in Europe Nuclear energy currently accounts for around one third of the EU’s electricity supply. Consequently, radioactive waste management is a priority for EU institutions—not only in terms of generating power, but also in terms of Europe’s future energy supply. Such was the subject of the EC’s debate-igniting Green Paper “Toward a European Strategy for the Security of Energy Supply,” adopted by the EC in June 2002. The paper laid out the details for a “safe, permanent and publicly acceptable management solution for all nuclear waste” across Europe, and gave rise to many of the EC’s proposals in the Nuclear Package—which have raised equal, if not more, controversy. But the issue will doubtless become more pressing after 10 new EU Member States—five of them from the former Soviet bloc, and four of them operating outmoded and dangerous Soviet built reactors—join the current 15 EU Member States on May 1st. Upcoming EU enlargement revives long-standing nuclear battle On the first of May later this year, the European Union will take 10 new member states on board, five of which are still operating nuclear power plants with so-called high-risk reactors. Four of the new Member States run Soviet design reactors—the VVER-440-230 and the fatally flawed, Chernobyl style RBMK series—all in need of maintenance or, better, complete shut-down. At stake in the debate over the Nuclear Package is the fate of waste from the EU’s soon-to-be 154 nuclear power plants—noted Christian Waeterloos, director of nuclear safety and safeguards issues at DG Energy and Transport, or DG TREN, echoing the theme of the EC Green Paper. “After 1st May, 11 additional plants will have to be taken into account. The EC came to the conclusion that the question of security of supply in Europe was of major importance, but that the energy choices would remain [within] the competence of the Member States,” said Waeterloos during his opening speech Monday. “These issues were all part of the negotiations with the candidate countries to the EU’s next enlargement.” The Nuclear Package On the heels of the EC Green Paper, the EC adopted the final text of Nuclear Package last year. The Nuclear Package proposed two EU directives on the general principles of nuclear safety that should be followed throughout the Union. Chief among these proposal were the suggestion that each nuclear nation in the EU cite and build deep geologic repositories for radioactive waste within a certain time frame, and that adequate finances be made available for decommissioning nuclear installations. The major aim of the package was to harmonize the different nuclear practices in each of the EU’s nations, especially the newly-accepted, formerly eastern bloc nations that have a weaker environmental tradition than their western counterparts. EC’s ‘nuclear package’ to harmonise atomic energy in expanded EU—but environmentalists cry foul The European Commission’s “nuclear package”—a raft of legislative proposals for nuclear energy and waste safety that many environmentalists consider a smokescreen for further European Union atomic development—is currently under debate at the European Parliament, or EP. [http://www.bellona.no/en/international/russia/nuke_industry/co-o peration/31518.html] Environmental controversy rages over package The package quickly caused a hullabaloo in the Brussels arena, the seat of EU power. Environmentalists slammed it as too weak to improve the concrete, day to day nuclear power situation, especially when the package was compared to the already-adopted principles of the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA. Environmentalists also said the weak Nuclear Package would provide a smokescreen for further nuclear development within the EU. In January, the European Parliament, or EP, voted in favour of the package in plenary session, though important amendments were eventually made to the EC’s original text. However, because the legal base for this new legislation is the Euratom Treaty—for which there is no codified multi-lateral decision making procedure—the EP has only a consultative role in the future of the Nuclear Package, leaving the Council of Ministers to act as the sole EU legislature. Will the Nuclear Package be legally binding? The Nuclear Package presented at the conference was a much more thinned-out version than the original document, said observers, and it remains unclear, if the Nuclear Package is adopted after May 1st, whether it will have the status of binding legislation or simply a non-binding resolution. This is one of the Nuclear Package’s biggest snarls as it makes its way to passage or the dust-bin. The Euradwaste conference’s first day of discussions was devoted to debate on EU radioactive waste management policies. Proposed legislation on this contained in the Nuclear Package is still under discussion in the Council of Ministers’ Atomic Questions Group, or AQD, in which a blocking minority of the European Union’s current 15 states—Germany, Finland, the United Kingdom, and Sweden—are opposing that the waste directive in the Nuclear Package become binding legislation. Decommissioning funds dumped Debates about the proposed Waste Directive among the Council of Ministers’ AQG, the Economic and Social Committee, and the EP led to changes in the original text. For instance, nuclear decommissioning funds envisaged in the original text received a very negative reaction and are now absent from the current Nuclear Package text. The EP had, in January, lobbied for a stronger text on decommissioning funds. “In the Waste Directive, the emphasis was put on high-level waste management, but the text covers all other forms of waste,” said Derek Taylor, one of EC’s key nuclear experts behind the development of the Nuclear Package at the Conference, on Monday. “One key point of the proposed Directive was to have Member States defining a clear program for radioactive waste management. This is also a requirement in the IAEA’s Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management.” Deep geologic repositories Another fierce debating point in the Nuclear Package was the time deadlines that it set for building of geologic repositories for nuclear waste that would be imposed on each EU Member State using nuclear power. The countries would have had until 2008 to research and cite the repositories and would have been required to have them up and running by 2018. Member States would also have been required to have fully operational facilities for low-level waste storage by 2013. These timetables, however, were criticised by many Member States and nuclear experts as unrealistically tight. NGOs, including Bellona, also weighed in, saying the deadlines would not allow adequate time for public consultation and scientific analysis. The timetables were withdrawn from the text of the Nuclear Package presented at the conference. Taylor said that the EC has been accused of offering deep geologic repositories as the only solution to handling the EU’s radioactive waste. “But we are not against other solutions, if they exist,” said Taylor. Other speakers, defending the EC point, emphasised that the consensus of the world nuclear community on radioactive waste containment is that deep geologic burial is the best option as yet discovered. Other unresolved issuses Some key issues remain unsolved, and are blocking the Nuclear Package’s passage as a whole. These include questions such as: “What would be the concrete added value of the new EU legislation compared to the current systems, namely those outlined in the IAEA agreement?” and “Would these proposals compromise the authority of Member States?” The EC should soon publish a new version of the text, taking into account comments from the EP, and on March 31st the AQG was in session to discuss the issue further. Only one thing is sure at the moment: The package will not be adopted before May 1st. The role of the public in solving radwaste issues Another key point of the Euradwaste discussions was the importance of the general public’s role in accepting the radioactive waste problem and mobilizing its assistance in overcoming the “Not in My Back Yard,” or NIMBY philosophy of waste handling. The NIMBY complex, dictates that locally produced energy waste be sent far from where the waste was produced and the community that produced it. Another session of the Euradwaste conference was entitled “Siting a Deep Geological Repository for Spent Fuel – A Technical Endeavour and a Social Challenge.” Among the speakers and panel members were representatives from the different EU Nuclear Industries—France’s Cogema, the Belgian Ondraf/Niras, Slovenia’s Arao and Denmark’s Bmu. Claes Thegerström, President of the Swedish SKB, for whom the siting of nuclear waste repositories in Europe was closely linked to the acceptance of such repositories by local populations, presented a unique point of view on the topic. “Since the 70s, the [nuclear] industry in Sweden has been involved with and created a structure between the different stakeholders," he said at the Conference. “In the 90s, when the first phase of the programme started, there was clear pressure from the local authorities and the local communities [regarding the choice of nuclear waste disposal sites].” From experience, Thegerström explained that it was important to develop a dialogue with local populations where potential geologic repositories are being investigated in order to build trust. He emphasised that public acceptance should be as high on the list of priorities as the technical aspects of the programme. This approach differed from that of Bertrand Barré of Cogema, who said misunderstandings with the public arose because it does not comprehend the technical and logistical imperatives of nuclear science. He said that the question of citing and building repositories was urgent, after years of accumulating research. Nils Bøhmer, The Bellona Foundation’s nuclear specialist, was also present at the conference and sat on a panel entitled “Can NIMBY be overcome?” He insisted, like Thegerström, on the importance of opening a democratic exchange on the geologic repository process and improving the transparency of the decision-making process surrounding it. “Local communities and NGOs need information and knowledge to have their own opinion on the [envisaged] plans,” he told the conference. “We need the resources to verify by ourselves [if the situation is objectively safe]. And we shouldn’t forget the idea of temporary storage, because the technology will develop further.” In order to earn public acceptance, and thus rid the debate of the NIMBY syndrome, it is crucial to have all stakeholders in areas surrounding potential geologic repositories—including local populations and civil society movements—participating in the decision-making process. EU legislation and harmonisation of the current various systems, especially on the eve EU enlargement, can be a tool to improve environmental safety as well as citizens’ rights to a healthy and clean world to live in. But it also must be a priority for EU institutions and the European nuclear industry to improve their communication and collaboration with the real people that are directly affected by their nuclear policies. Publisher: [bellona@bellona.no] , President: [frederic@bellona.no] Information: [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 34 BBC: Dounreay run-down brought forward Last Updated: Friday, 2 April, 2004 [Dounreay Nuclear Power Plant] Decommissioning plans for Dounreay have been moved forward Plans to decommission the Dounreay nuclear plant are to be accelerated by 13 years. A new management team and a £313m clean-up programme mean the work will now be finished by 2047, according to the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA). The former experimental reactor site in Caithness is being decommissioned at an estimated total cost of £4bn. The 140-acre facility opened in 1955 and manufactured its last batch of nuclear fuel earlier this week. Clearing up The details of the new work programme are contained in a new UKAEA plan submitted to the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and its successor body, the proposed Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). The plans are subject to relevant regulatory consents and include: + The destruction of more than 1,000 tonnes of hazardous waste liquid metals used as coolant in the fast reactor + The isolation of the waste shaft four years earlier than expected + Accelerating the immobilisation of hazardous liquid waste left over from the reprocessing of research reactor fuel by two years to 2010 + A new plant to destroy active solvents and oils left over from reprocessing and reactor operations with on-site incineration + Demolition of decommissioned test cells and other buildings. Dounreay site director Norman Harrison said: "Nobody in western Europe has more experience of managing the safe decommissioning of nuclear sites than UKAEA. "This is underlined by the commitments we have made to the Government to accelerate the decommissioning of Dounreay in a way that continues to be safe, secure and environmentally responsible." He said the decommissioning of Dounreay has generated new business opportunities for companies in the local region, worth approximately £80m a year to the Highlands and responsible for a fifth of jobs in the immediate area. Local contractors He added: "With their help we can eliminate more of the hazards left over from Dounreay's operational days. "We can do it quicker and more cost-effectively without jeopardising our over-riding priorities of safety, security and environmental protection "This is good news for the taxpayer, for the environment and for local contractors." Dounreay was the UK centre for fast reactor research and development from 1955 until 1994 with three reactors, fuel processing and other facilities on site. The NDA will take responsibility for the decommissioning of Dounreay from 1 April, 2005, taking over from the DTI's Liabilities Management Unit. ***************************************************************** 35 Daily Nebraskan: Senators split on solution to budget crisis Friday April 02, 2004 dailynebraskan.com] By RACHAEL SERAVALLI / DN Senior Writer LEGISLATURE Lawmakers seemed divided Thursday on how to solve a pending budget crisis -- or whether to attempt to solve it at all. Options have included a sales tax increase, an income tax increase, a property tax levy increase and a bond proposal. Sen. Chris Beutler of Lincoln offered an amendment that would have increased the sales tax by half a cent for one year, raising about $122 million. Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha, however, vowed to fight the amendment because he said he believed a sales tax to be unfairly hard on the poor. "I'm going to be rock solid against any sales tax increase," he said. "And should it become necessary to wage a one-person battle against it, I shall do so." Beutler withdrew the amendment, but Chambers' threat didn't keep senators from considering the various options, including everything between Beutler's amendment and nothing. Sen. Kermit Brashear of Omaha revived his bond proposal in a scaled-back form to raise only enough money for a possible $155 million judgment against the state. Initially, the bonds would have been used to raise $270 million to cover both the possible judgment and an additional $104 million shortfall predicted by the state's economic forecast board. At least one court has ruled Nebraska broke a regional contract when it prevented a low-level radioactive storage site from being built in the state. The state is appealing the ruling, and the bill on the judgment could come due as early as November. Brashear eventually withdrew the amendment when legislators failed to show unified support, though even Beutler, who expressed opposition to the plan initially, said he would be willing to seriously consider it. Sen. Ray Janssen of Nickerson, who said facing the possibility of a judgment was good stewardship, offered an amendment that combined three different revenue options: a 3 percent electricity bill surcharge for 15 months, a 5 percent increase in income tax for one year and a quarter-cent sales tax increase for one year. All totaled, the plan would have raised about $158 million. Beutler proposed an amendment to the plan that would eliminate the electricity surcharge. The amendment passed 25-4 and reduced the amount raised by the Janssen plan by $46 million. Chambers divided the amendment into its three components, making some lawmakers fearful that one type of tax would pass but not the other. The remaining income portion of the Janssen amendment failed 21-19, and senators had not yet voted on the sales tax portion when they adjourned for the day. Sen. Mark Quandahl of Omaha, one of a few outspoken senators against raising taxes at all, strongly encouraged the body to wait for a definitive economic outcome before taxing Nebraskans. "Just say no," Quandahl said. [end of article dingbat] © 2004 Daily Nebraskan ***************************************************************** 36 Las Vegas SUN: Changes in Yucca funding sought By Suzanne Struglinski < [suzanne@lasvegassun.com] > SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Energy Department needs to secure more funding for the Yucca Mountain project to be fair to ratepayers supporting the project, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., told Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham Thursday. The department wants Congress to change its budget rules so lawmakers can spend at least $750 million of the proposed nuclear waste storage site at Yucca without hurting other federal programs. The department doesn't want the project to compete for funding through Congress. Instead, it wants to take the money directly from a fund for nuclear waste disposal without fighting in Congress for the money. Congress, so far, has denied the request. Dingell said the department should go above and beyond its budget request and ask for the $14 billion in the fund, which is supported by nuclear utilities. "You have to protect those funds or else they are going to be dissipated," Dingell said at a House and Energy Commerce Committee hearing Thursday. "Congress is willing to spend those monies for other purposes." Dingell said he was concerned about the "hijacking" of money in the nuclear waste fund by the budget committee. Abraham said at this point the department is only focusing on funds coming into the fund in the future. The department's proposal to change the budget has not moved through Congress so far, which leaves the project to fight for it share of federal money just like any other program. Many members of Congress said it was unlikely the Energy Department would get its wishes to dip into the nuclear fund without competition. Nevada's congressional delegation has been against giving the department more money. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., has routinely cut the budget. Abraham said Thursday it is wrong that people pay money toward the Yucca project but not see it spent. "We are going to work as hard as we can," Abraham said. "We recognize we'll have to work very hard in the Senate, but we are going to everything we can to make that happen. We think it's appropriate to fence that money off." ***************************************************************** 37 UKAEA: Clean-up programme worth £313 million to be driven forward by new management 1st April 2004 Ref: 2004/18 Contact: Colin Punler, 01847 806080 The UK Atomic Energy Authority today announced it is accelerating the decommissioning of the former experimental reactor establishment at Dounreay. Site director Norman Harrison said the timescale for complete decommissioning has been brought forward to 2047. He also announced a new management structure designed to sharpen the focus on delivering the site restoration plan on an even earlier timescale. Details of the accelerated work programme are contained in a Near Term Work Plan submitted by UKAEA to the Liabilities Management Unit of the Department of Trade and Industry and its successor body, the proposed Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. The plan details the programme of work worth £313 million to decommission the site over the next two years. Launching a summary of the plan, Norman Harrison said: Nobody in western Europe has more experience of managing the safe decommissioning of nuclear sites than UKAEA. This is underlined by the commitments we have made to the Government to accelerate the decommissioning of Dounreay in a way that continues to be safe, secure and environmentally responsible that I am announcing today. 'The job we have started at Dounreay has generated new business opportunities for companies in Caithness and Sutherland to become expert in the skills in decommissioning and has attracted some of the worlds largest engineering, environmental and project management companies to this area. With their help, we can eliminate more of the hazards left over from Dounreays operational days, we can do it quicker and we can do it more cost-effectively without jeopardising over our-riding priorities of safety, security and environmental protection. This is good news for the taxpayer, it is good news for the environment and it is good news for local contractors.' Subject to the relevant regulatory consents where appropriate, the plan includes: + Accelerating the immobilisation of hazardous liquid wastes left over from the reprocessing of research reactor fuel by two years to 2010. + Public participation in proposals to accelerate the immobilisation of hazardous liquid wastes left over from the reprocessing of fast reactor fuel. + The destruction of more than 1000 tonnes of hazardous liquid metals used as coolant in the fast reactors. + Isolation of the waste shaft from its hydrogeological environment four years earlier than previously forecast. + Plans for a new plant to destroy active solvents and oils left over from reprocessing and reactor operations. Following public participation in the options, UKAEA has concluded that incineration of the waste at Dounreay is the Best Practicable Environmental Option. + Development of new facilities for the management of low-level waste from the decommissioning programme following public participation in the options. An announcement about the Best Practicable Environmental Option is due to be made in Spring. + Demolition of decommissioned test cells and other buildings. + The beginning of construction of facilities for the removal of stuck breeder fuel from the Dounreay Fast Reactor. + Agreement on the Best Practicable Environmental Option for management of particles in the marine environment following public participation in the options. Delivery of these and other important tasks in the Near Term Work Plan will be led by a new management team designed to sharpen focus on acceleration of the site restoration plan. A new structure is being put in place and subject to regulatory consent announcements about key appointments will be made in the near future. Ends Notes to Editors: 1. Dounreay was Britains centre of fast reactor research and development from 1955 until 1994. Three nuclear reactors, fuel reprocessing and other associated nuclear facilities were built and operated on a 140-acre. The site is now being decommissioned at an estimated total cost in the region of £4 billion. The decommissioning programme is prioritised towards reducing and eliminating the greatest hazards first. 2. The summary of the Near Term Work Plan for Dounreay can be found at www.ukaea.org.uk/reports/sites.htm 3. Under Government proposals, a new organisation known as the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority will become responsible for the strategic direction and funding of the decommissioning of UKAEA and BNFL sites from 1 April 2005. The Liabilities Management Unit of the Department of Trade and Industry is preparing the ground for this new body. Initially, UKAEA and BNFL will be contracted by the NDA to manage the decommissioning of their respective sites. 4. Decommissioning Dounreay is worth approximately £80 million a year to the economy of the Highlands in general and Caithness and north Sutherland in particular through nett salaries, pensions, contracts and sub-contracts. One in five jobs in Caithness and north Sutherland depend on decommissioning. Across Scotland, it accounts for 2,930 jobs. 5. Public participation in the options for disposal of radioactive solvents and oils at Dounreay was a pilot project for consultation in waste management decisions at the site. A total of 18 written responses were received during a 12-week period of consultation. A report on the consultation and its outcome is being issued today to stakeholders, and can be found at www.ukaea.org.uk/dounreay/dsrpnews.htm 6. For more information, please contact Colin Punler, Communications Manager, Dounreay on 01847 806080 or 0776 4164812. Outwith normal office hours (0800-1615hrs) telephone 01847 802121 and ask for the Duty Press Officer. Copyright© UKAEA 2003 ***************************************************************** 38 WT&G: Army agrees to pay for removal, disposal of hazardous materials Worcester Telegram &Gazette: Friday, April 2, 2004 The Associated Press BOSTON- The U.S. Army has agreed to pay for the removal and disposal of more than 3,700 barrels of depleted uranium from the Starmet facility in Concord, a Superfund site. The settlement between the U.S. Army and the U.S. Department of Justice will result in the removal of low-level radioactive material and other hazardous materials from the facility, Commissioner Robert Golledge Jr. of the Department of Environmental Protection and Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly announced Friday. "The materials contained in these drums have long been a source of concern for the local community, so with the DEP taking the lead to make sure the drums are removed, the Environmental Protection Agency can properly assess and clean up this Superfund site," Golledge said in a statement. The DEP will select a hazardous materials packaging and transportation contractor and the removal process is expected to begin in three to four months. The process, which will be supervised by DEP staff, could take between four and six months. Starmet, which owns the Concord site and was formerly called Nuclear Metals Inc., manufactured depleted uranium munitions for the Army from the 1970s through 1999. The recent settlement largely resolves issues in another lawsuit filed by Massachusetts in 2002 after Starmet filed for bankruptcy the same year. The court eventually ordered Starmet to provide security at the site when the company threatened to abandon the property. An investigation is underway to determine the extent of contamination at the site. [http://www.telegram.com] | [http://www.eworcester.com] | Worcester Telegram &Gazette Corp. ***************************************************************** 39 Pahrump Valley Times: YUCCA MOUNTAIN NEWS April 2, 2004 No surprise, but little desire for nuke trucks NETH, OTHER OFFICIALS DECRY DOE REVIVING TRUCK USE FOR NUCLEAR WASTE TRANSPORTS By STEVE TETREAULT PVT WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON - Considering the challenge of building a 300-mile railroad, state and local officials expressed little surprise on Wednesday that the Department of Energy has revived the possibility of shipping nuclear waste across Nevada by truck to a repository at Yucca Mountain. Whether they welcomed the prospect is another thing. "This isn't really new except it's taken on new life perhaps with the realization that the department may not have a railroad done by 2010," said Caliente Mayor Kevin Phillips. DOE's move to explore a backup plan "says to me they recognize their whole rail proposal is going to take longer and be more complicated than they thought," said Bob Loux, director of Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects. Yucca Mountain Project director Margaret Chu said Wednesday she remains hopeful DOE will have a 319-mile Nevada rail line built in time to convey nuclear waste to the repository for a planned 2010 opening. Chu said discussions about backup truck shipments were part of the department's "robust planning." "We want to be sure when we open the repository that we can begin shipping," Chu said. DOE officials did not provide further information about possible costs of its contingencies, nor the possible number of shipments that Nevada motorists may encounter if trucks are employed during the first years of repository operations. A department analysis this month assumed nuclear waste would be hauled by truck for six years while a railroad is being built. While it did not specify a route, it indicated a likely 330-mile path from Caliente to Tonopah along state roads and then south on U.S. Highway 95 to Yucca Mountain. Under the scenario, nuclear waste would be shipped by rail from power plants to a transfer station in Caliente, and then loaded onto semi-trailers for the final leg to the repository. DOE plans to ramp up the repository, accepting smaller amounts of nuclear waste during the first four years of operations. Robert Halstead, a transportation consultant for the state of Nevada, estimated this week that truck shipments on rural highways could number about 600 the first year to 2,200 annually by the fourth year. Halstead said DOE officials might conclude it is easier to ship by truck than to build a railroad that could cost $1 billion or more. In Nye County, the prospect of nuclear waste-carting trailers drew a strong reaction from County Commission Chairman Henry Neth. The likely truck route would carry spent nuclear fuel through Warm Springs, Tonopah and Beatty, he said. "That would be the worst possible scenario for Nye County," Neth said. "The infrastructure for those types of trucks would just devastate (Nye County). They would be going right through the middle of every small town in Nye County. Right through the middle." In Lincoln County the idea got a more welcoming reception from the Caliente mayor. Phillips and other county leaders have lobbied the government for a nuclear waste transfer station, which they view as a major economic development tool. "This is going to bring opportunities for us," Phillips said. Phillips said he pictured the Yucca program providing a good living for truck drivers hauling nuclear waste and others working for the government. "A teamster could live here, make his run, drop his load, pick up an empty, come back through Vegas and make the round trip in a one day shift," Phillips said. "I have teamsters who are just hoping this comes about so they can be home with their families and have a decent job." Nevada elected officials reacted swiftly and strongly against the idea. They renewed arguments that waste shipments could become involved in tragic accidents or come under attack by terrorists. "That's a lot of truckloads," Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said. "And this is more than just a truckload of fertilizer. "DOE just doesn't know what they are doing," Reid said. "Yesterday they were building a railroad, today they may not be." Nuclear industry representative David Blee said safety fears are unfounded. Blee said truck casks are licensed to specifications set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and risks would be minimal. "Obviously a truck cask presents a smaller target and carries a smaller payload. In many respects it would be less vulnerable," said Blee, spokesman for the U.S. Transport Council, an association of nuclear material shipping firms. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said she rejected even empty nuclear waste casks traveling near Las Vegas. "That would give people the idea that this is a valid proposal and it is not," she said. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., whose district includes communities along the likely truck route, "believes this is a bad idea and something he would not support," said Amy Spanbauer, his deputy chief of staff. Gibbons was particularly concerned about the ability of rural first responders to handle accidents involving nuclear waste, Spanbauer said. Gibbons was working in the House Intelligence Committee and was not available. Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., said DOE officials gave no hint to the possibility when quizzed during a hearing before his railroad subcommittee in March. According to a transcript, Gary Lanthrum, a DOE official who is planning the Yucca Mountain shipping campaign, testified that Nevada would have "significant input" in any discussions of truck routing. "If Nevada has a say, we will hold them to that," Porter said. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., "would strenuously oppose this, just as he opposes rail," spokesman Jack Finn said. For comment or questions, please e-mail [webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com] Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2003 ***************************************************************** 40 U.S. Newswire: TSA to Conduct Background Checks on Hazmat Drivers 4/2/2004 5:24:00 PM To: National Desk Contact: TSA Public Affairs, 571-227-2829 WASHINGTON, April 2 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration (TSA) announced today plans for conducting background checks on commercial truck drivers who transport hazardous materials (HAZMAT), including explosives. The plan requires conducting name-based terrorist focused background checks on all 3.5 million hazmat drivers this year to determine whether any present a potential terrorist threat. Drivers will also undergo an FBI fingerprint-based criminal history check to begin no later than January 31, 2005. TSA developed this plan to protect against the threat posed by terrorists transporting hazmat, and to maximize flexibility for the states so the issuance of hazmat endorsements is not impeded by security requirements. Previously the deadline for states to begin collecting fingerprints and providing them to the FBI was April 1, 2004. TSA is providing states additional time to make the significant changes to their existing commercial driver safety and testing programs. The USA PATRIOT Act requires background checks for all commercial drivers who apply for, renew or transfer a hazmat endorsement. TSA will notify the States of the results of the background checks and states will either issue or deny hazmat endorsement based on that information. The act gives TSA responsibility for collecting and transmitting fingerprints and other information from applicants for hazmat endorsements to the FBI. If a hazmat endorsement is denied, a driver can appeal on grounds of mistaken identity or inaccurate court records. Drivers who do not wish to transport hazardous materials do not need an endorsement, and drivers who surrender an endorsement will not be subject to a background check. Hazardous items include gasoline, explosive cartridges, radioactive and infectious substances, propane, chlorine, acids, ammonia and other poisonous gases. Drivers must renew a hazmat endorsement every five years, although a state may require more frequent renewals. Under TSA rules, drivers are responsible for reporting disqualifying events. http://www.usnewswire.com/ [http://www.usnewswire.com/] /© 2004 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/ ***************************************************************** 41 Scotsman.com: Dounreay to be decommissioned 13 years early Fri 2 Apr 2004 THE timescale to finish decommissioning the Dounreay nuclear plant has been brought forward by 13 years, its operator announced today. A new management team and a £313million clean-up programme have meant the work will now be finished by 2047, said the UK Atomic Energy Authority. The former experimental reactor establishment in Caithness is being decommissioned at an estimated total cost of £4 billion. It was also announced earlier this week that the facility had manufactured its last batch of nuclear fuel. Dounreay site director Norman Harrison said: "Nobody in western Europe has more experience of managing the safe decommissioning of nuclear sites than UKAEA. "This is underlined by the commitments we have made to the Government to accelerate the decommissioning of Dounreay in a way that continues to be safe, secure and environmentally responsible." He added: "The job we have started at Dounreay has generated new business opportunities for companies in Caithness and Sutherland to become expert in the skills in decommissioning and has attracted some of the world’s largest engineering, environmental and project management companies to this area. "It is good news for the environment and it is good news for local contractors." scotsman.com ***************************************************************** 42 Tri-City Herald: K Basins accident concerns DOE This story was published Friday, April 2nd, 2004 By Annette Cary Herald staff writer The Department of Energy is concerned that a hoist accident at the Hanford K Basins could indicate a recurring breakdown of good safety operations and management at the project. "It was a big wake-up call," said DOE spokeswoman Colleen Clark in Richland. In a letter to contractor Fluor Hanford, DOE's Richland manager Keith Klein listed several events over the last year that added to his concern. Some incidents involved workers, such as a fist fight between two employees at the K Basins several weeks ago over a nonwork issue, said DOE spokeswoman Andrea Harper in Richland. In another case, workers played "pranks" and put equipment where it did not belong, causing work delays, Harper said. Other problems were linked to the long-delayed start of sludge removal at the K Basins. Last spring Fluor Hanford prematurely declared it was ready to start moving sludge, Harper said. The work has yet to begin. Klein also listed "inadequate engineering processes," a reference to design issues on equipment needed for the sludge removal, Harper said. In some cases, Fluor took action too slowly, according to the letter. That included a "recent slow response to elevated airborne contamination levels" and "delayed notification of events" to DOE. Klein wrote the letter after a 160-pound hoist used to move heavy equipment fell from overhead tracks and crashed 6 feet below onto steel grating above the K West Basins. The K Basins are two indoor pools of water built to hold spent nuclear fuel temporarily about 400 yards from the Columbia River. The pools, built in the '50s, have leaked. Work is about 80 percent complete to remove 2,300 tons of fuel from them. 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. No one was injured when the hoist fell on the graveyard shift shortly before midnight March 10. It landed about 8 feet away from a work area. Klein was concerned not only that the accident occurred, but also about Fluor's delay in notifying DOE of the accident. According to the letter, there had been other incidents of delayed notification in the past year, apparently of less serious events. After the hoist incident, a manager secured the area with caution tape but did not realize the accident should be reported, according to Fluor. DOE was not notified until the next afternoon. The events "may indicate a recurring breakdown of formality and discipline required to safely perform operations at K Basin," Klein wrote. Fluor responded in a five-page letter to DOE last week. At the time of the hoist accident, officials speculated that a safety system of cogs to hold the hoist in place on the tracks might have failed because of worker sabotage. But Fluor now believes the problem was caused by wear and tear on equipment at the end of its life cycle, possibly exacerbated by heavy loads. The report discussed better mechanical inspections, improved maintenance procedures and more formal procedures. The hoists are now being checked each time they are used, said Fluor spokesman Geoff Tyree. "We cannot allow informality in the nuclear business," said Donna Busche, vice president of regulatory compliance. The contractor is continuing to take a broader look at the problem to make sure a lack of discipline in safety procedures is not occurring in other systems at the K Basins, she said. The report also addressed problems related to high airborne radioactivity. The cleanest fuel was removed from the basins first, but now Fluor is nearing the end of the project and removing the fuel that is crumbling and degraded. As the fuel is washed, it leaves more heavily contaminated water. When the water is disturbed in the process, radioactive particulates have been measured in the air. Workers are protected with respirators and protective clothing. Fluor also is working to reduce the airborne contamination by using a better filtering system for the water and starting a better airborne monitoring sampling program to characterize the source of airborne radioactivity. © 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 43 Oak Ridger: Engineering the future Story last updated at 12:29 p.m. on April 2, 2004 GETTING INFORMED: Company involved in efforts to raise public awareness and appreciation of engineers and their work. By: Paul Parson | Oak Ridger Staff paul.parson@oakridger.com [paul.parson@oakridger.com] For Jill Kovalchik, it was a chance to get a first-hand glance at what engineers do in the real world. The 25-year-old was one of 19 University of Tennessee engineering students who spent Thursday afternoon at CH2M Hill's Oak Ridge offices. In addition to learning about the engineering and construction management firm, Kovalchik said the visit helped her and the other students learn what's going to be expected of them when they enter the workforce. "It's really great what they're doing," said Kovalchik, who'll graduate in May 2005. Ken Hill, left, vice president of CH2M Hill's Tennessee Operations, talks with four University of Tennessee engineering students: Adam Fiscor, Amy Longcrier, Jill Kovalchik and Chris Butler. The students spent the afternoon visiting and learning about the engineering and construction management firm. The visit was originally supposed to take place in February as part of National Engineers Week, but had to be rescheduled due to snow. Ken Hill, vice president of CH2M Hill's Tennessee Operations, seemed enthused as he talked with and toured students around the company's offices. "It's been refreshing to see that they have an interest," Hill said. "I'm delightfully surprised by the number of questions." During the visit, the students were briefed on some of the projects that CH2M Hill has been involved in, including design and construction work pertaining to a rail line in Salt Lake City, Utah, as well a nuclear cleanup project at the Department of Energy's Rocky Flats weapons facility, located northwest of Denver, Colo. Headquartered in Denver, CH2M Hill's work is concentrated in the areas of water, energy, environment, transportation, communications, construction and industrial facilities. With more than 13,100 employees working in 200 offices worldwide, the company provides services to public and private clients in numerous industries. National Engineers Week is celebrated throughout the United States to raise public awareness and appreciation of engineers and their work. Since 1997, the firm has been a national sponsor for National Engineers Week; and Bud Ahearn, vice chairman for CH2M Hill, serves on the Corporate Advisory Council for the week-long event. CH2M Hill officials are familiar with the statistics driving increased engineering education and awareness in kindergarten through 12th grades. According to National Science and Engineering Indicators, U.S. enrollment in engineering schools has decreased approximately 17 percent in the last 20 years. ***************************************************************** 44 Colorado Daily: Rocky Flats: a nice place to take the kids? By RICHARD VALENTY/Colorado Daily Staff Writer Almost nobody disputes that the former plutonium trigger production facility at Rocky Flats, some 12 miles south of Boulder, left behind significant amounts of nuclear contamination. But, how much and where is it? Currently, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Kaiser-Hill Company are running a cleanup operation at the Flats site, with a target completion date of Dec. 15, 2006. After the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) certifies the cleanup, the Flats site is scheduled to become the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge (NWR). The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) will inherit the site management responsibilities from DOE. Still, some local residents are concerned that people may ultimately use the NWR as Open Space, in the same vein as Chautauqua Park, without considering that inhaling a speck of plutonium can cause incurable cancer. Lisa Morzel, former Boulder City Council member, is also a founding member of the Rocky Flats Coalition of Local Governments (RFCLOG). Morzel believes that FWS should take as much time as it needs before allowing recreational activity at the Refuge. "The issue here is the level of cleanup,' said Morzel. "Have we identified all of the contamination that we think is out there or not? I think we need to be very cautious and take a very slow, deliberate approach." According to Morzel, the budget for the cleanup is "limited' to $7 billion, and as a result of limited funds, the cleanup would be constricted primarily to the site's surface. "The cleanup concentrates in the upper 12 inches of the soil," said Morzel. "There are caps being put in place that will supposedly protect the environment from contamination. However, there are different animals that live out there, like prairie dogs that can burrow down five feet deep. Will they be able to bring contamination from the sub-surface up to the surface?" Dean Rundle, FWS refuge manager for the Rocky Flats project, believes that DOE will hand FWS a safe piece of property. "The land will not come to FWS until it's been certified by the EPA and the state health department," said Rundle. "We're (FWS) not a cleanup decision-maker, but we are reviewing cleanup plans and data available on the extent and nature of the contaminants out there. The land coming to FWS will be safe for us, for our workers out there and also for people to visit." Morzel has a Ph.D. in geology and geophysics, and works as a research geologist for the U.S. Geological Survey. She said plutonium has a half-life of 24,000 years and can remain hazardous to human health for ten times that, so her concern for the NWR extends into future generations. "From a geological perspective, I'm concerned about the process of erosion," said Morzel. "A significant amount of erosion can occur over the period of time in which the site remains hazardous. Given the financial limitations, I don't think a more thorough underground cleanup is possible." The FWS has released a draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and an Environmental Impact Statement for the future NWR, which can be found at http://rockyflats.fws.gov. Four basic plans are listed. Alternative "A" is called "No Action," followed by "Wildlife, Habitat and Public Use (B)," "Ecological Restoration (C)." and "Public Use (D)." Options "B" and "D" both show some hiking trails in "buffer zones" to the north and south of where the actual Flats operational facilities were located. Morzel said Boulder County government favors alternative "A," while she and the city government favor "C." "There needs to be ecological restoration before you let people back on the land," said Morzel. "There are old roads and areas out there used for who knows what, and the land needs to be reclaimed to pre-settlement conditions." Rundle said FWS would still accept citizen comment on the plans until April 26. "We've received several hundred pieces of communication," said Rundle. "There is no consensus among the public, but it's been a real good public process. A lot of people are engaged." Morzel and RFCLOG will be meeting Monday, April 5, at the Jefferson County Airport, 11755 Airport Way, Broomfield, 8:30 a.m. The meeting is open to the public. At Monday's meeting, DOE will discuss a Flats "post-closure agreement," the draft EIS and Flats responsibilities to be handled by a DOE "Office of Legacy Management" which was created last fall. The Wildlife Refuge is going to happen, but Morzel simply hopes all precautions are taken before there is any grand opening for humans. "No reason exists to rush this," said Morzel. "It took 50 years to contaminate this site; it will take at least 15 from now to ensure public exposure on this site will be safe." ***************************************************************** 45 Oak Ridger: Says risk statements don't help public understand Story last updated at 10:52 a.m. on April 2, 2004 To The Oak Ridger: Concerning the front page article "Report: Weapons plants threat to environment" by Paul Parsons (OR, March 20, 2004), I fear the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability has not done its homework with an open mind. Unqualified statements, such as "Federal weapons facilities pose a threat to major water supplies Š" are of course true if the magnitude of the threat is not stipulated and is small enough. Examination of the status of the known plumes and discharges to the Clinch River from the ORR give a measure of the true status of things. The Y-12 East End deep plume of volatile organics (VOC) extends east under the commercial area of Union Valley which is served by city water. After surfacing into Scarboro Creek the VOCs evaporate long before they reach the Clinch River. The Y-12 West End plume (nitrates, etc.) enters Bear Creek which also receives low levels of uranium from the Bear Creek waste areas. The creek intermixing with ground water, shows a decreasing level of contamination and meets requirements long before it reaches the Lower East Fork Popular Creek which itself shows slightly elevated levels of mercury just below Y-12 but is contaminated by city sewage in its lower reaches. The ORNL and its Melton Valley waste areas are the most contaminated sites on the ORR but essentially all of the outflow is over the White Oak Creek Dam (WOC) and has been carefully measured for decades. The WOC effluent is almost good enough for humans to drink (but not frogs) and is diluted by a factor of 1,000 where it joins the Clinch. ETTP (old K-25) drains more or less diffusely to Poplar Creek and the Clinch. One small VOC plume surfaces in Mitchell Branch and evaporates. The total contribution to the Clinch is relatively small and the Kingston intake is on the Tennessee not the Clinch. In spite of the currently safe levels in the Clinch and the short range of plumes, DOE has under way plans that will reduce the levels even lower and ensure safety in the future. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry is investigating (as required by law) and will report on any public health hazards from the ORR. They are being assisted by the Oak Ridge Reservation Health Effects Subcommittee, a citizen's group. The investigation is not complete but the interim results look reassuring After years of "oversighting" the DOE, I find qualitative statements about threats and risks such as those made in the article, to be less than helpful to public understanding. Alfred A. Brooks Oak Ridge Calls paper unprofessional in reporting press release To The Oak Ridger: I am disappointed and disturbed at the lack of professionalism exhibited by The Oak Ridger by publishing the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability's (ANA) press release (Front Page, March 29, 2004) without question or independent investigation. The facts presented by the ANA are common knowledge. Many agencies and independent researchers have published the details of pollution at Department of Energy (DOE) weapons production and research facilities. DOE has logged, listed, cataloged and described in every manner, the location and extent of contamination on their reservations. Other agencies have provided oversight and independent verification. The ANA derived their facts from these countless DOE, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and state investigations. What is pure flight of fancy by the ANA is the contention that there is a continuing threat of groundwater contamination in Oak Ridge. DOE has, with the oversight of EPA, Tennessee Department of Ecology and Conservation, and local citizens, studied, prioritized and cleaned up contaminated sites based on the potential of groundwater contamination and public health risk. Since 1985, DOE has spent over $8 billion in Oak Ridge to remediate waste sites and facilities. Significant progress has been made and the work is moving quickly now. The risks have been all but eliminated. The recent announcement of shipment of transuranic wastes to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, N.M., marks the beginning of the end of any potential long-term public health risk. The Oak Ridger, our newspaper, should be expert on these important local facts and not automatically reprint the spurious allegations of outsiders. The Oak Ridger should take note of the activities of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in Oak Ridge. ATSDR, an agency of the National Institutes of Health, has the congressionally mandated responsibility to independently assess the potential threat to public health that is presented by localities such as the DOE Oak Ridge Reservation. ATSDR has been working in Oak Ridge for several years. With the help of a panel of community residents and interested individuals, ATSDR scientists have poured over hundreds of documents, including operations reports, monitoring studies and research papers to determine if the past or current operations in Oak Ridge do now or have ever posed a public health hazard. ATSDR has independently screened all activities and potential sources of contamination since operations began in the mid 1940s. They have, again with significant public input, identified "contaminates of concern" and they are conducting formal, detailed, Public Health Assessments (PHA) for each identified contaminate of concern. The first PHA, regarding Uranium Releases from Y-12, was released last September and the second, regarding radiological releases from White Oak Creek will be released in draft next month. Both of these PHA's conclude that it is unlikely that these sources could have affected public health. All PHA's, including a PHA on groundwater, will be completed in a year or so. ATSDR is doing the hard work and independent analysis to determine scientifically if these DOE operations have in the past or could in the future, pose a public health hazard. The Oak Ridger would be well advised to follow ATSDR's example and do their background investigation before they publish biased, political drivel. Call ATSDR (Bill Taylor) at 220-0295. Bob Craig Oak Ridge Suggests sidewalks for visiting rowers to run on To The Oak Ridger: Many of us have noted the many new sidewalks in Oak Ridge recently. However, those of us who see the many rowers walking or running along Emory Valley Road are very much concerned for their safety - some of them walk or run on the roadway, etc. In my opinion, it is desirable that a sidewalk be built to accommodate them. I would hope that the sidewalk could be wide, could be far enough from the road that the road could be expanded, that the sidewalk could extend from the rowing areas to motels and restaurants, etc. I would hope that anyone on the sidewalk could be seen from the road. Maybe there could even be permission to build a restaurant near the rowing area. If such a sidewalk is built, chances of a rower being hurt or killed during a visit to Oak Ridge would be greatly reduced. Patrick F. Brown Oak Ridge ***************************************************************** 46 FR: Hanford Waste Management comments by EPA FR Doc 04-7479 [Federal Register: April 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 64)] [Notices] [Page 17403-17405] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02ap04-51] ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-6649-9] Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments Availability of EPA comments prepared pursuant to the Environmental [[Page 17404]] Review Process (ERP), under section 309 of the Clean Air Act and section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act as amended. Requests for copies of EPA comments can be directed to the Office of Federal Activities at (202) 564-7167. Summary of Rating Definitions Environmental Impact of the Action LO--Lack of Objections The EPA review has not identified any potential environmental impacts requiring substantive changes to the proposal. The review may have disclosed opportunities for application of mitigation measures that could be accomplished with no more than minor changes to the proposal. EC--Environmental Concerns The EPA review has identified environmental impacts that should be avoided in order to fully protect the environment. Corrective measures may require changes to the preferred alternative or application of mitigation measures that can reduce the environmental impact. EPA would like to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts. EO--Environmental Objections The EPA review has identified significant environmental impacts that must be avoided in order to provide adequate protection for the environment. Corrective measures may require substantial changes to the preferred alternative or consideration of some other project alternative (including the no action alternative or a new alternative). EPA intends to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts. EU--Environmentally Unsatisfactory The EPA review has identified adverse environmental impacts that are of sufficient magnitude that they are unsatisfactory from the standpoint of public health or welfare or environmental quality. EPA intends to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts. If the potentially unsatisfactory impacts are not corrected at the final EIS stage, this proposal will be recommended for referral to the CEQ. Adequacy of the Impact Statement Category 1--Adequate EPA believes the draft EIS adequately sets forth the environmental impact(s) of the preferred alternative and those of the alternatives reasonably available to the project or action. No further analysis or data collection is necessary, but the reviewer may suggest the addition of clarifying language or information. Category 2--Insufficient Information The draft EIS does not contain sufficient information for EPA to fully assess environmental impacts that should be avoided in order to fully protect the environment, or the EPA reviewer has identified new reasonably available alternatives that are within the spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, which could reduce the environmental impacts of the action. The identified additional information, data, analyses, or discussion should be included in the final EIS. Category 3--Inadequate EPA does not believe that the draft EIS adequately assesses potentially significant environmental impacts of the action, or the EPA reviewer has identified new, reasonably available alternatives that are outside of the spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, which should be analyzed in order to reduce the potentially significant environmental impacts. EPA believes that the identified additional information, data, analyses, or discussions are of such a magnitude that they should have full public review at a draft stage. EPA does not believe that the draft EIS is adequate for the purposes of the NEPA and/or section 309 review, and thus should be formally revised and made available for public comment in a supplemental or revised draft EIS. On the basis of the potential significant impacts involved, this proposal could be a candidate for referral to the CEQ. Draft EIS ERP No. FR-DOE-A09824-00 Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program, New Information on Waste Management Alternatives, Waste Management Practices Enhancement for Low-Level Radioactive Waste, Mixed Low-Level Radioactive Waste and Transuranic Waste, Richland, Benton County, WA. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns with the characterization that affects from past and current activities result in irreversible and irretrievable impacts to groundwater and recommend that the record of decision clarify that groundwater impacts from the proposed project do not represent irreversible and irretrievable effects. EPA also recommended that additional analysis be conducted if T Plant is not included in the preferred alternative or implemented project. [FR Doc. 04-7479 Filed 4-1-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ***************************************************************** 47 DOE: Office of Science; Biological and Environmental Research FR Doc 04-7485 [Federal Register: April 2, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 64)] [Notices] [Page 17399-17400] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02ap04-48] Advisory Committee AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Committee. 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: Thursday, April 29, 2004, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.; and Friday, April 30, 2004, 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. ADDRESSES: Academy for Education Development (AED) Conference Center, 1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. David Thomassen ((301) 903-9817; [ david.thomassen@science.doe.gov] ), or Ms. Shirley Derflinger ((301) 903- 0044; [shirley.derflinger@science.doe.gov] ), Designated Federal Officers, Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Committee, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, SC-70/Germantown Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-1290. The most current information concerning this meeting can be found on the Web site: [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.science.doe.gov/ober/berac/anno unce.html] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Meeting: To provide advice on a continuing basis to the Director, Office of Science of the Department of Energy, on the many complex scientific and technical issues that arise in the development and implementation of the Biological and Environmental Research Program. Tentative Agenda: Thursday, April 29, and Friday, April 30, 2004: Conflict of Interest and Federal Advisory Committee Act requirements and overview Comments from Dr. Raymond Orbach, Director, Office of Science Report by Dr. Ari Patrinos, Associate Director of Science for Biological and Environmental Research Discussion of BERAC reports on (1) need for additional sites for environmental remediation sciences research (2) review of the scientific basis for a proposed subsurface geosciences laboratory at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, (3) guidance to BER on how the Atmospheric Science Program should be reconfigured, (4) a Committee of Visitors review of the Climate Change Research Division's program management, and (5) radiochemistry program needs and opportunities. BERAC recommendations for BER to develop a roadmap for achieving and tracking its long term performance measures Status report on the development of a Genomics:GTL roadmap Coordination of common DOE and NIH research interests Discussion to define operating hours at BER facilities Science talk New Business Public comment (10 minute rule) Public Participation: The day and a half 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 David Thomassen or Shirley Derflinger at the address or telephone numbers listed above. You must make your request for an oral statement at least five business days before 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, IE-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. [[Page 17400]] Issued in Washington, DC on March 29, 2004. Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee, Management Officer. [FR Doc. 04-7485 Filed 4-1-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 48 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 16:44:59 -0800 (PST) SEVEN Lessons for Dealing With Today's North Korea Nuclear Crisis Arms Control Today - USA As the United States and North Korea prepare for a fourth round of talks to resolve an 18-month old crisis over Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons programs, the two ... See all stories on this topic: BUSH, ElBaradei, Discuss Proposals of Nuclear Nonproliferation ... Arms Control Today - USA ... to convene for nearly two weeks beginning April 26 to assess what future measures might be taken to shore up the beleaguered nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty ... See all stories on this topic: NUCLEAR Necessity in Putin's Russia Arms Control Today - USA What purpose do nuclear weapons serve in today’s Russia? ... Sergeyev favored a strong role for strategic nuclear weapons in Russia’s military policy. ... VAJPAYEE was opposed to nuclear programme In India: Congress Deepika - India ... saying the credit he took for the Pokhran tests of May 1998 was specious since he was once opposed to the idea of resumption of India's nuclear programme. ... GAO urges more NNSA oversight of nuclear weapons labs KOB-TV - Albuquerque,NM,USA A report from the GAO contends that the National Nuclear Security Administration should closely monitor Los Alamos until the University of California, which ... See all stories on this topic: NUCLEAR plant decommissioning timetable brught forward Ireland Online - Dublin,Ireland The timescale to finish decommissioning the Dounreay nuclear plant in Scotland has been brought forward by 13 years, its operator announced today. ... See all stories on this topic: PRESSURE mounts on Iran to reveal nuclear activities amid US ... Financial Times - London,England,UK International pressure is mounting on Iran to give a full account of its nuclear programme ahead of a visit to Tehran next week by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of ... See all stories on this topic: EU tells UK to clean up Sellafield nuclear plant Environmental Data Interactive - UK The European Commission has told the UK authorities to clean up its operations at the Sellafield nuclear facility or face stringent fines. ... See all stories on this topic: US averted nuclear catastrophy 25 years ago Petroleumworld.com - Venezuela Twenty-five years ago, 100,000 people poured onto the roads of Pennsylvania fearing a nuclear disaster at the Three Mile Island power plant located between ... See all stories on this topic: JUDGE Rejects Washington Contractors' Defense in Nuclear- ... Miami Herald - Miami,FL,USA ... responsible for radiation releases in Eastern Washington starting in the 1940s because they were following government orders to make plutonium for nuclear bombs ... See all stories on this topic: 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/ ***************************************************************** 49 JS Online: Finding a future in fusion J.P. Pattern teams with nuclear researchers By THOMAS CONTENT tcontent@journalsentinel.com Posted: April 1, 2004 Butler - This week, an investors consortium announced plans to have a new nuclear reactor somewhere in the U.S. licensed by 2010. Meanwhile, a Waukesha County company is helping to design a reactor that will render obsolete the one just announced. Photo/Michael Sears Greg Hartwell, assistant research professor of physics at Auburn University, inspects the interior surfaces of a stellarator component at J.P. Pattern Inc. in Butler earlier this year. Photo/Michael Sears Mark Steckhan (left) of J.P. Pattern Inc. and Hartwell (rear left) conduct a test assembly of a stellarator component. Looking on are company vice president Gary Puhl (rear right) and president John Puhl. J.P. Pattern Inc., a 40-year-old company that has its roots in producing patterns for foundries and the metal casting industry, is collaborating with University of Wisconsin-Madison researchers to create electricity from nuclear fusion. Word of mouth and a welcoming attitude toward technology have helped the small company with $2 million in sales and 15 employees carve out a niche that it now wants to expand. From early work making some molds for UW-Madison, "it has just snowballed from there" to recent projects involving other universities, including Auburn and Princeton, said company president John Puhl, whose father founded the firm. Nuclear work now accounts for 20% of company sales. After embracing automation early on in the 1980s with computer automated machines, Pattern took on rapid prototyping, working in conjunction with the Milwaukee School of Engineering and others. But the company's customers became so enamored of rapid prototyping that they took that work in-house, said Gary Puhl, brother of John and vice president of operations. Pattern recovered by converting its evolving expertise with computer-aided design into a client-retaining service. About 90% of its projects are driven by computer design. By designing and building the mold as one seamless project, Pattern can adapt the design along the way to accommodate customers' last-minute ideas. "Design is our key," Gary Puhl said. "A lot of tool-and-die shops send out the design - they actually just build the mold." "That's what Wisconsin liked about us," John Puhl said. "They were very computer literate," said David Anderson, professor of electrical and computer engineering at UW-Madison. "They were able to take our computer-aided design models and adapt them to their systems and basically fabricate in a paperless sort of design these very complicated sort of shapes." Consequently, its nuclear work has exploded. Pattern is collaborating with the universities to develop experimental machines intended to evaluate one potential base design for a fusion reactor. Nuclear fusion combines atoms to create energy, unlike fission, which splits atoms to create energy. Today's reactors use fission. Actually harnessing fusion to generate electricity is decades away, but researchers are pursuing it because of the potential payoff. One big advantage to fusion is environmental. Fusion could generate power without emissions of greenhouse gases or radioactive waste. Fission reactors - like the Kewaunee and Point Beach plants on Lake Michigan - generate spent fuel that is currently stored on site and is planned eventually to be disposed of deep in a rural Nevada mountain. Pattern's work is at the core of the fusion concept. Research ongoing at UW-Madison and Auburn and Princeton universities is delving into building structures known as stellarators - truck-sized, elaborate doughnut-like structures that use magnets to trap and contain elements of hydrogen that, when combined, can create electricity. J.P. Pattern's role: helping to design and build the best doughnut. But it's not your basic round doughnut, given all the spirals found on these stellarators, UW-Madison's Anderson said. "It's more like a French twist," he said. The company was originally brought in to work with UW-Madison on an explosion forming mold for the university's stellarator project. Explosives were used to blast pieces of metal into position to form the stellarator's coils, Anderson said. When a California supplier ran into problems making magnet coils for the project, UW turned to J.P. Pattern again to design them instead. This year, the company finished work on a project for Auburn University's stellarator, and is now two-thirds of the way through a project for the more than $70 million stellarator being developed at the Department of Energy's Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory. Nuclear work could have a long half-life for Pattern. As with every business in the local tool-and-die and machining world, J.P. Pattern was hit by the manufacturing downturn that began in mid-2000 that persisted into this year. It employs only half as many people now as it did at its peak, Gary Puhl said. Federally sponsored research grants are a steady source of income, especially compared to manufacturing customers whose outsourcing preferences change often. Gary Puhl said Pattern is looking for more university work. "We thought we wouldn't have to rely on normal tooling as much. So we decided to market this type of work more, because it fits us so well," Gary Puhl said. "We're in good shape," he said, adding with a smile, "as long as the government doesn't outsource these experiments to China or overseas." From the April 2, 2004 editions of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Copyright 2004 [http://www.jsonline.com/copyright.html] , Journal Sentinel Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************