*****************************************************************
08/23/04 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 12.201
*****************************************************************
   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 KoreaTimes: Seoul Rolls Up Sleeves for 6-Party Nuke Talks 
2 Mass Arrests Of US, UK Nuclear WMD Protestors
3 Hi Pakistan: Who wants nukes? - By Dr Faisal Bari     --> 
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
4 US: [NukeNet] NRC Issues Statement on Environmental Justice
5 Daily Yomiuri: Prosecutors to get papers on KEPCO over blowout 
6 Slovak Spectator: Energy law is missing
7 Slovak Spectator: Slovenian privatization owner to be announced
8 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Model Application Concerning Tech
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
9 DU: A Death Sentence in US and Elsewhere
10 Evening Times: 31 held in demo at Clyde nuke sub base - 
11 Sri Lanka: US to install nuclear detection equipment at Colombo port
12 Japan Times: Radioactive material found at university
13 Scotsman.com News: UK - Nuclear protesters blockade Faslane base
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
14 US: [NukeNet] Skull Valley/PFS Dump update
15 US: [NukeNet] Skull valley/ PFS nuke dump update Part 2
16 Daily Yomiuri: Expense not only factor in nuclear fuel issue
17 Las Vegas SUN: Nuke lobbyists plan to appeal Yucca decision
18 US: Las Vegas SUN: Probe sought after waste leak
19 US: Wichita Eagle: BRIEF EDITORIALS: ON RADIOACTIVE WASTE, NEIGHBORH
20 US: Quad-City Times: Nuclear waste in the Q-C: 100 years down, 9,900
21 Quad-City Times: Bush and Kerry on Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repo
22 ITAR-TASS: 1,100 containers N-waste found at local University
23 The Australian: N-dump talk 'like Monty Python' 
24 Border Mail: Nuclear bombshell as sites listed for dump 
25 AU ABC: Govt dismisses nuclear waste dump site reports » 
26 KRNV Report: ad is misleading voters about Bush position on Yucca Mo
27 The Australian: Victoria on nuclear waste shortlist 
28 The Australian: Radioactive waste left in school 
29 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada
30 Las Vegas SUN: Bush campaign ad accuses Kerry of flip-flopping on Yu
 
                         NUCLEAR WEAPONS
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
31 Seattle Times: Editorials: Promises made to a wild river
32 Guardian Unlimited: Pantex Nuclear Facility Repairs Costly
33 Times-News: Computer helps archeologists sift through historic data 
34 PRN: CH2M HILL Hanford Celebrates Key Milestone in Hanford Tank Farm
35 DOE: Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act
 
                          OTHER NUCLEAR
 
36 [NukeNet] Uranium on Campus: New York Times letter to the
37 Google News Alert - nuclear
38 IPS: WIND POWER:: CLEANER, UNLIMITED, AND CHEAPER THAN OIL
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 KoreaTimes: Seoul Rolls Up Sleeves for 6-Party Nuke Talks 

Hankooki.com > Korea Times > Nation   

By Ryu Jin Staff Reporter

 After watching the game calmly in the backcourt for weeks, Seoul 
has now rolled up its sleeves to facilitate the fourth round of 
six-party talks aimed at resolving Pyongyang¡¯s nuclear standoff, 
sending top negotiators to neighboring countries.

 South Korea¡¯s Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Soo-hyuck will make 
visits to China and Japan from today throughout the week to 
discuss ways to resume the stalled process of the multilateral 
dialogue, a top Seoul diplomat said.

 ``Chief delegate Lee will visit Beijing on Aug. 24-25 and Tokyo 
on Aug. 26-27 to discuss the nuclear issue,¡¯¡¯ Cho Tae-yong, 
Seoul¡¯s deputy chief negotiator, told reporters. ``We¡¯re also 
setting up a schedule for visits to the United States and 
Russia.¡¯¡¯

 Cho explained they would have ``frank and in-depth¡¯¡¯ 
discussions on the fourth round of six-way talks, anticipated in 
September, and working-group talks that are expected to come 
before the main session will involve deputy chief negotiators.

 He added Seoul believed the fourth round of talks would be held 
in Beijing by the end of next month as agreed upon by all the six 
parties in the previous talks in June, despite ``the reluctant 
attitude of North Korea.¡¯¡¯

 Lee¡¯s back-to-back visits to the neighboring nations show 
Seoul¡¯s anxiety about the stalled nuclear talks as the six 
nations involved have been failing to decide the timeline and 
other details for the fourth round of talks and the working-group 
meeting.

 ``We¡¯ve been waiting for positive results as other nations, 
including the host China, have tried to decide on the 
schedule,¡¯¡¯ a diplomatic source, familiar with the Beijing 
talks, told The Korea Times on a customary condition of 
anonymity.

 ``But now we have become unable to wait and see any longer,¡¯¡¯ 
the official added, citing North Korea¡¯s high rhetoric against 
the U.S. in recent days.

 Since its top negotiator¡¯s visit to Beijing last week, 
Pyongyang has been upping the ante against George W. Bush¡¯s U.S. 
administration, arguing its ``hostile¡¯¡¯ policy is preventing 
the working-group talks from taking place.

 North Korea even called Bush a ``tyrant that puts Hitler in the 
shade,¡¯¡¯ reiterating it cannot attend the working-group talks 
because of Washington¡¯s hostile policy.

 The nuclear crisis erupted in October 2002 when U.S. officials 
claimed that Pyongyang had admitted it had a secret program to 
enrich uranium for use in weapons. This was in addition to a 
separate program for producing plutonium that was frozen under a 
1994 U.S.-North Korea accord but has since been resumed. 

jinryu@koreatimes.co.kr 08-23-2004 22:11         
*****************************************************************
 2 Mass Arrests Of US, UK Nuclear WMD Protestors
 
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 00:48:53 -0400
 
 "Taken as a story of human achievement, and human blindness, the 
discoveries in the sciences are among the great epics."

 -Robert Oppenheimer


   "It is still an unending source of surprise for me to see how 
a few scribbles on a blackboard or on a sheet of paper could 
change the course of human affairs."

  -Stanislaw Ulam


The International Court of Justice [ICJ] Advisory Opinion on 
Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, **including ALL the Separate 
Opinions of ALL the Judges**, the Canberra Report, the CTBT Text 
and Protocol, the NPT text and the 1925 Gas Protocol, the 
Nuremberg Principles and the MODEL Nuclear Weapons Convention can 
be found under the Documents Index at:

http://www.cornnet.nl/~akmalten/docs.html



  The "free press" in the USA just won't touch the issue of US 
WMDs or on those unusual occaisions when they do raise the false 
"rational" that the US and it's colleagues with nuclear [and 
other] WMDs are "responsible" and are therefor justified in their 
possession. They're only there for defensive purposes as the US 
is a promulgator of human rights not a terrorist rogue nation 
that's the greatest threat to peace on earth. They'll still be 
printing this as the US continues plans and/or works on space 
weaponization and nuclearization and quite possibily until the 
day this brings about the end of the world. Manga:

1) TRIDENT PLOUGHSHARES

Press Release: 23rd August 2004 at 3.30pm

70 arrests as peace activists block British WMD site

70 people, including four members of the Scottish Parliament, 
have been arrested during the blockade of Faslane naval base on 
the Clyde.

>From 6.30 this morning there were long tailbacks of worker 
traffic as the protesters besieged the gates of the base, sitting 
down in the roadway and locking on to each other. Two climbers 
scaled lamp-posts and hung across the main gate of the base a 
large banner reading "Nuclear Free Scotland". The base was 
disrupted for almost nine hours as gates cleared by police were 
blocked again by activists.

The MSPs arrested are Mark Ballard, Francis Curran, Rosie Kane 
and Patrick Harvie. Along with the others they are likely to be 
released from police custody this evening.

The blockade has now been closed with a formal ceremony but 
further actions against the base may be taken during the rest of 
the day.

Overnight two Scandinavian activists, Tiina Sarkinen, 23, a plant 
scientist from Finland, and Anna Goransson, 24, a student from 
Sweden, swam into the high security berths where the Trident 
submarines are berthed and got 200 metres inside the boom before 
being apprehended. Early this morning Petter Joelson (27), from 
Goteborg in Sweden, and Per Hilkrstrom (22), from Nosrkoping in 
Sweden breached security at the Trident nuclear warhead store at 
Coulport on Loch Long, five miles from Faslane.

A Big Blockade spokesperson said: "We are delighted that so many 
people have been willing today to take a stand against Britainís 
weapons of mass destruction."

The Trident Ploughshares camp at Coulport continues until 1st 
September, with the prospect of further direct action against the 
Trident bases.







2) 11 Protesters of Nuclear Navy ELF/Trident System Arrested at 
Hiroshima  Commemoration

CLAM LAKE, Wisconsin, August 8 - Anti-nuclear activists 
commemorating the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 
Japan, gathered at the Navy's extremely low frequency  submarine 
transmitter, and 11 were arrested for trespassing on the site.

About 100 people gathered at the remote antenna grid, west of 
Clam Lake, in the Chequamegon National Forest which sends secret 
messages to missile-firing Trident and Fast Attack submarines. 
During the demonstration, two dozen people conducted a "die in" 
representing the 135,000 men, women and children who were killed 
instantly by the Hiroshima bomb August 6, 1945, and the 
additional 70,000 who died in Nagasaki three days later.

<>The bombings ushered in the 58-year-old nuclear age, recently 
punctuated by U.S. government launching a preemptive war based on 
the potential future threat of "weapons related programs."

<>The eleven who were ticketed for trespassing walked under an 
unlocked gate and into the compound were operators run the 
"Project ELF" transmitter system that U.S. Senator Russ Feingold 
has dubbed a "relic of the Cold War."

Eight of those ticketed and ordered to appear in Federal court 
for arraignment on the petty offence were from the Chicago-based 
Christian Peacemaker Teams, a human rights group that sends teams 
of volunteer observers and conflict s into trouble spots around 
the world

The eleven included: Suzanna Collerd, 22, River Forest, Ill;  Tom 
Fox, 53, Springfield, Virginia; Christina Gibb, 75, Dunedin, New 
Zealand; John Lynes, 76, Hastings, England; Michele Naar-Obed, 
49, Duluth; Michael T. Smith, 57, Gibson City, Ill; Scott Smith, 
26, Tillamook, Oregon; Bonnie Urfer, 52, Luck, Wisc.; Gail 
Vaughn, 51, LaCrosse, Wisc.; Michael Walli, 55, Duluth; Annaliese 
Watson,28, Tillamook, Oregon.

Nine other nuclear weapons opponents who were arrested at the 
site May 16 will be tried Nov. 5 in Madison Wisconsin. Two of 
three others sentenced to 30 days in federal prison camp for 
refusing to pay trespass fines were released recently. Kathy 
Kelly, of Chicago and aco-founder of Voices in the Wilderness, 
and Ozone O'Leary, of Duluth, Minn., each had 30 days added to 
90-day sentences previously imposed for trespass at the Army 
School of the Americas. The Rev. Jerry Zawada of Burlington, 
Wisc., continues to serve a 30-day ELF sentence which was added 
to 6-months imprisonment imposed for trespass at the SOA.  - end  
--
*****************************************************************
 3 Hi Pakistan: Who wants nukes? - By Dr Faisal Bari     --> 
 
August 23 2004     
 
Why does a country, in this day and age, need nuclear weapons? 
And here our discussion is focused more on countries in South 
Asia. The main arguments fall in the following categories. India 
says it needs them to show to the world that it is a world power 
that should have a seat on the Security Council, that should be 
taken seriously in the world and that should be taken at par with 
China. Pakistan says that it needs them to protect itself from 
India and to have some form of parity, in power terms, with the 
much larger India.

Then there are a host of smaller arguments too. Nuclear 
capability shows technological capability, it shows advancement 
in science and technology, and it can have spillovers in other 
areas of science, technology as well as industry.

But do any of these arguments make any sense? Will India be taken 
more seriously if it has nuclear capability? But India has had 
them since 1974, if the world was not taking it seriously even 
then, what will change now? India is a one billion strong large 
country with tremendous potential and actual achievements in all 
areas of human endeavour. Whether it is pure science (the Nobels 
that Indians have won bear testimony to that), technology 
(India’s IT industry and heavy industry), social science (again 
look at the number of academics India has produced), commerce and 
trade, religion or the arts (Indian cinema, sculpture), India has 
made worthy contributions in all fields. This is more than enough 
for anyone to take India seriously. A gadget, called the nuclear 
weapon, and one that has the power to kill millions, can evoke 
fear in others but not awe or respect. In fact, the immorality of 
the implicit or explicit threat involved in keeping this weapon, 
can only reduce respect, it cannot increase it.

The same is true of Pakistan. The world will not think of us any 
differently if we have this weapon. Since 1998 we have only added 
to our isolation by keeping this weapon, it has not endeared us 
to the world in any way. The bomb also does not convince anyone 
in the world about our scientific ability or technological 
advancement. This is fairly old technology (the bomb has been 
around since 1940s), and more importantly, the modular nature of 
technology allows us to do something more advanced in one field 
without similar progress in a broad spectrum of fields. Our human 
development indicators show, much better, where we actually 
stand.

We do not think of these issues in an organised, cool and 
detached manner. We entangle the issue of nuclear weapons with 
patriotism. The incumbent Prime Minister and even the incoming 
Prime Minister have been quoted as saying that ‘only a traitor of 
Pakistan will freeze or downsize the nuclear programme’. This is, 
to say the least, a strange thing to say for surely the nuclear 
programme is not an article of our faith, and the programme is 
for us and not the other way round.

A good source for all of these arguments, and more, is ‘Out of 
the Nuclear Shadow’, edited by Smitu Kothari and Zia Mian (Oxford 
University Press, 2003, 300 pages, Price Rs. 595). The editors, 
established names in this area, have brought together a very nice 
variety of articles on the issue of the nuclearization of South 
Asia. We hear enough jingoistic talk; this book gives us the 
other side. And with the likes of Eqbal Ahmed, and Amartya Sen 
colouring its pages, the book is a must read. It also has an 
excellent article by Arundati Roy on ‘The End of Imagination’. 
Such is truth regarding the nuclearization decision.

I think most people will agree that nuclear weapons, which target 
civilians by hundreds of thousands, poison the earth and the 
surroundings, are difficult and costly to build and maintain, 
have a tendency to have costly accidents and so on, are a weapon 
that the world can do without. I think that most people will 
agree that if we can have a nuclear weapon free world that would 
be better for all. If they allow this, then the position of the 
existing countries that have stockpiles of nuclear weapons, and 
these include most of the developed countries, comes out in very 
poor light. They, and here India, Pakistan and even the aspirants 
have a point, are not in a position to tell the rest of the world 
that they should not have these weapons. But this does not mean 
others have a ‘right’ to develop these weapons either. The 
‘rights’ based talk does not make sense here. If someone is doing 
something that is morally objectionable and odious, it neither 
gives the others the right to do it, nor does it make it a better 
outcome for the world. So India and Pakistan should not base 
their decision on ‘rights’. There are no rights to nuclear 
weapons.

India and Pakistan can point out the hypocrisy in the position of 
these other countries, and then say that they are making a 
‘strategic’ decision to have nukes because of this. But it is, as 
mentioned above, a ‘rights’ issue. On strategic grounds let us 
look at the decision of India and Pakistan to have nuclear 
weapons.

India wanted to be taken seriously in the world, and has 
justified its weapons on the basis of possible threats from 
Pakistan and of course China. But none of these reasons seem to 
be valid. We have already said that countries are not taken 
seriously due to nuclear weapons; they are taken seriously on the 
basis of their overall development, economic excellence and 
overall position in the world order. Look at China and Japan.

India’s relations with China have improved tremendously and are 
not a source of the kind of threat that should have forced India 
into nuclearization, and Pakistan could never have threatened 
India to the extent that it would need nuclear weapons.

Pakistan has cited India as the main reason for our 1998 
explosions. This position needs more careful consideration. It is 
true that Pakistan lives in a relatively hostile environment and 
needs to have reasonable level of protection. But does this mean 
that we should have the ability to destroy almost all of South 
Asia? That is the question. By having the capability of 
destroying Delhi, Bombay and some of the other larger cities, 
what does Pakistan want to stop India from doing? The general 
impression is that if Pakistan’s existence comes under question, 
and our back is against a wall, we might threaten to use these 
weapons or actually use them.

This sort of strategic thinking is very iffy. In game theory, the 
way to rigourously analyse such situations, such games are 
usually characterised by multiple equilibria and these tend to be 
very sensitive to the assumptions one makes. In this case we seem 
to be assuming that even in these dire straits we will have the 
ability to launch a nuclear response, the other side would not 
have taken out these weapons already, that the world will sit 
quietly by and watch us die and kill lots of the ‘enemy’ too. 
Change these assumptions a little and we could have a very 
different result. What makes us think that we will ever be in 
that tight a situation, and even in such a situation the rest of 
the world will just let us drift towards a nuclear holocaust?

Then there are the arguments that nuclear weapons provide 
deterrence. This too is very iffy. We did not have a war with 
India for 30 years even though we did not have nuclear weapons 
and they had exploded a device in 1974. But even after our 
explosions in 1998 Kargil did happen. So where is the evidence 
for deterrence. Even the cold war does not give us any comfort on 
this count. We cannot say that the USSR and US did not fight due 
to nuclear weapons. There is no counterfactual possible here.

There is definitely resistance to thinking against doing away 
with nuclear weapons. Part of it might be genuine, but a lot of 
it is also drummed up jingoism and misplaced patriotism. Strong 
interest groups have a stake in keeping these weapons and in 
trading on the constituency of fear. What are needed are clear 
thinking, and a consensus at the level of the society on this.

We should be thinking about what we need to do multilaterally in 
world fora, bilaterally in talks with India and unilaterally, for 
ourselves. We should keep in mind that nuclear weapons have a 
cost too. They are expensive to build, expensive to maintain, and 
have a certain probability of costly accidents. Should poor and 
developing nations, like India and Pakistan, be really in this 
game?

But cost aside, the main argument that India and Pakistan need to 
flesh out is the reason for these weapons. There is no moral 
justification for these weapons, for us, or the rest of the 
world. What we have to think about is if there is a strategic 
justification for them and if that is really there. The usual 
discourse says there is, but most authors in the book mentioned 
above think there is not. We need to hear them too to make up our 
mind more dispassionately. Only then will India and Pakistan, 
together and even unilaterally, move forward on this issue.
      
Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 4 [NukeNet] NRC Issues Statement on Environmental Justice
 
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:19:50 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
"A draft policy statement on this subject was issued for public comment
on November 5, 2003. No substantive changes were made as a result of the
comments received."

August 23, 2004

NRC ISSUES POLICY STATEMENT ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2004/04-098.html

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing a policy statement
to provide its consolidated views on how it will treat environmental
justice matters in agency regulatory and licensing actions.
In the policy statement the NRC recognizes that the impact of the
agency's regulatory or licensing actions on certain populations may be
different from those on the general population due to a community's
distinct cultural characteristics. The policy statement reflects the
view that the disproportionately high and adverse impacts of a proposed
action that fall heavily on a particular community call for close
scrutiny under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

In February 1994, President Clinton issued to all Federal agencies
Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice
in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations," which directed them
to make achieving environmental justice part of their mission by
identifying and addressing disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects of their programs, policies and
activities on minority and low-income populations.

Although independent agencies, such as the NRC, were only requested to
comply with this Executive Order, the agency in a letter to President
Clinton indicated that it would endeavor to carry out the measures set
forth in the Order as part of its efforts to comply with NEPA.

A draft policy statement on this subject was issued for public comment
on November 5, 2003. No substantive changes were made as a result of the
comments received. A copy of the final statement will be published in
the Federal Register shortly.

_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 5 Daily Yomiuri: Prosecutors to get papers on KEPCO over blowout 

Yomiuri Shimbun 

Public prosecutors will receive papers on Kansai Electric Power 
Co. in connection with the steam pipe blowout at Mihama Nuclear 
Power Plant's No. 3 reactor in Mihamacho, Fukui Prefecture, that 
left four people dead and seven injured, officials said Monday. 

The papers will be submitted by the Fukui Labor Bureau and the 
Tsuruga Labor Standard Inspection Office, which believe KEPCO 
violated the Industrial Safety and Health Law through its failure 
to inspect the pipe. 

The law generally holds employers accountable for employees who 
die or are injured in accidents. However, as the accident is the 
worst to have occurred at a nuclear plant in this country, the 
bureau and the office decided to hold KEPCO responsible because 
it built the facility.   

  

  
Copyright 2004 The Yomiuri Shimbun 
*****************************************************************
 6 Slovak Spectator - Energy law is missing

  Volume 10, Number 32
     
Slovakia's English language newspaper     August 23 - 28,2004   

[http://www.relo.sk]     

 
From press reports 



THE SLOVAK Economy ministry is late in preparing the key law on
decommissioning Slovakia's nuclear power plant. The law is a
critical part of the ongoing sale of the 66 percent share in the
power producer Slovenské elektrárne (SE) to a strategic
investor. 

The law should take effect January 1, 2005, but the ministry has
not yet started its preparation, the daily Pravda wrote. 

The power producer is worthless without the law, as potential
investors will not know the source of the Sk90 billion (€2.3
billion) needed to finish the decommissioning process. 

Potential investors are currently offering between Sk40 billion
(€1 billion) and Sk19 billion (€475 million) for the stake in
SE. 

If they were also required to pay the cost of decommissioning
the power plant, they would likely rethink their bids. 
[8/23/2004] 

   Copyright © 1998-2003 The Rock spol. s r.o. All rights
*****************************************************************
 7 Slovak Spectator: Slovenian privatization owner to be announced

  Volume 10, Number 32
     
Slovakia's English language newspaper     August 23 - 28,2004   

http://www.relo.sk] [http://www.sme.sk]   

 The privatisation commission will decide in September; there are 
doubts about the transparency of the deal Energy producer awaits 
new owner
 
By Marta Ïurianová Spectator staff 

A NEW owner of the state power producer Slovenské elektrárne (SE) 
will be announced in September this year. 

After opening bids for the potential 66 percent share of SE on 
August 12, the privatisation commission has now recommended that 
the bidding companies clarify and revise their offers. 

"All assessed bids are equal at this moment. There is a need to 
compare the offers because they each provide numbers based on a 
different premise. They are not easily comparable," Peter Mitka 
from the privatisation advisor PricewaterhouseCoopers told the 
press. 

Investors have received an additional two weeks to clearly define 
their offers. The commission is supposed to discuss the revised 
offers beginning September 3. 

During this period investors may change their bids as well. 

"Our aim was not to encourage the investor to increase the price. 
However, if the potential buyer wants to do that, they may," 
added Mitka to the daily Pravda. 

Four companies - Czech ÈEZ, Russian RAO UES (in consortium with 
German OstElektra), Italian Enel, and Austrian Verbund, submitted 
final bids for the purchase of the majority share of SE. 

Because the firth suitor, Verbund, was only interested in 
purchasing the water and heating plants of SE (and not the 
nuclear plants), the company was automatically dropped from the 
final evaluation of the bids. 

Economy minister Pavol Rusko implied earlier that the ministry 
intended to sell SE with its nuclear facilities included. The 
ministry considers accomplishing the third and fourth blocks of 
the nuclear power plant in Mochovce a priority. 

According to information leaked to the public, Italian Enel 
proposed the highest price for SE so far, Sk40 billion (€992 
million). 

It is believed that Enel wants to buy all of the SE properties, 
although the firm did not specify whether it intends to complete 
the nuclear blocks in Mochovce as well. However, it conditioned 
the best price by planning to abolish SE's disadvantageous 
long-term contracts that lose the company billions of crowns in 
stranded costs. 

The Czech power producer ÈEZ offered Sk31 billion (€769 million) 
for SE. It is willing to cooperate in accomplishing the Mochovce 
nuclear power plant, but its bid does not include purchasing the 
hydro plant in Gabèíkovo or the Jaslovské Bohunice V1 and A1 
nuclear blocks . 

Slovakia has to close down the V1 block based on accession 
agreements with the European Union in 2006 to 2008. The A1 block 
was broken in 1977 and has not been functioning for 30 years. The 
future owner will have to face the task and costs of their full 
decommissioning. 

"We will not buy something that will have to be closed down in 2 
to 4 years and not produce electricity any more," said Ladislav 
Køíž, the spokesman of ÈEZ. 

According to Køíž, the ownership of the nuclear blocks in respect 
to the costs of their decommissioning is not important. 

"In Slovakia, the decommissioning is paid by the State Fund of 
Liquidation of Nuclear Energy Facilities," added Køíž to the 
Národná Obroda daily. 

Russian RAO UES set its bid at Sk19 billion (€471 million). 
Although the amount might be the lowest, RAO is the only 
potential investor interested in acquiring both the V1 and A1 
blocks and considers the completion of Mochovce one of its 
priorities. 

Each of the interested companies has its pros and cons. 

ÈEZ and SE were built as one unified system during the period of 
the former Czechoslovakia. Although it does not want to buy the 
V1 block and Gabèíkovo, ÈEZ is interested in operating them. ÈEZ 
has vast experience in the construction and operation of nuclear 
facilities similar to those in Slovakia. 

"Before 1992, SE and ÈEZ were connected as one energy system and 
from a technical point of view this connection still makes sense 
today," Vladimír Dohnal, the general director of Symsite Research 
told The Slovak Spectator. 

"We consider our bid very advantageous for the whole Slovak 
energy industry for several reasons. The Slovak and Czech energy 
industries were developed as one unit," said Martin Roman, the 
general director and chairman of the board of directors of ÈEZ. 

On the other hand, the Czech energy company is fully state owned, 
as is the SE. Its financial strength is also lower than that of 
the other bidding parties. 

Although it is free from the financial scandals that plagued the 
SE, there are doubts that the state enterprise would be able to 
bring fresh and new ideas to the Slovak company. 

"SE would not be able to gain a strong financial strategic owner. 
There are no scandals (of tunnelling) connected to ÈEZ unlike 
with the SE, however, it is still a state-run company in the 
post-communist Czech Republic," added Dohnal. 

On the other hand, Enel is one of the financially stronger 
potential investors. The state has a 68 percent share in the 
Italian company. 

Its most significant advantage is without a doubt a strong 
financial background. Enel, however, has no experience in 
managing nuclear energy facilities. 

Russian RAO UES would fulfill both the conditions of financial 
reliability and long-term nuclear facilities operation, plus the 
state's share in the company represents only 53 percent. 

The Russian company is a big energy player at home and in 
neighbouring countries. The reason it is interested in buying SE 
might be that it is looking for a gateway to Europe. 

In spite of this, the firm has the lowest rating among all the 
bidders. The well-known case of Russian oil producer Yukos (which 
owns a minority stake in the Slovak oil transport company 
Transpetrol) only strengthens concerns about the riskiness of 
dealing with a Russian company. 

SE consists of 3 nuclear, 2 thermal power plants, and 34 water 
energy sources. The net profit of SE for 2003 represented Sk1.31 
million (€3.3 million). 

According to Dohnal, the government faces many problems regarding 
the privitisation of SE. The largest of which is SE's stranded 
costs, which climb into the tens of billions of crowns and thus 
decrease the value of SE. 

He explained that SE inherited the costs from the politically 
motivated decision to maintain houshold electricity prices at a 
level lower than cost. 

There is also a history of some economically unreasonable 
investments, for example, the two blocks of the nuclear plant in 
Mochovce during the government of former Prime Minister Vladimír 
Meèiar. 

In addition, SE also signed some strange long-term and highly 
disadvantageous contracts such as the agreement to purchase 
electricity from Paroplynový cyklus (PPC), as well as to supply 
electricity to Slovalco in Žiar nad Hronom. 

According to Hospodárske noviny daily, SE sells 1 KWH of 
electricity to the aluminium producer Slovalco for $0.03 (€0.02). 
Such a price is unheard of in central Europe. On the other hand, 
SE is buying electricity from PPC for too much. 

SE quantified the stranded costs at almost Sk70 billion (€1.76 
billion). The company cannot offer prices (mainly to large 
customers) as low as those offered by the Czech, Hungarian, and 
Ukrainian competitors due to its stranded costs and indebtedness. 

The Slovak power producer needs a large partner so that it may 
have a better chance of success in a unified and liberalised EU 
market. 

SE, although active in foreign markets, must face high 
electricity imports from abroad, mainly from the Czech Republic, 
Hungary, and Ukraine. 

Additionally, there are doubts about the transparency of the 
tender. According to Transparency International, apart from 
last-minute changes to deadlines, there are no clear and publicly 
known rules of the bidding assessment. 

"In such a situation we can only hope that the commission will 
not change them [the rules] in favour of a concrete candidate and 
that it will proceed according to them," Emília Sièáková-Beblavá, 
the president of Transparency International, told the daily SME. 
[8/23/2004] 

 [http://www.slovakia-online.sk]   

   Copyright © 1998-2003 The Rock spol. s r.o. All rights
*****************************************************************
 8 NRC: Notice of Availability of Model Application Concerning Technical 
 
                        FR Doc 04-19203 
[Federal Register: August 23, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 162)] 
[Notices] [Page 51864-51867] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr23au04-71]                         
 
Specifications Improvement Regarding Revision to the Control Rod 
Scram Time Testing Frequency in STS 3.1.4, ``Control Rod Scram 
Times'' for General Electric Boiling Water Reactors Using the 
Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process AGENCY: Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Notice of availability.
 
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared a model safety 
evaluation (SE), a model no significant hazards consideration 
(NSHC) determination, and a model license amendment application 
relating to a change in the Technical Specifications (TS) to 
extend the interval for the surveillance requirement (SR) in 
Standard Technical Specifications (STS) 3.1.4, ``Control Rod 
Scram Times.'' The purpose of these models is to permit the NRC 
to efficiently process amendments that propose to incorporate 
this change into plant-specific TS. Licensees of nuclear power 
reactors to which the models apply may request amendments 
utilizing the model application.
 
 
DATES: The NRC staff issued a Federal Register Notice (69 FR 
30339) on May 27, 2004, which proposed a model SE and a model 
NSHC determination related to changing plant TS to extend the 
control rod scram time testing interval from ``120 days 
cumulative operation in MODE 1'' to ``200 days cumulative 
operation in MODE 1.'' The
 
[[Page 51865]] NRC staff hereby announces that the enclosed model 
SE and NSHC determination may be referenced in plant-specific 
applications.
 
The NRC staff has posted a model application on the NRC web site 
to assist licensees in using the consolidated line item 
improvement process (CLIIP) to incorporate this change. The NRC 
staff can most efficiently consider applications based upon the 
model application if the application is submitted within a year 
of this Federal Register Notice.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bhalchandra Vaidya, Mail Stop: 
O-7D1, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of 
Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555- 0001, telephone (301) 415-3308, or William 
Reckley at (301) 415-1323.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Regulatory Issue Summary 
2000-06, ``Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process for 
Adopting Standard Technical Specifications Changes for Power 
Reactors,'' was issued on March 20, 2000. The CLIIP is intended 
to improve the efficiency of NRC licensing processes. This is 
accomplished by processing proposed changes to the STS in a 
manner that supports subsequent license amendment applications. 
The CLIIP includes an opportunity for the public to comment on 
proposed changes to the STS following a preliminary assessment by 
the NRC staff and finding that the change will likely be offered 
for adoption by licensees. The CLIIP directs the NRC staff to 
evaluate any comments received for a proposed change to the STS 
and to either reconsider the change or to proceed with announcing 
the availability of the change for proposed adoption by 
licensees. Those licensees opting to apply for the subject change 
to TS are responsible for reviewing the staff's evaluation, 
referencing the applicable technical justifications, and 
providing any necessary plant-specific information. Each 
amendment application made in response to the notice of 
availability will be processed and noticed in accordance with 
applicable rules and NRC procedures.
 
This notice involves changes to plant TS to extend the control 
rod scram time testing interval from ``120 days cumulative 
operation in MODE 1'' to ``200 days cumulative operation in MODE 
1.'' This proposed change was proposed for incorporation into the 
STS by the industry's TS Task Force as TSTF-460, ``Control Rod 
Scram Time Testing Frequency.'' Applicability This proposed 
change to extend the surveillance interval for control rod scram 
time testing is applicable to boiling water reactors (BWRs).
 
The CLIIP does not prevent licensees from requesting an 
alternative approach or proposing the changes without referencing 
the model SE and the NSHC. Variations from the approach 
recommended in this notice may, however, require additional 
review by the NRC staff and may increase the time and resources 
needed for the review.
 
Public Notices In a notice in the Federal Register dated May 27, 
2004 (69 FR 30339), the NRC staff requested comment on the use of 
the CLIIP for proposed changes to extend the control rod scram 
time testing interval as proposed in TSTF-460.
 
TSTF-460, as well as the NRC staff's SE and model application, 
may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public 
Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 
records are accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public 
Library component on the NRC Web site, (the Electronic Reading 
Room).
 
The NRC staff received no formal comments from the request 
published in the Federal Register. Several editorial changes were 
identified to the staff and are reflected in the model safety 
evaluation included in this notice.
 
To efficiently process the incoming license amendment 
applications, the NRC staff requests each licensee applying for 
the changes addressed by TSTF-460 using the CLIIP to address the 
plant-specific information identified in the model SE. Namely, 
each licensee submitting amendments to extend the surveillance 
frequency should demonstrate the reliability of the control rod 
insertion system based on historical control rod scram time test 
data, and by the more restrictive acceptance criterion for the 
number of slow rods allowed during at-power surveillance testing.
 
Model Safety Evaluation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Consolidated Line Item 
Improvement Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Change 
Traveler TSTF-460, ``Control Rod Scram Time Testing Frequency'' 
1.0 Introduction By application dated [Date], [Licensee] (the 
licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) 
for [facility]. The proposed changes would revise TS testing 
frequency for the surveillance requirement (SR) in TS 3.1.4, 
``Control Rod Scram Times.'' These changes are based on TS Task 
Force (TSTF) change traveler TSTF-460 (Revision 0) that has been 
approved generically for the boiling water reactor (BWR) Standard 
TS, NUREG-1433 (BWR/4) and NUREG- 1434 (BWR/6) by revising the 
frequency of SR 3.1.4.2, control rod scram time testing, from 
``120 days cumulative operation in MODE 1'' to ``200 days 
cumulative operation in MODE 1.'' A notice announcing the 
availability of this proposed TS change using the consolidated 
line item improvement process was published in the Federal 
Register on [DATE] (XX FR XXXXXX).
 
2.0 Regulatory Evaluation The TS governing the control rod scram 
time surveillance is intended to assure proper function of 
control rod insertion.
 
Following each refueling outage, all control rod scram times are 
verified.
 
In addition, periodically during power operation, a 
representative sample of control rods is selected to be inserted 
to verify the insertion speed. A representative sample is defined 
as a sample containing at least 10 percent of the total number of 
control rods. The current TS stipulates that no more than 20 
percent of the control rods in this representative sample can be 
``slow'' during the post outage testing. With more than 20 
percent of the sample declared to be ``slow'' per the criteria in 
Table 3.1.4-1, additional control rods are tested until this 20 
percent criterion (e.g., 20 percent of the entire sample size) is 
satisfied, or until the total number of ``slow'' control rods 
(throughout the core, from all surveillances) exceeds the 
Limiting Condition for Operation limit. For planned testing, the 
control rods selected for the sample should be different for each 
test. The acceptance criterion for at-power surveillance testing 
has been redefined from 20 percent to 7.5 percent. This tightened 
acceptance criterion for at-power surveillance aligns with the TS 
3.1.4 requirement for the total control rods allowed to have 
scram times exceeding the specified limit.
 
The proposed change does not affect any current operability 
requirements and the test frequency being revised is not 
specified in regulations. As a result, no regulatory requirements 
or criteria are affected.
 
 
[[Page 51866]] 3.0 Technical Evaluation 3.1 Statement of Proposed 
Changes NUREG-1433, SR 3.1.4.2 states, ``Verify, for a 
representative sample, each tested control rod scram time is 
within the limits of Table 3.1.4-1 with reactor steam dome 
pressure >=[800] psig.'' NUREG- 1434, SR 3.1.4.2 states, 
``Verify, for a representative sample, each tested control rod 
scram time is within the limits of Table 3.1.4-1 with reactor 
steam dome pressure >=[950] psig.'' Both SRs have a frequency of 
``120 days cumulative operation in MODE 1.'' The proposed change 
revises the frequency to ``200 days cumulative operation in MODE 
1.'' The Bases are revised to reference the new frequency and to 
reduce the percentage of the tested rods which can be ``slow'' 
from 20 percent to 7.5 percent. 3.2 Evaluation of Proposed Change 
The control rod insertion time test results at [Plant Name] have 
shown the control rod scram rates to be highly reliable. During 
the most recent [XXX] years of operation, out of [XXX] control 
rod insertion tests, only [XXX] control rods have been slower 
than the insertion time limit. The extensive historical database 
substantiates the claim of high reliability of the [Plant Name] 
control rod drive system. The current TS requires that 10 percent 
of the [XXX] control rods, or [XXX] rods, be tested via sampling 
every 120 cumulative days of operation in Mode 1.
 
The current TS states that the acceptance criteria have been met 
if 20 percent or fewer of the sample control rods that are tested 
are found to be slow. The acceptance criterion has been 
re-defined for at- power surveillance testing from 20 percent to 
7.5 percent when the surveillance period is extended to 200 
cumulative days of operation in Mode 1. This tightened acceptance 
criterion for at-power surveillance aligns with the TS 3.1.4 
requirement for the total control rods allowed to have scram 
times exceeding the specified limit.
 
The licensee will incorporate the revised acceptance criterion 
value of 7.5 percent into the TS Bases in accordance with their 
Bases Control Program and as a condition of this license 
amendment.\1\ 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- \1\ Conditioning of the license amendment is 
accomplished by including wording similar to the following in the 
implementation language (typically included as item 3) in the 
Amendment of Facility Operating License: This license amendment 
is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within [XX] days from the date of issuance. The licensee shall 
incorporate during the next periodic update into the TS Bases 
Section the changes described in its application dated [Date].
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- The NRC staff considers the extended surveillance 
interval to be justified by the demonstrated reliability of the 
control rod insertion system, based on historical control rod 
scram time test data, and by the more restrictive acceptance 
criterion for the number of slow rods allowed during at-power 
surveillance testing. The NRC staff finds the proposed TS change 
acceptable.
 
4.0 State Consultation In accordance with the Commission's 
regulations, the [State] State official was notified of the 
proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had 
[choose one: (1) No comments, or (2) the following comments--with 
subsequent disposition by the staff].
 
5.0 Environmental Consideration The amendment changes a 
requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility 
component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR 
Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has 
determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in 
the amounts and no significant change in the types of any 
effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no 
significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational 
radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a 
proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant 
hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on 
such finding (XX FR XXXXX). Accordingly, the amendment meets the 
eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 
CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental 
impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in 
connection with the issuance of the amendment.
 
6.0 Conclusion The Commission has concluded, based on the 
considerations discussed above, that: (1) There is reasonable 
assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be 
endangered by the operation in the proposed manner, (2) such 
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's 
regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be 
inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and 
safety of the public.
 
Model Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination 
Description of Amendment Request: The proposed amendment changes 
the Technical Specification (TS) testing frequency for the 
surveillance requirement (SR) in TS 3.1.4, ``Control Rod Scram 
Times.'' The proposed change revises the test frequency of SR 
3.1.4.2, control rod scram time testing, from ``120 days 
cumulative operation in MODE 1'' to ``200 days cumulative 
operation in Mode 1.'' Basis for proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), an 
analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration is 
presented below: 1. Does the change involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated? Response: No.
 
The proposed change extends the frequency for testing control rod 
scram time testing from every 120 days of cumulative Mode 1 
operation to 200 days of cumulative Mode 1 operation. The 
frequency of surveillance testing is not an initiator of any 
accident previously evaluated. The frequency of surveillance 
testing does not affect the ability to mitigate any accident 
previously evaluated, as the tested component is still required 
to be operable. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
 
2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? 
Response: No.
 
The proposed change extends the frequency for testing control rod 
scram time testing from every 120 days of cumulative Mode 1 
operation to 200 days of cumulative Mode 1 operation. The 
proposed change does not result in any new or different modes of 
plant operation.
 
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of 
a new or different kind of accident from any previously 
evaluated.
 
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety? Response: No.
 
The proposed change extends the frequency for testing control rod 
scram time testing from every 120 days of cumulative Mode 1 
operation to 200 days of cumulative Mode 1 operation. The 
proposed change continues to test the control rod scram time to 
ensure the assumptions in the safety analysis are protected. 
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.
 
Based on the above, the proposed change presents no significant 
hazards consideration under the standards set
 
[[Page 51867]] forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and accordingly, a 
finding of ``no significant hazards consideration'' is justified.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of August 2004.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
William D. Reckley, Chief (Acting), Section 1, Project 
Directorate IV,Division of Licensing Project Management,Office of 
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. 04-19203 Filed 8-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 9 DU: A Death Sentence in US and Elsewhere
 
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 00:27:29 -0500 (CDT)

 
Forwarded with Compliments of Government of the USA in Exile (GUSAE):
Free Americans Resisting the Fourth Reich on Behalf of All Species.

   Depleted Uranium: Dirty Bombs, Dirty Missiles, Dirty Bullets

           A Death Sentence Here and Abroad

By Leuren Moret
SF Bayview,  18 August 2004
www.globalresearch.ca  21 August 2004
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR408A.html

  "Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in
foreign policy." - Henry Kissinger, quoted in "Kiss the Boys Goodbye:
How the United States Betrayed Its Own POW's in Vietnam"

Vietnam was a chemical war for oil, permanently contaminating large
regions and countries downriver with Agent Orange, and
environmentally the most devastating war in world history. But since
1991, the U.S. has staged four nuclear wars using depleted uranium
weaponry, which, like Agent Orange, meets the U.S. government
definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Vast regions in the Middle
East and Central Asia have been permanently contaminated with
radiation.

And what about our soldiers? Terry Jemison of the Department of
Veterans Affairs reported this week to the American Free Press that
"Gulf-era veterans" now on medical disability since 1991 number
518,739, with only 7,035 reported wounded in Iraq in that same
14-year period.

This week the American Free Press dropped a "dirty bomb" on the
Pentagon by reporting that eight out of 20 men who served in one unit
in the 2003 U.S. military offensive in Iraq now have malignancies.
That means that 40 percent of the soldiers in that unit have
developed malignancies in just 16 months.

Since these soldiers were exposed to vaccines and depleted uranium
(DU) only, this is strong evidence for researchers and scientists
working on this issue, that DU is the definitive cause of Gulf War
Syndrome. Vaccines are not known to cause cancer. One of the first
published researchers on Gulf War Syndrome, who also served in 1991
in Iraq, Dr. Andras Korinyi-Both, is in agreement with Barbara Goodno
from the Department of Defense's Deployment Health Support
Directorate, that in this war soldiers were not exposed to chemicals,
pesticides, bioagents or other suspect causes this time to confuse
the issue.

This powerful new evidence is blowing holes in the cover-up
perpetrated by the Pentagon and three presidential administrations
ever since DU was first used in 1991 in the Persian Gulf War.
Fourteen years after the introduction of DU on the battlefield in
1991, the long-term effects have revealed that DU is a death sentence
and very nasty stuff.

Scientists studying the biological effects of uranium in the 1960s
reported that it targets the DNA. Marion Fulk, a nuclear physical
chemist retired from the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab and formerly
involved with the Manhattan Project, interprets the new and rapid
malignancies in soldiers from the 2003 war as "spectacular 
 and a
matter of concern."

This evidence shows that of the three effects which DU has on
biological systems - radiation, chemical and particulate - the
particulate effect from nano-size particles is the most dominant one
immediately after exposure and targets the Master Code in the DNA.
This is bad news, but it explains why DU causes a myriad of diseases
which are difficult to define.

In simple words, DU "trashes the body." When asked if the main
purpose for using it was for destroying things and killing people,
Fulk was more specific: "I would say that it is the perfect weapon
for killing lots of people."

Soldiers developing malignancies so quickly since 2003 can be
expected to develop multiple cancers from independent causes. This
phenomenon has been reported by doctors in hospitals treating
civilians following NATO bombing with DU in Yugoslavia in 1998-1999
and the U.S. military invasion of Iraq using DU for the first time in
1991. Medical experts report that this phenomenon of multiple
malignancies from unrelated causes has been unknown until now and is
a new syndrome associated with internal DU exposure.

Just 467 U.S. personnel were wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf
War in 1990-1991. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I,
11,000 are dead, and by 2000 there were 325,000 on permanent medical
disability. This astounding number of disabled vets means that a
decade later, 56 percent of those soldiers who served now have
medical problems.

The number of disabled vets reported up to 2000 has been increasing
by 43,000 every year. Brad Flohr of the Department of Veterans
Affairs told American Free Press that he believes there are more
disabled vets now than even after World War II.

They Brought It Home

Not only were soldiers exposed to DU on and off the battlefields, but
they brought it home. DU in the semen of soldiers internally
contaminated their wives, partners and girlfriends. Tragically, some
women in their 20s and 30s who were sexual partners of exposed
soldiers developed endometriosis and were forced to have
hysterectomies because of health problems.

In a group of 251 soldiers from a study group in Mississippi who had
all had normal babies before the Gulf War, 67 percent of their
post-war babies were born with severe birth defects. They were born
with missing legs, arms, organs or eyes or had immune system and
blood diseases. In some veterans' families now, the only normal or
healthy members of the family are the children born before the war.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has stated that they do not keep
records of birth defects occurring in families of veterans.

How Did They Hide It?

Before a new weapons system can be used, it must be fully tested. The
blueprint for depleted uranium weapons is a 1943 declassified
document from the Manhattan Project.

Harvard President and physicist James B. Conant, who developed poison
gas in World War I, was brought into the Manhattan Project by the
father of presidential candidate John Kerry. Kerry's father served at
a high level in the Manhattan Project and was a CIA agent.

Conant was chair of the S-1 Poison Gas Committee, which recommended
developing poison gas weapons from the radioactive trash of the
atomic bomb project in World War II. At that time, it was known that
radioactive materials dispersed in bombs from the air, from land
vehicles or on the battlefield produced very fine radioactive dust
which would penetrate all protective clothing, any gas mask or filter
or the skin. By contaminating the lungs and blood, it could kill or
cause illness very quickly.

They also recommended it as a permanent terrain contaminant, which
could be used to destroy populations by contaminating water supplies
and agricultural land with the radioactive dust.

The first DU weapons system was developed for the Navy in 1968, and
DU weapons were given to and used by Israel in 1973 under U.S.
supervision in the Yom Kippur war against the Arabs.

The Phalanx weapons system, using DU, was tested on the USS Bigelow
out of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in 1977, and DU weapons have been
sold by the U.S. to 29 countries.

Military research report summaries detail the testing of DU from
1974-1999 at military testing grounds, bombing and gunnery ranges and
at civilian labs under contract. Today 42 states are contaminated
with DU from manufacture, testing and deployment.

Women living around these facilities have reported increases in
endometriosis, birth defects in babies, leukemia in children and
cancers and other diseases in adults. Thousands of tons of DU weapons
tested for decades by the Navy on four bombing and gunnery ranges
around Fallon, Nevada, is no doubt the cause of the fastest-growing
leukemia cluster in the U.S. over the past decade. The military
denies that DU is the cause.

The medical profession has been active in the cover-up--just as they
were in hiding the effects from the American public--of low-level
radiation from atmospheric testing and nuclear power plants. A
medical doctor in Northern California reported being trained by the
Pentagon with other doctors, months before the 2003 war started, to
diagnose and treat soldiers returning from the 2003 war for mental
problems only.

Medical professionals in hospitals and facilities treating returning
soldiers were threatened with $10,000 fines if they talked about the
soldiers or their medical problems. They were also threatened with
jail.

Reporters have also been prevented access to more than 14,000
medically evacuated soldiers flown nightly since the 2003 war in
C-150s from Germany who are brought to Walter Reed Hospital near
Washington, D.C.

Dr. Robert Gould, former president of the Bay Area chapter of
Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), has contacted three
medical doctors since February 2004, after I had been invited to
speak about DU. Dr. Katharine Thomasson, president of the Oregon
chapter of the PSR, informed me that Dr. Gould had contacted her and
tried to convince her to cancel her invitation for me to speak about
DU at Portland State University on April 12. Although I was able to
do a presentation, Dr. Thomasson told me I could only talk about DU
in Oregon "and nothing overseas 
 nothing political."

Dr. Gould also contacted and discouraged Dr. Ross Wilcox in Toronto,
Canada, from inviting me to speak to Physicians for Global Survival
(PGS), the Canadian equivalent of PSR, several months later. When
that didn't work, he contacted Dr. Allan Connoly, the Canadian
national president of PGS, who was able to cancel my invitation and
nearly succeeded in preventing Dr. Wilcox, his own member, from
showing photos and presenting details on civilians suffering from DU
exposure and cancer provided to him by doctors in southern Iraq.

Dr. Janette Sherman, a former and long-standing member of PSR,
reported that she finally quit some time after being invited to lunch
by a new PSR executive administrator. After the woman had pumped Dr.
Sherman for information all through lunch about her position on key
issues, the woman informed Dr. Sherman that her last job had been
with the CIA.

How was the truth about DU hidden from military personnel serving in
successive DU wars? Before his tragic death, Sen. Paul Wellstone
informed Joyce Riley, R.N., B.S.N., executive director of the
American Gulf War Veterans Association, that 95 percent of Gulf War
veterans had been recycled out of the military by 1995. Any of those
continuing in military service were isolated from each other,
preventing critical information being transferred to new troops. The
"next DU war" had already been planned, and those planning it wanted
"no skunk at the garden party."

The US Has a Dirty (DU) Little (CIA) Secret

A new book just published at the American Free Press by Michael
Collins Piper, "The High Priests of War: The Secret History of How
America's Neo-Conservative Trotskyites Came to Power and Orchestrated
the War Against Iraq as the First Step in Their Drive for Global
Empire," details the early plans for a war against the Arab world by
Henry Kissinger and the neo-cons in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
That just happens to coincide with getting the DU "show on the road"
and the oil crisis in the Middle East, which caused concern not only
to President Nixon. The British had been plotting and scheming for
control of the oil in Iraq for decades since first using poison gas
on the Iraqis and Kurds in 1912.

The book details the creation of the neo-cons by their "godfather"
and Trotsky lover Irving Kristol, who pushed for a "war against
terrorism" long before 9/11 and was lavishly funded for years by the
CIA. His son, William Kristol, is one of the most influential men in
the United States.

Both are public relations men for the Israeli lobby's
neo-conservative network, with strong ties to Rupert Murdoch.
Kissinger also has ties to this network and the Carlyle Group, who,
one could say, have facilitated these omnicidal wars beginning from
the time former President Bush took office. It would be easy to say
that we are recycling World Wars I and II, with the same faces.

When I asked Vietnam Special Ops Green Beret Capt. John McCarthy, who
could have devised this omnicidal plan to use DU to destroy the
genetic code and genetic future of large populations of Arabs and
Moslems in the Middle East and Central Asia - just coincidentally the
areas where most of the world's oil deposits are located - he
replied: "It has all the handprints of Henry Kissinger."

In Zbignew Brzezinski's book "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy
and Its Geostrategic Imperatives," the map of the Eurasian chessboard
includes four regions strategic to U.S. foreign policy. The "South"
region corresponds precisely to the regions now contaminated
permanently with radiation from U.S. bombs, missiles and bullets made
with thousands of tons of DU.

A Japanese professor, Dr. K. Yagasaki, has calculated that 800 tons
of DU is the atomicity equivalent of 83,000 Nagasaki bombs. The U.S.
has used more DU since 1991 than the atomicity equivalent of 400,000
Nagasaki bombs. Four nuclear wars indeed, and 10 times the amount of
radiation released into the atmosphere from atmospheric testing!

No wonder our soldiers, their families and the people of the Middle
East, Yugoslavia and Central Asia are sick. But as Henry Kissinger
said after Vietnam when our soldiers came home ill from Agent Orange,
"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used for foreign
policy."

Unfortunately, more and more of those soldiers are men and women with
brown skin. And unfortunately, the DU radioactive dust will be
carried around the world and deposited in our environments just as
the "smog of war" from the 1991 Gulf War was found in deposits in
South America, the Himalayas and Hawaii.

In June 2003, the World Health Organization announced in a press
release that global cancer rates will increase 50 percent by 2020.
What else do they know that they aren't telling us? I know that
depleted uranium is a death sentence 
 for all of us. We will all die
in silent ways.

To Learn More

Sources used in this story that readers are encouraged to consult:

American Free Press four-part series on DU by Christopher Bollyn.

  Part I: "Depleted Uranium: U.S. Commits War Crime Against Iraq,
Humanity," www.americanfreepress.net/depleted_uranium.html ;

  Part II: "Cancer Epidemic Caused by U.S. WMD: MD Says Depleted
Uranium Definitively Linked,"
www.americanfreepress.net/html/cancer_epidemic_.html

August 2004 World Affairs Journal. Leuren Moret: "Depleted Uranium:
The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War,"
www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm and

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR407A.html

August 2004 Coastal Post Online. Carol Sterrit: "Marin Depleted
Uranium Resolution Heats Up - GI's Will Come Home To A Slow Death,"
www.coastalpost.com/04/08/01

World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference, Hamburg, Germany, October
16-19, 2004:
www.worlduraniumweaponsconference.de/speakers/speakers.htm
International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan. Written opinion of
Judge Niloufer Baghwat:
www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Afghanistan-Criminal-Tribunal10mar04.htm

"Discounted Casualties: The Human Cost of Nuclear War" by Akira
Tashiro, foreword by Leuren Moret,
www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.html

====================================================

  Global Research Contributing Editor Leuren Moret is a geoscientist
who has worked around the world on radiation issues, educating
citizens, the media, members of parliaments and Congress and other
officials. She became a whistleblower in 1991 at the Livermore
Nuclear Weapons Lab after experiencing major science fraud on the
Yucca Mountain Project. An environmental commissioner in the City of
Berkeley, she can be reached at leurenmoret@yahoo.com .

Email this article to a friend

To express your opinion on this article, join the discussion at
Global Research's News and Discussion Forum  , at
http://globalresearch.ca.myforums.net/index.php

The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at
www.globalresearch.ca  grants permission to cross-post original
Global Research (Canada) articles in their entirety, or any portions
thereof, on community internet sites, as long as the text & title of
the article are not modified. The source must be acknowledged as
follows: Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at
www.globalresearch.ca  .  For cross-postings, kindly use the active
URL hyperlink address of the original CRG article. The author's
copyright note must be displayed. (For articles from other news
sources, check with the original copyright holder, where
applicable.). For publication of Global Research (Canada) articles in
print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:
editor@globalresearch.ca  .

For media inquiries: editor@globalresearch.ca

) Copyright belongs to the author, 2004. For fair use only/ pour
usage iquitable seulement.
*****************************************************************
 10 Evening Times: 31 held in demo at Clyde nuke sub base - 
 
[online@eveningtimes.co.uk]           

  TRIDENT DEMO: protesters are faced by lines of police outside 
the Clyde Submarine base at Faslane. Picture: Nick Ponty   

THIRTY-ONE protesters – including three MSPs – were arrested 
today during a blockade at Faslane nuclear submarine base on the 
Clyde. 

Around 300 people, protesting against weapons of mass 
destruction, blocked off the north and south gates of the base by 
sitting on the ground and linking their arms. 

Most of the arrests were for breach of the peace and resisting 
arrest. 

The three MSPs were arrested when they refused to move away from 
the gates. 

The Green Party's Mark Ballard was dragged away by police, 
followed by Scottish Socialist MSPs Rosie Kane and Frances 
Curran. 

Ms Kane was carrying a banner with the names of soldiers killed 
in Iraq, including Gordon Gentle from Glasgow. 

Earlier, two demonstrators tried to swim into the base. They got 
as far as a security boom around 1am before being arrested by MoD 
police. 

One of them, Tiina Sarkinon, 23, from Finland, was later released 
and joined fellow protesters at the gates. 

She said: "We were trying to reach the submarines and we would 
have spray-painted ‘Disarm the submarines'. I have been here many 
times and it is important we get our message across." 

Security was tightened at Faslane, with extra military police 
drafted in, and many officers from Strathclyde Police. 

The Carry On Up The Clyde: The Big Blockade protest was organised 
by Trident Ploughshares and CND, with the aim of preventing 
workers from entering Faslane. 

Both gates remained closed throughout the morning but some 
personnel were believed to have entered the grounds at an oil 
dump. 

Demo organisers said they were pleased with the success of the 
protest and claimed to have closed the base for two hours. 
Politicians from most main parties turned up to show their 
support. 

Nationalist MSPs Linda Fabiani, Nicola Sturgeon, Rob Gibson and 
Sandra White joined the blockade. 

They said public pressure could bring an end to nuclear missiles 
on the Clyde. 

Ms Sturgeon said: "It's more important than ever to campaign 
against nuclear weapons. 

"I cannot understand the hypocrisy of a Prime Minister who takes 
us into an illegal war in Iraq over weapons of mass destruction 
that don't exist, while he's happy to make room in Scotland for 
the most lethal bombs possible. 

"It's high time we told Westminster we don't want these weapons 
on our river." 

Glasgow minister the Rev David McLachlan returned to the base 
where he was arrested three years ago. 

Mr McLachlan, of Langside Parish Church, said: "I won't be doing 
anything that will get me arrested today as I am still appealing 
a £175 fine handed out a few years ago." 

At a similar protest last year, campaigners blocked access to the 
base for more than five hours. 

More than 100 people were arrested. 
*****************************************************************
 11 Sri Lanka: US to install nuclear detection equipment at Colombo port 

8 - 23 - 2004

  Sri Lankan Daily News and Reports -   
  
  The US government will install nuclear detection equipment at 
their cost.   

Aug 23, Colombo: Central Environmental Authority (CEA) chairman 
and Law and Order Ministry Secretary Tilak Ranaviraja says the 
United States will install equipment at the Colombo port to 
detect nuclear material. 

The decision was finalised with the signing of a Memorandum of 
Understanding between Sri Lanka and the United States during 
Ports and Aviation Minister Mangala Samaraweera’s recent visit to 
Washington. 

The US government will install nuclear detection equipment at 
their cost in order to prevent such material coming into or 
passing through Sri Lanka. [goto Top] 


  Copyright © 2000, 2004 by LankaPage.com (LLC)     for Latest
News: LankaPage.com [http://www.lankapage.com]   
*****************************************************************
 12 Japan Times: Radioactive material found at university

  Tuesday, August 24, 2004   


 About 1,100 bottles containing liquid radioactive material have 
been found unattended on the campus of the University of 
Tokushima, the education ministry said Monday, warning the 
university to improve its control of hazardous materials.

 The Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Ministry 
issued a written reprimand to university President Toshihiro 
Aono.

 Radioactivity levels on the surfaces of the bottles were low, 
and there are no signs of contamination in the surrounding areas, 
the ministry said, adding that there is no danger to humans and 
the environment.

 The unattended bottles, most of them 20 milliliters in capacity, 
were found on shelves in laboratories, refrigerators along 
corridors and other research facilities.

 Most contained tritium, while some had radioactive materials 
from reagent chemicals.

 The ministry learned through inquiries of personnel at the 
university that some of the radioactive materials had been taken 
by professors out of controlled areas without permission and were 
used for experiments at laboratories between 1976 and 1997, 
ministry officials said.

 According to the university, the professors have explained that 
they took the materials because it was more convenient than 
bringing test tools into the controlled areas.

 University officials said they plan to punish the professors.

 They said the ministry also found that an isotope center managed 
by the university has been keeping banned types of radioactive 
substances, including strontium.

 The ministry ordered the university to conduct an internal probe 
following the discoveries of radioactive substances in its 
laboratories in June and July.

 The Japan Times: Aug. 24, 2004 (C) All rights reserved 
*****************************************************************
 13 Scotsman.com News: UK - Nuclear protesters blockade Faslane base
 
Tuesday, 24th August 2004    	 

ANTI-NUCLEAR campaigners were today blockading the Faslane 
nuclear submarine base on the Clyde to highlight government 
"hypocrisy" over weapons of mass destruction. 

Up to 400 people, including politicians, members of the clergy 
and peace activists from Belgium, Scandinavia, Spain and across 
the UK, were expected to take part. 

Many sat down in the road to prevent naval base workers from 
entering the home of Britain’s Trident nuclear submarines. 

The protest is being organised by Trident Ploughshares and CND. 

Among MSPs taking part in the protest were Lothians Green MSPs 
Robin Harper and Mark Ballard and Scottish Socialists Rosie Kane 
and Frances Curran. 

Ms Kane said: "We have 1000 Horoshimas here and I can’t stay at 
home and ignore that. 

"We aim to disrupt the base for the day and draw the attention of 
the people of Scotland to the fact we’re housing these 
dangerous weapons - and maybe one day the parliament will have 
enough power itself to bring about their peaceful removal." 

Mr Harper said the Trident programme on the Clyde was costing 
taxpayers more than 100 times as much as the controversial new 
£431 million Holyrood building. 

"It is vital that we never give up drawing attention to the 
iniquity of the existence of these weapons. 

"These are the true weapons of mass destruction, and they 
themselves must be destroyed."                   

*****************************************************************
 14 [NukeNet] Skull Valley/PFS Dump update
 
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:19:43 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
Dear friends,

This is the first of two recent articles on the urgent Skull Valley/PFS 
nuke dump proposal. Please check our website 
http://www.shundahai.org/skull_valley_info.htm for other recent and 
archived articles, as well as an announcement on the fall gathering in 
Skull Valley. More updates are forthcoming.

Peace,
Pete Litster
Shundahai Network

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yucca slips, Skull Valley stock rises
Will new delays for Nevada site mean more nuclear waste in Utah?
By Judy Fahys
The Salt Lake Tribune

Aug. 16, 2004

Two miles into the Yucca Mountain tunnels in August 2000 are experimental 
sites designed to simulate heat given off by nuclear waste packages. Recent 
setbacks for the proposed nuclear repository have raised the profile of the 
Skull Valley site in Utah as a temporary storage option. (Paul 
Fraughton/Tribune file photo)
The latest round of face-to-face presentations are under way on licensing a 
nuclear waste storage site in Skull Valley, about 50 miles from Salt Lake City.
The hearing is taking place behind closed doors in Washington to protect 
sensitive nuclear safety information from getting into terrorists' hands. 
But the real action on the nation's nuclear-waste problem continues to play 
out in plain view in the dynamic between the temporary Skull Valley storage 
site and the federal repository planned for Yucca Mountain, Nev.
That's where the federal government wants to build underground disposal for 
up to 77,000 tons of reactor waste and the highly radioactive discards from 
nuclear bomb-making programs.
The thinking goes that further delays on Yucca Mountain would increase 
pressure on the federal government to allow the Utah project, a joint 
venture of the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians and a consortium of 
out-of-state utilities called Private Fuel Storage, or PFS.
And lately, Yucca Mountain has run into a few potential obstacles.
The possible snags affirm what proponents of the Skull Valley site have 
said all along: The nuclear industry needs an interim alternative to Yucca, 
which has been under discussion for more than 20 years.
"It points to the need for temporary storage," said PFS spokeswoman Sue 
Martin. If the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board signs off on the Skull 
Valley project after this new round of hearings, waste could start coming 
to Utah by 2007.
Meanwhile, even though the Energy Department has promised to open the 
Nevada repository by 2010, many doubt the federal government will be able 
to meet the deadline.
Martin calls the Energy Department's effort to license Yucca Mountain in 
four years "extremely optimistic." The PFS proposal, though temporary and 
far less complex than plans for the permanent Yucca repository, recently 
entered its eighth year of federal licensing review - PFS originally 
expected it to take a couple of years - and the earliest the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) could issue the license is next January.
Bob Loux, head of the Nevada state government office devoted to derailing 
the Yucca Mountain plan, bluntly doubts that Yucca Mountain can secure a 
license in half the time.
"I don't think there's any way in the world that the NRC is going to be 
able to complete this [licensing] hearing process in four years," he said.
Loux has many reasons to believe there will be more delays for Yucca 
Mountain, including:
l A Washington, D.C., appeals court last month rejected a regulation 
requiring the Energy Department to build the repository so that it would be 
safe for 10,000 years, saying that it should stand up even longer. Two past 
changes to that standard have each delayed the site by eight months, Loux said.
l A funding squeeze looms because the Energy Department wanted $880 million 
for next year's work on Yucca but the Bush administration budgeted only 
$131 million.
l The Energy Department has failed to complete an electronic document 
system that must be done to the NRC's satisfaction at least six months 
before commissioners will accept a license application for the Yucca 
Mountain project.
l The nation may have a new president next year in Democrat John Kerry, who 
restated his opposition to the Nevada repository while stumping last week 
in Nevada.
As these events unfold around Yucca Mountain, Skull Valley rarely comes up 
as an alternative, even though PFS continues to advertise storage space in 
the nuclear industry trade media.
The consortium has always billed itself as a solution to a backlog of 
reactor waste that is accumulating at more than 60 sites around the nation.
As planned, the facility would be big enough to hold up to 4,000 
steel-and-concrete containers of spent fuel - about 10 million rods - on 
concrete pads sprawling across 100 acres of the Skull Valley Goshute 
reservation. The waste would be shipped over rail lines, mostly from 
reactors east of the Mississippi.
Utah political leaders have been the Skull Valley project's most aggressive 
and vocal critics. But so far they have not succeeded in stopping it.
Lawmakers passed anti-waste legislation in 1998 and 2001, but last month a 
federal appeals court struck them down.
Republican 1st District Rep. Rob Bishop has sponsored federal legislation 
that would use wilderness protections to block rail shipments from 
traversing the eastern edge of the Cedar Mountains. The legislation, first 
conceived by then-Rep. Jim Hansen, R-Utah, appears to be bogged down in a 
Senate defense bill.
"It took a great deal of effort by the delegation to get to where we are 
right now," said Adam Elggren, spokesman for U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, 
"and I understand that negotiations are in a delicate stage."
Hatch, along with fellow Utah Republican Sen. Bob Bennett, voted two 
summers ago to override Nevada's objections to Yucca Mountain and get that 
project going on the premise that the sooner the Nevada dump is built, the 
less likely the Skull Valley storage would be needed.
State Rep. Stephen Urquhart, R-St. George, is not sure what the state will 
do next. He criticized then-Gov. Mike Leavitt for a "bet-the-farm legal 
strategy."
"It's now looking like that bet is not very wise," he said. "Where does 
that leave us?"
He worries that even if the Legislature steps in to deal with Skull Valley 
soon, it may be too late to have any control over the site because it's on 
sovereign lands.
Utah may also have missed the chance to negotiate financial benefits for 
living with the risks it poses.
Still, he said, "I am not pessimistic. I'm not fatalistic."
Ultimately, it could be that Skull Valley never materializes into a viable 
option because the licensing process falls through or the numbers don't add 
up for potential customers.
Rod McCullum, who follows waste management for the Nuclear Energy 
Institute, an industry group, wonders how many companies would want storage 
in Skull Valley, regardless of what happens to Yucca Mountain. He notes 
that the storage crisis PFS is banking on has instead become more of a 
financial and legal crisis for the federal government.
Reactor owners have filed 65 suits against the Energy Department for 
missing its original disposal-site deadline in 1998. They already have won 
one of those cases.
Meanwhile, many have expanded storage at their reactors to avoid the 
expense of moving it before the government is ready to haul it away. There 
is room for more than 500 casks at 28 sites now.
"The companies don't have a crisis," McCullum said. "The government does."
Finally, there is the possibility that the state will succeed in shooting 
down the license before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. The 
three-person panel, an expert review board of the NRC, is analyzing 
arguments that the waste casks will hold up even if a military jet crashes 
into the site. Skull Valley is on the path of thousands of flights between 
the Utah Test and Training Range and Hill Air Force Base.
Washington, D.C., attorney Joe Egan warns that a license for PFS is no sure 
bet. A member of Nevada's legal team that has worked with Utah in trying to 
derail the PFS project, he said Utah's lawyers have a strong case. Even 
with political and economic pressure to deal with the waste backlog, the 
consortium might not be able to prove the casks will withstand the impact 
of a crash, he said.
"If they can't make the numbers, the licensing board is not going to give 
them a license," Egan said. "It's not political pressure. It's the 
regulations."
He added: "Anyone who thinks it's over is deluding themselves. It's not over.

fahys@sltrib.com

<http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_2393461>http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_2393461


Shundahai Network
PO Box 1115
Salt Lake City, UT 84110
Phone: 801-533-0128
Fax: 801-533-0129
email: shundahai@shundahai.org
website: www.shundahai.org

Dedicated to Breaking the Nuclear Chain

Shundahai is a Newe (Western Shoshone) word meaning "peace and harmony with 
all creation".
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 15 [NukeNet] Skull valley/ PFS nuke dump update Part 2
 
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:19:48 -0700

 
<x-flowed>

Nuclear agency says Skull Valley casks OK

Joe Baird. The Salt Lake Tribune. Salt Lake City, Utah: Aug 21, 2004.

Copyright Salt Lake Tribune Aug 21, 2004

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's inspector general has determined 
that allegations about the integrity of containers planned for storing 
high-level nuclear waste on the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation are 
unsubstantiated.

Concerns were raised last year that the steel-and-concrete casks, in use at 
several nuclear sites, were flawed. Under plans put forth by the consortium 
called Private Fuel Storage (PFS), the casks would hold up to 44,000 tons 
of spent nuclear reactor fuel at the Skull Valley site, 45 miles southwest 
of Salt Lake City.

Bringing the charge was a former quality assurance auditor, Oscar Shirani, 
who warned of faulty welding and other safety shortcomings in the casks, 
which are designed by New Jersey-based Holtec International and fabricated 
by U.S. Tool and Die. Shirani also claimed that the NRC staff ignored his 
warnings.

Investigators agreed to review the allegations after requests were made by 
two public-interest watchdog groups. But in a 20-page report this week, the 
inspector general concluded that the NRC provided adequate oversight of 
Holtec and U.S. Tool and Die's quality assurance programs.

The NRC, the inspector general's report said, conducted yearly inspections 
from 1999-2002, and audits in 1996, 1999, 2000 and 2002. Deficiencies were 
revealed, but investigators concluded that the quality assurance programs 
at both companies met all requirements.

"The NRC inspection into Shirani's concerns found no violations of NRC 
regulations or significant safety deficiencies," the inspector general's 
report said.

PFS spokeswoman Sue Martin said Friday that the inspector general's report 
upheld the consortium's long-standing belief that the casks met NRC safety 
requirements.

"We're pleased but not surprised by the results," she said. "We've always 
thought that the Holtec casks were performing well in all of the places 
that they're being used."

But the casks' durability have likely come into question again this week as 
the NRC's licensing board held another round of closed- door hearings on 
the PFS proposal in Washington -- centering on the potential effects of a 
fighter jet crash into the Goshute storage facility, where the casks would 
be stored above ground.

In March 2003, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board stalled PFS's efforts 
to get a license and begin construction at the Utah site by ruling that the 
chances of such a crash -- military jets fly over the area between Hill Air 
Force Base and the Utah Test and Training Range -- exceeded the allowable risk.

Martin said the NRC's licensing board has two more days of hearings 
scheduled next month on the PFS proposal. A licensing decision is expected 
early next year.

jbaird@sltrib.com

_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 16 Daily Yomiuri: Expense not only factor in nuclear fuel issue
 
Yomiuri Shimbun 

How can Japan use nuclear power as a major electricity source to 
maintain a stable supply of energy in the future? 

This question, like the problem of maintaining a secure food 
supply, is directly related to the nation's basic strategy and 
security. The government should look at what the situation might 
be like in 50 or 100 years, make comprehensive policy plans based 
on these projections and carry them out with resolve. 

A major pillar of Japan's nuclear policy is the Long Term Program 
for Research, Development and Utilization of Nuclear Energy, 
which has as its highest priority the realization of the nuclear 
fuel cycle. 

In the nuclear fuel cycle, uranium and plutonium are extracted by 
reprocessing nuclear fuel spent at nuclear power stations, and 
using it again as fresh fuel for nuclear power generation. This 
cycle is said to have several advantages, including the promotion 
of efficiency in consuming uranium resources and in disposing of 
nuclear waste. 

However, the Atomic Energy Commission has started to review this 
cycle because, ahead of a review of the program done every five 
years, some experts have said that burying nuclear waste is more 
economical. They have demanded a change in the nation's nuclear 
policy toward more cost efficiency. 

=== 

Security should come first 



In light of this, the commission since June has been working on a 
revision of the program based on cost comparisons. But the 
program should not be discussed solely on this basis. 

If the government decides to change its nuclear policy in favor 
of burying waste, the nation will have to obtain more uranium 
than ever. But it is uncertain that we will be able to secure a 
stable supply as we are already using 12 percent of global 
uranium output, while China is planning to build more nuclear 
plants. 

Such a policy change could result in an even more excessive 
dependence on oil and natural gas as sources of power. 

There are few studies on the safety of burying spent nuclear fuel 
underground, and it will be extremely difficult to find any 
municipality willing to accept such a burden. The opposition of 
local communities and political speculation could boost the cost 
of burial. 

=== 

Keep hidden costs in mind 



Calculating the expense of burying nuclear waste without taking 
such invisible costs into consideration is highly likely to 
damage the long-term security of the nation. 

The state and the electric power industry have been criticized 
for not revealing results of several similar cost calculations 
done in the past. 

But according to those provisional calculations, the nuclear fuel 
cycle would raise the running cost of nuclear power plants by 
only a few percentage points. The unit cost of nuclear power 
generation would still be cheaper than that of a unit of power 
generated by oil or other power sources. 

A working group established by the Atomic Energy Commission to 
revise the program has already held five meetings, but the 
discussion has yet to gather any steam. 

This delay means that Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd.'s nuclear 
fuel-reprocessing plant in Rokkashomura, Aomori Prefecture, which 
is nearly ready to go on line, has been unable to obtain the 
approval of the local community to conduct its final-phase tests. 
The cost of maintaining the plant is said to amount to several 
hundreds of millions of yen per month. 

Discussions on the nuclear issue must be carried forward 
immediately. 

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, Aug. 24)   

Copyright 2004 The Yomiuri Shimbun 
*****************************************************************
 17 Las Vegas SUN: Nuke lobbyists plan to appeal Yucca decision

Radiation standards challenged

 By Suzanne Struglinski <suzanne@lasvegassun.com 
[suzanne@lasvegassun.com] > SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU

 WASHINGTON -- The Nuclear Energy Institute plans to ask a 
federal appeals court to reconsider the Yucca Mountain legal 
decision handed down more than a month ago.

 The institute, the lobbying arm of the nuclear industry, plans 
to file papers with the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia this afternoon asking for a rehearing of 
part of the case.

 The motion is expected to question the court's ruling earlier 
this year, in which the judges told the Environmental Protection 
Agency to set new radiation standards for Yucca Mountain.

 If the motion is filed today, the court's ruling is expected to 
be stayed and won't be enforced until the motion is considered.

 Details about the Nuclear Energy Institute's request will not be 
available until Tuesday.

 The institute, Nevada, any of the environmental groups that 
brought legal challenges, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and 
the Justice Department had until today to ask the court to 
reconsider any of the legal challenges against the site.

 Nevada will not request a rehearing, even though it lost several 
cases with the court's decision, Nevada Deputy Attorney General 
Marta Adams said. The last day to appeal to the Supreme Court is 
Oct. 7 and the state is still evaluating what to do next, Adams 
said. The state's decision will depend on what the court decides 
to do with the rehearing request, she said.

 But, she added, rehearings are rarely granted.

 "They are seeking to delay the inevitable," Adams said. "This 
will go back to the EPA. At some point we have to be practical.

 It was not certain Friday what the Justice Department, which 
represents the Energy Department and the Environmental Protection 
Agency, would do, spokesman Charles Miller said. The Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission's legal department could not be reached for 
comment.

 On July 9, the court threw out the 10,000-year radiation 
standard for the nuclear waste storage site planned at Yucca, 90 
miles northwest of Las Vegas. The court found the EPA did not 
follow a law that required it to use a recommendation by the 
National Academy of Sciences when it set the radiation standard. 
The court said either Congress will have to change the law to 
allow the 10,000-year standard or the EPA will have to develop a 
new standard.

 But technically the 10,000-year standard is still in place until 
seven days after the court denies a petition to rehear the case 
or if none of the parties file for a rehearing, said Mike Bauser, 
the Nuclear Energy Institute's associate general counsel. He said 
the Energy Department should continue to work on the license 
application until the court's decision becomes final.

 The department intends to submit the project's license 
application to the commission in December.

 Adams said the federal court issued a separate but "totally 
standard" ruling with its decision to hold its order.

 The request for rehearing will leave the EPA standard in place 
until the court decides whether or not it will grant the 
rehearing.

 If the court agrees to rehear the case, the standard would 
remain in place until the case is reconsidered, Bauser said.

 If the court does not agree to rehear the case or decides again 
that the standard needs to be thrown out, it would be void a week 
later unless the court stays the decision to allow the ruling to 
be taken to the Supreme Court, Bauser said.
*****************************************************************
 18 Las Vegas SUN: Probe sought after waste leak

Truck was headed to Nevada Test Site

 By Suzanne Struglinski <suzanne@lasvegassun.com 
[suzanne@lasvegassun.com] > SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU 

WASHINGTON -- Leaking sand from a truck moving radioactive waste
from an Energy Department site closed an Arizona highway for
about 45 minutes earlier this month, prompting Arizona Gov.
Janet Napolitano to call for an investigation.

 A truck hauling radioactive material from Paducah, Ky., to the
Nevada Test Site starting leaking a kitty-litter type substance
as it made its way across Arizona on Aug. 15. The westbound
lanes of Interstate 40 in northern Arizona were closed until
hazardous-materials personnel determined that the leaking
material was not radioactive.

 Napolitano wrote Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham that she has
"deep concerns" about the leak and wants it investigated.

 "This event gives me grave concern that, even though no
radioactive material was released, there appears to be a
systemic weakness in your shipping and packaging procedures,"
Napolitano wrote.

 The leak was of a sandlike, absorbent packing material and not
the shipment of uranium tetraflouride being trucked to Nevada
that had been leaking, according to the Arizona governor's
office. Greg Cook, a spokesman for Bechtel Jacobs, the
contractor that operates the Paducah facility, said the truck
driver followed procedures. But he referred other questions to
the Energy Department.

 The material being shipped was different than the nuclear waste
destined for Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas,
but Nevada's congressional delegation and state officials have
pointed to potential problems with moving 77,000 tons of waste
across the country for decades as part of their strategy to kill
the project.

 Bob Loux, executive director of the state's Agency for Nuclear
Projects, said the shipments may be different but the incident
"speaks to the issue that no matter how safe people say things
are going to be or how prepared they are, things happen."

 "To say these can be done without anything happening clearly is
wrong and this is an example," Loux said.

 David Cherry, spokesman for Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said
transportation is the "permanent Achilles heel" of the project.

 "You can make the leap and say if they can't handle the
low-level waste shipments, doesn't that raise questions on how
they will handle high-level waste?" Cherry said.

 Cherry said the project's environmental impact statement says
there are going to be accidents, but that it is hard to predict
exactly what can take place.

 Used nuclear fuel shipments would use a different container and
would not have sand in them, according to the Nuclear Energy
Institute. The sand-augmented type of container is used for
low-level waste. The reason for the leak still needs to be
investigated, but people need to keep in mind that this not the
same as a high-level waste shipment, spokeswoman Melanie Lyons
said.

 Other trucks traveling from Oak Ridge, Tenn., to the Nevada
Test Site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, also have been found
leaking the same packing material, Napolitano noted in the
letter dated Wednesday.

 Napolitano's letter also cited a December 1997 incident near
Kingman in which water leaked from a truck carrying low-level
radioactive waste from an Ohio nuclear weapons plant to Nevada.
No radiation was found in the water.

 The investigation into the 1997 shipment from the Ohio plant
"revealed significant management weakness on the oversight of
the waste packaging and shipping program," Napolitano wrote.
"Due to the number of packages that leaked absorbent material
from these shipments this week, it appears that a similar
problem may now exist at Oak Ridge."

 Calls this morning were not returned by the Energy Department
headquarters in Washington, and calls to Bechtel Jacobs and the
Paducah site were also referred to DOE headquarters.

 In the letter Napolitano asked Abraham what steps were taken
before the incident to ensure the safety of radioactive
shipments and an explanation of whether those steps were
followed.

 She also asked for information about what notices are provided
to state and local authorities about the shipments, how the
Energy Department tracks and inspects the loads and the steps
the agency will take to prevent future problems.

 "The federal government has a responsibility to reassure the
people of Arizona that the shipping of radioactive material on
their roadways is done in the most secure way and that their
safety is paramount," Napolitano wrote.

 Napolitano spokeswoman Pati Urias said the leaking truck's
driver pulled into a rest area west of Flagstaff after another
driver in a group of trucks detected problems with his own load.

 After pulling over and spotting the leak, the trucker called
dispatchers, who contacted the Arizona Department of Public
Safety, Urias said.

 After the nature of the leak was determined and the load was
resealed, the truck went on its way.

 The Associated Press and Sun reporter Mary Manning contributed
to this story.

 

*****************************************************************
 19 Wichita Eagle: BRIEF EDITORIALS: ON RADIOACTIVE WASTE, NEIGHBORHOOD BLIGHT

| 08/23/2004 | 

What a radioactive waste 

Twenty-four years after Congress told states to develop regional 
dumps for low-level radioactive waste, Kansas' region is nowhere 
on that mandate, because it still can't find a place to put its 
waste. 

A costly 17-year legal fight over the states' decision to send 
their waste to northeast Nebraska ended earlier this month in a 
settlement, with Nebraska agreeing to pay $141 million to escape 
the obligation. 

And the problem isn't just in this five-state region. Only three 
sites in the nation accept such waste, including those that 
Kansas now uses in South Carolina and Utah. But the former won't 
be open to this region's waste after 2008, and the latter limits 
what it takes. 

This mess was made on Capitol Hill, which is where the solution 
must now be found. As Ron Hammerschmidt, director of the Division 
of Environment at the Kansas Department of Health and 
Environment, said, "The compact system hasn't worked. Congress 
needs to go back to the drawing board and figure out how to 
handle this on a national basis." 

Let's hope lawmakers will and can, as the second choice for this 
region's waste dump was Kansas. 

-- For the editorial board, Rhonda Holman 

Clean up neighborhood 

A northeast neighborhood, bounded by 25th Street North, I-135, 
Ninth Street and Oliver, has roughly 200 rundown homes that don't 
meet code standards. It's a depressing picture: Vacant, 
burned-out houses. Broken windows. Trash everywhere. 

As one resident said, "We shouldn't have to live in this kind of 
environment." 

To its credit, Sunflower Community Action is doing something 
about it, including organizing a meeting between city officials 
and residents who want to clean up their area. 

Blight can kill a neighborhood, provide a breeding ground for 
crime, and sap hope for the future. It's good to see residents 
fighting back. 

-- For the editorial board, Randy Scholfield   
*****************************************************************
 20 Quad-City Times: Nuclear waste in the Q-C: 100 years down, 9,900 to go 

8:31 am, Monday, August 23rd, 2004
						
.Imagine our community 10,000 years from now. One hundred 
centuries. Ten millennium celebrations..Nothing we see now will 
remain. The river will have cut a new path..No one plans for 
outcomes that are 10,000 years away. Yet engineers at the Exelon 
Corp.’s Quad-Cities nuclear generating station in Cordova are 
grappling with one..                                                        

Larry Fisher/Quad-City Times Exelon’s Brian Maze examines the 
base layer that will support a four-foot thick concrete pad to 
store casks of waste from the nuclear plant. View Photo | More 
Photos                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
                                                              
Site Vice President Tim Tulon is overseeing construction of a new 
area to hold nuclear waste that will remain dangerous for 10,000 
years. The meticulous engineering for the Exelon’s planned dry 
cask storage area intends to provide a safe, temporary home for 
radioactive fuel rods until they can be moved to a central 
repository..

Of course, no central repository exists..

Nevada’s Yucca Mountain is caught in the middle of a political 
and practical dilemma. President Bush says he will proceed with 
opening the nation’s only permanent nuclear waste dump, 
regardless of the objections of most Nevadans, their Republican 
governor, and their three Republican and one Democratic 
congressmen. John Kerry says he will pull the plug on Yucca 
Mountain, leaving the 30-year-old dilemma about nuclear waste 
unresolved. Even if the repository opens, the federal government 
and states still need to resolve transportation of the waste over 
U.S. interstates and railroads..

There is no Plan B for long-term nuclear waste storage..

So no one can say for sure if Exelon is building a temporary 
morgue or a permanent graveyard for nuclear waste.. 

* * *.

Exelon’s Brian Maze is overseeing excavation of a smooth, flat 
area just slightly smaller than a football field. It is covered 
with soft, leveled sand. The sand will be covered by fabric. Over 
that goes a layer of one-inch crushed rock. Then comes a two-foot 
layer of concrete and soil, topped by another two feet of solid 
concrete. When finished, this $1.5 million pad — and possibly 
three more like it — will be able to support up to 48,960 tons of 
nuclear waste containers..

In 1998, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the federal government 
has an “unconditional obligation” to take the waste off the hands 
of utilities. In fact, the court ruling said, since the 1950s, 
the federal government has “owned” the nation’s nuclear waste..

This month, the federal government cut an $80 million check to 
Exelon, the first payment to settle a lawsuit Exelon filed 
seeking reimbursement for unforeseen waste storage costs. Exelon 
is in line to receive $300 million to cover their costs for 
storing nuclear waste. If the federal government doesn’t open the 
Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in Nevada by 2010, expect 
more payments..

* * *.

Nuclear fuel rods emit no dangerous energy until they are 
inserted in the reactor and become part of the radioactive 
reaction. The controlled reactions produce heat and steam which 
drive generators to create electricity. The Cordova reactors 
provide enough to power about 1 million households, most in the 
Chicago area..

Each reactor’s core has 724 rods that are shifted and readjusted 
to maintain an even dispersal of energy. During refueling every 
two years, about 280 spent rods are removed and replaced with new 
ones. The highly radioactive rods glow blue when pulled from the 
core and placed in an indoor water tank, initially designed as 
temporary storage..

No one in 1972 anticipated that nuclear waste disposal would be 
unresolved 30 years later. Today, more than 6,000 radioactive 
rods fill the tank..

Nationally, the waste now totals some 42 metric tons and is 
located at 131 nuclear plants in 39 states. In addition, untold 
amounts of nuclear waste are stored in secret at military 
installations across the nation..

* * *.

Regardless of the fate of Yucca Mountain, the Cordova plant site 
next year will begin amassing 17-foot tall concrete cylinders, 
called casks, that look like corn silos. The casks will be the 
final resting place for spent nuclear rods packed into 
impermeable metal cylinders surrounded by two-foot thick 
concrete. Each cask weighs 180 tons. Each of the four pads to be 
constructed will hold 68 casks. That will be 272 casks at $1 
million each, fully packed and sealed..

Each cask can withstand a 360 mph wind, equivalent of an F-5 
tornado, says Joe Reiss, on-site engineer for Holtec 
International. The twister that leveled Utica, Ill., was an F-3 
tornado. .Reiss is overseeing implementation of the nuclear waste 
management system called ISFSI. When the project began, the 
acronym stood for Interim Spent Fuel Storage Installation. Now, 
documents refer to it as the Independent Spent Fuel Storage 
Installation..

* * *.

The Homeland Security precautions most of us only read about are 
evident throughout the Cordova plant, where more than $7 million 
was spent on security this year, mostly on concrete, rock and 
wire..

The casks will be in the open air behind concrete barricades and 
a double, razor-wire fence with motion detectors and cameras. 
Eight guard towers go up this year to surround the entire plant. 
Each will be staffed round-the-clock— holidays, too— by guards 
armed with automatic weapons..

For how long? No one knows..

Tulon expects the NRC will authorize the Cordova plant to 
continue producing power for another 20 years. After that, he 
seems certain the plant will shut down. Newer ways of generating 
power from nuclear energy, or perhaps some other source, will 
make Cordova’s infrastructure obsolete..

Tulon seems personally committed to the safe operation of the 
plant and storage of waste..

“I don’t want to be the one who leaves this as a legacy,” he 
said..

He estimates the casks can safely store the waste for about 100 
years..

That leaves about 9,900 years of storage still to be figured out.                                                   
						
 © 2004, Quad-City Times [http://www.qctimes.com] , Davenport,
*****************************************************************
 21 Quad-City Times: Bush and Kerry on Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository 

8:32 am, Monday, August 23rd, 2004
						
.Bush: Yes.“I said I would make a decision based upon.science, 
not politics. I said I would listen to the scientists … and 
that’s exactly what I did,” Bush told supporters in Las Vegas 
earlier this summer. .Kerry: No.                                                        

“When John Kerry is president, there is going to be no nuclear 
waste at Yucca Mountain. Period,” Kerry said during a campaign 
appearance earlier this month in Las Vegas. .                                                          
						
 Exelon Energy is constructing a waste holding area outside their 
Cordova, Ill. plant for the first time. 

[http://www.qctimes.com/internal.php?story_id=1033656&t=Opinion&c
=22,1033656] 

Exelon Energy’s installation of an outdoor nuclear waste holding 
area at the Cordova plant: Does not concern me. I’m satisfied 
with the industry’s safety record. Worries me, but is a price we 
can afford to pay for nuclear energy. Scares me. I can’t believe 
we still generate nuclear power without a permanent solution for 
waste.

 © 2004,  [http://www.qctimes.com] , Davenport, IA A 
[http://www.leeenterprises.com] subsidiary
*****************************************************************
 22 ITAR-TASS: 1,100 containers N-waste found at local University
 	 	 	 
[ITAR-TASS News Agency of Russia]     

1,100 containers with radioactive liquid at Tokushima University
located on the Japanese Island of Shikoku

23.08.2004, 12.13

TOKYO, August 23 (Itar-Tass) - Nearly 1,100 containers with
radioactive liquid have been found in the grounds of Tokushima
University located on the Japanese Island of Shikoku, the
Education and Science Ministry reports on Monday. 

According to ministry officials, there is no danger of
contamination of the environment. 

It is not clear how the dangerous material found its way to the
center of the university campus. Police are investigating the
incident. 
       
© ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy,

*****************************************************************
 23 The Australian: N-dump talk 'like Monty Python' 

[August 24, 2004]

[http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au

FEDERAL frontbencher Fran Bailey has dismissed suggestions a 
nuclear waste dump could be built at the Puckapunyal army 
barracks in central Victoria as ludicrous.

Ms Bailey, the Minister Assisting the Defence Minister, described 
as "not at all accurate" ABC radio reports that two Victorian 
sites - Puckapunyal, and Bandiana in the state's northeast, and a 
third at Mulwala, on the Murray River in southern New South Wales 
- were under consideration.

 Last month, the Federal Government was forced to abandon plans 
to build a nuclear waste repository near Woomera in South 
Australia after an adverse Federal Court ruling and strong 
opposition from the SA Government.

 Ms Bailey, whose seat of McEwen includes the Puckapunyal base, 
said today it would be highly irresponsible to locate a nuclear 
waste dump at the army base.

 "When I first heard of this I thought it was like something out 
of a script from Monty Python," she said. 



	       
  
	     	  
[http://adserver.news.com.au/click.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&site=n 
ews&section=breakingnews&adsize=300x250&pagepos=1] 
       
	     	
 	     	 





The base was a major training area that housed about 2000 people, 
including families, she said.

 "Anyone who could consider putting any sort of nuclear waste 
dump on a military training base where the major training 
exercises involve armour and artillery ... and a base which 
houses up to 2000 people at any one time, and that includes 
hundreds of families, you would have to say that is ludicrous."

 Channel 9 news last night said Science Minister Peter McGauran 
had confirmed all three sites were under consideration, but said 
the Government was still a long way from a final decision.

 Ms Bailey denied there was any shortlist.

 "I've never heard of any such list existing until there was a 
report on the news last night," she said.

 Victorian Premier Steve Bracks said his government would fight 
any plan for a nuclear waste dump in that state.

 "I wasn't aware of it. Obviously the Federal Government had such 
a list and certainly we're concerned about that," he said on 
radio 3AW.

 "There's no reason why there should be (a dump in Victoria).

 "We are not a great contributor to any of the nuclear waste 
which occurs, and I don't think Victoria should be unduly 
punished to have such a facility in our state." 
		 			 			
© The Australian   
*****************************************************************
 24 Border Mail: Nuclear bombshell as sites listed for dump 
 
Tue, Aug 24, 2004

They made a list of possible places for a waste disposal site on
Commonwealth land, Ms Panopoulos said. 

This list is being abandoned but I had never heard of such a
list until now. 

It would be over my dead body for the site to be put in place at
Bandiana. 

It is clear to me they got out a map and in their own tunnel
vision without liaising with the Defence Department put down
Bandiana. 

The land has been earmarked for residential land and is so close
to being up for sale. 

Ms Panopoulos said as the list was two years old it was a
surprise it was leaked and suspected it was Victorian Government
mischief making. 

A Federal Court ruling and strong opposition from the South
Australian Government curtailed Federal Government plans for a
nuclear waste repository near Woomera. 

Member for Benambra, Mr Tony Plowman, said he would not be
surprised if the listing of Bandiana as a possible site was a
furphy. 

Member for Farrer, Mrs Sussan Ley, said she would fight tooth
and nail to oppose a nuclear waste site in Mulwala. 

She said if the proposal was legitimate she would not hesitate
to fight Mr McGauran on the issue and would invite him to see
the Murray River. 

My electorate comes first and it is common sense not have a
nuclear waste site on a flood plain, Mrs Ley said. 

Member for Albury, Mr Greg Aplin, said the waste needed to be
stored somewhere but Mulwala was not the place. 

He said the bridge crossing would certainly not be suitable to
carry such dangerous material on a regular basis. 

My immediate concern is the possibility of seepage into the
Murray River and the threat to the life force it brings. 

The Victorian Government vowed to fight moves to put the dump in
its State. 

A spokesman for the Victorian Health Minister, Ms Bronwyn Pike,
called on the Federal Government to come clean. 

He said the Government understood the site would be used to
house medical nuclear waste from cancer treatments. 

Wodonga council mayor Cr Lisa Mahood said she was amazed
Bandiana had even been considered due to its high residential
population. 

She said it was comforting to know both Federal and State
politicians in the region were so opposed to the idea. 

Corowa councillor Bill Gorman, of Mulwala, said he hoped his
hometown was not a serious consideration by the Federal
Government. 

He said the Defence land was only 2km out of Mulwala and would
be too close to residential land and the river. 

I will be making my own inquiries about this and I will consult
the council about the course of action, if any we need to take. 

  All content copyright © The Border Mail and its respective
contributors, 2000. All rights reserved.
 Contact: webmaster@bordermail.com.au
[webmaster@bordermail.com.au]   
*****************************************************************
 25 AU ABC: Govt dismisses nuclear waste dump site reports » 

ABC Goulburn Murray » Local News
 
"Australian Broadcasting Corporation 

[http://abc.net.au/

Tuesday, 24 August 2004 

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence has 
laughed off reports of plans for a nuclear waste dump on a 
Victorian military site. 

There have been suggestions the Federal Government is considering 
storing nuclear waste at Puckapunyal, in central Victoria, or 
Bandiana, in the north-east. 

Parliamentary Secretary Fran Bailey says it is ridiculous to 
suggest that waste could be stored in an area used for military 
training. 

"There is just no way that you could ever put any sort of waste 
site on to a range that is used 52 weeks of the year, is used for 
training of both armour and artillery and that means bombing and 
target practice. I mean, could you imagine," she said. 

Meanwhile, the Federal Government says it has the final say over 
proposals for a hazardous waste store in the Mallee. 

The Bracks Government is proposing to build the industrial waste 
facility at Nowingi, south of Mildura. 

Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell says the site is close 
to the Hattah Kulkyne Lakes, which are listed under the 
international RAMSAR convention. 

He says the State Government will need to carry out a thorough 
environmental impact assessment, then the decision will 
ultimately come to the Commonwealth. 

"If there's a threat to internationally valuable wetlands or any 
other threatened or endangered species, yes the Commonwealth has 
power to say no, and that's why we're there," he said. 

"We support protecting the environment, we support protecting 
valuable wetlands and we support ensuring that there's an 
internationally-connected set of habitats for migratory birds." [ 

[http://www.abc.net.au/common/copyrigh.htm] | Privacy Policy
[http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm]  | Information about the use
*****************************************************************
 26 KRNV Report: ad is misleading voters about Bush position on Yucca Mountain

August 23, 2004   

A Nevada newspaper is reporting a new ad could be misleading 
voters about President Bush's position on Yucca Mountain. 

A new pro-Perry ad says the president promised Governor Guinn he 
would veto legislation making Yucca mountain a nuclear dump. But 
the Las Vegas Sun is reporting that the letter used in the 
MoveOn.org ad is being misquoted. 

The article says Bush never told Guinn he would veto the overall 
project. In a letter he had promised that he would veto temporary 
storage of nuclear waste at the site while the scientific details 
were still being worked out. 

Bush promised to make his decision on "sound science." 

A spokeswoman for Moveon.org told the Sun they did not know why a 
distinction was not made in the ad between interim storage and 
the overall project.

Meanwhile, the Bush Campaign announced that it will begin running 
its own Yucca ads Monday.

The ad attacks Senator John Kerry along the new Bush Campaign 
theme "There’s what Kerry says and then there’s what Kerry does…"

The ad claims Kerry voted seven times to make it easier to dump 
waste at Yucca and that he even attempted to speed shipments of 
nuclear waste from his home state of Massachusetts to Nevada.   

[http://www.worldnow.com]     All content © Copyright 2001 -
2004 WorldNow and KRNV. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 27 The Australian: Victoria on nuclear waste shortlist 

[August 24, 2004]
 	 	
By Catherine Hockley

TWO Victorian sites have been shortlisted to take the nation's 
most toxic nuclear waste.

And a third, over the border at Mulwala on the Murray River in 
NSW, which is home to an explosives and propellent factory is 
also understood to be on the list. 

Puckapunyal army base, near Seymour, and the Bandiana army base, 
near Wodonga on the Murray River, are on the Federal Government 
list of 80 locations for a nuclear waste dump. 

But a 21-year-old Act might thwart any Commonwealth plans to make 
Victoria the nuclear waste state. 

The state's Nuclear Activities (Prohibitions) Act 1983 forbids 
the building of a nuclear waste dump in Victoria - although 
Commonwealth land could be exempt. 

The Federal Government plans to build at the one site on 
Commonwealth land an underground repository for low-level waste 
and a store for intermediate waste. 

A separate repository was to have been built in South Australia, 
but the Federal Government abandoned plans after intense local 
opposition and threats to marginal seats at the next election. 

The State Government said it is determined to block any plan to 
dump nuclear waste in Victoria. 

A spokesman said last night the Government would vigorously 
oppose any suggestion the waste be dumped in Victoria. 

The Federal Govern ment must find a permanent home for its 
nuclear waste before the Australian Radiation Protection and 
Nuclear Safety Agency will approve a new $335 million nuclear 
reactor in Sydney's Lucas heights, that is already under 
construction. 
		 			 			
© The Australian   
*****************************************************************
 28 The Australian: Radioactive waste left in school 

[August 23, 2004]
 	 	
[http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/mm]     

From correspondents in Tokyo

SCHOOL officials failed to dispose of more than 1000 bottles of 
radioactive waste, leaving them in a university lab in southern 
Japan for years, the government said today.

No radiation leaked as the bottles were sealed and there was no 
damage to the environment at Tokushima University, about 515km 
southwest of Tokyo.

 Coming just two weeks after Japan's worst nuclear accident, the 
news still raised concerns about safety practices for radioactive 
materials. Four workers were killed in the August 9 accident at a 
nuclear power plant operated by Kansai Electric, though no 
radiation leaked.

 Most of the bottles contained tritium, a radioactive form of 
hydrogen that is dangerous only if consumed in large quantities. 
The bottles had been abandoned by university officials after 
experiments carried out from 1976-1997, the Education and Science 
Ministry said in a statement.

 Leaving the bottles in the lab violated government regulations 
requiring that radioactive material from experiments be disposed 
of in a specially designated area. 

The ministry issued a warning to Tokushima University.

 It also ordered the institution to regularly report on its 
storage of radioactive materials for the next three years. 
		 			 			
© The Australian   
*****************************************************************
 29 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada
 
                        FR Doc 04-19227 
[Federal Register: August 23, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 162)] 
[Notices] [Page 51831] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr23au04-37]                         
 
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
 
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Nevada Test 
Site. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 
Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be 
announced in the Federal Register.
 
 
DATES: Wednesday, September 8, 2004, 6 p.m.-8:30 p.m.
 
ADDRESSES: Bob Ruud Community Center, 150 North Highway 
160,Pahrump, NV.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay Planamento, Navarro Research 
and Engineering, Inc., 2721 Losee Road, North Las Vegas, Nevada 
89130, phone: 702-657-9088, fax: 702-295-5300, e-mail: 
NTSCAB@aol.com [NTSCAB@aol.com] .
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 
the Advisory Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas 
of environmental restoration, waste management, and related 
activities.
 
Tentative Agenda: Members of the CAB's Underground Test Area 
Committee will provide a briefing to update stakeholders on their 
work related to groundwater issues at the Nevada Test Site.
 
CAB members will discuss technical committee focus areas and 
activities completed in fiscal year 2004.
 
Copies of the final agenda will be available at the meeting.
 
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
 
Written statements may be filed with the Committee either before 
or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral 
statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Kelly 
Kozeliski, at the telephone number listed above. Requests must be 
received 5 days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision 
will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The 
Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the 
meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of 
business. Each individual wishing to make public comment will be 
provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
 
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the Freedom of Information Public Reading 
Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday, 
except Federal holidays. Minutes will also be available by 
writing to Kay Planamento at the address listed above.
 
Issued at Washington, DC, on August 18, 2004.
 
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. 04-19227 Filed 8-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 30 Las Vegas SUN: Bush campaign ad accuses Kerry of flip-flopping on Yucca

 
Today: August 23, 2004 at 16:47:51 PDT 

 By ADAM GOLDMAN ASSOCIATED PRESS 

LAS VEGAS (AP) - President Bush - stung by criticism for 
approving a national nuclear waste repository in Nevada - began 
airing a television commercial on Monday that accuses Democratic 
candidate John Kerry of supporting the project. 

The commercial indicates the Massachusetts senator - who has 
vowed to block burying nuclear waste 90 miles northwest of Las 
Vegas - has favored Yucca Mountain, too. 

Bush spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt said the 30-second commercial 
airing in Las Vegas and Reno was intended to deliver a GOP 
message that Kerry flip-flops on issues. 

"We think it's important for voters to understand John Kerry's 
real record on Yucca Mountain," she said. "There is a rather 
large divide between his political rhetoric while campaigning in 
Nevada and his voting record in the U.S Senate." 

Jon Summers, communications director for the Nevada State 
Democratic Party, said it's "outrageous and disingenuous" for 
Bush to try to make Yucca Mountain an issue after Bush approved 
the repository as president in 2002. 

Nevada has been cast as a battleground state with both campaigns 
trying to capture its five critical electoral votes. 

Democrats are attempting to win the state by making Yucca 
Mountain a central campaign theme, with Republicans trying to 
thwart that effort with this latest commercial. 

"Listening to John Kerry, you'd think he'd been against Yucca 
Mountain his entire career," the commercial says. 

"But Kerry voted to establish the nuclear repository at Yucca 
Mountain. Kerry voted seven times to make it easier to dump waste 
at Yucca." 

Bush's ad also takes aim at a 1999 letter Kerry co-wrote to the 
chairman of the Senate's committee on energy and natural 
resources. The letter asks for an accelerated waste acceptance 
schedule, though it does not mention Nevada by name. 

The commercial says Kerry "tried to speed shipment of nuclear 
waste from Massachusetts to Yucca. There's what Kerry says and 
then there's what Kerry does." 

The commercial doesn't tell the whole story. 

On simple votes deciding whether to send waste to Yucca Mountain, 
Kerry has voted against it, including key votes in 2000 and 2002. 

The Bush campaign has seized upon Kerry's 1987 vote for a massive 
budget bill that had a provision favoring a nuclear waste site in 
Nevada. The vote did not create the repository, and Kerry voted 
several times to yank the provision from the bill. 

Sean Smith, a Kerry campaign spokesman in Nevada, said the 
commercial was an act of desperation. 

"It's an insult quite frankly to the voters of this state," he 
said. 

Last week, Kerry came to Las Vegas and promised to block the 
repository. It was his third trip to the Silver State this year. 
Bush arrived shortly thereafter for his second appearance in the 
state this year and accused Kerry of turning Yucca Mountain into 
a "political poker chip." 

"I said I would make a decision based upon science, not 
politics," Bush said in defending his decision to approve Yucca 
Mountain the day after Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham 
recommended it. 

In an effort to counter Democrat Al Gore who opposed Yucca 
Mountain during the 2000 presidential campaign, Bush sought to 
assure Nevada voters that the nuclear waste dump was not a 
foregone conclusion and a decision would be based on "sound 
science" if he were elected. 

Democrats accuse Bush of not keeping his word on the issue. 
*****************************************************************
 31 Seattle Times: Editorials: Promises made to a wild river
 	
Monday, August 23, 2004 - Page updated at 12:00 A.M.
 			 			 			 			
As Interior Secretary Gale Norton campaigned for President Bush 
in the Northwest, we want to remind her to keep a promise her 
predecessors made about the Hanford Reach National Monument. 

Four years ago, when President Clinton declared the Reach a 
national monument, he preempted efforts to ensure local control 
of the last 51 miles of undammed Columbia River. But 
then-Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt promised the community 
would have a say in how the Reach was managed. 

Now is the time to keep that promise. 

The region — including once-fierce opponents of federal control — 
has rallied. In early 2001, an advisory committee of members 
representing local governments, environmentalists, tribes and 
recreation advocates began meeting. 

In June, with unanimous support, the group proposed the 
second-least-restrictive of four plans to the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service. It proposes more access in shrewdly selected 
areas and some recreational development at either end. But the 
plan still keeps off limits most of the Arid Lands Ecology 
Reserve to the west of the Hanford nuclear site. 

The Hanford site's role in the nation's nuclear-defense programs 
is what has left the Reach a unique and near-pristine area. A 
need for a buffer zone around now-defunct nuclear plants sealed 
the land away from developers and the river away from dam 
builders. 

The Fish and Wildlife Service is expected to have the Reach's 
first 15-year management plan available for review as early as 
this fall. 

There is precedent for the federal government following the 
recommendations of advisory committees. At times, the Hanford 
Reach National Monument has seemed a low priority for Norton's 
office. 

At one point, one-quarter of the committee's seats were vacant 
for more than six months and its charter was about to lapse. 
Ultimately, the committee was extended and new members appointed. 

Supporters of the national monument — including Sen. Patty 
Murray, who invited Clinton's intervention — are optimistic the 
local advice will be followed. That's as it should be. That was 
the promise. 

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company
*****************************************************************
 32 Guardian Unlimited: Pantex Nuclear Facility Repairs Costly
 
[http://www.guardian.co.uk

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Monday August 23, 2004 8:01 PM

AMARILLO, Texas (AP) - Sealant used in a nuclear weapons plant to 
prevent plutonium from leaking in case of an accidental blast is 
peeling, and a repair job could cost $20 million, a government 
report shows. 

The Department of Defense's Pantex Plant is the nation's only 
nuclear weapons assembly and disassembly plant and technicians 
work with radioactive and explosive materials at the complex 
around the clock. 

According to a report by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety 
Board, sealant had been applied to faulty door welds on 
underground workshops at the plant after officials learned that a 
6-year-old work order to repair them was never completed. 

The government temporarily halted nuclear weapons operations at 
the plant while it repaired the welds with the sealant. 
Afterward, operations resumed. 

But in a July 21 report, an official with the nuclear facilities 
safety board found the sealant was peeling away in places. Now, 
safety board officials say sealing potential leak spots could 
cost between $15 and $20 million. 

Engineers at the plant are studying the extent of the problem and 
will report its findings to the safety board. 

The cells that contain the subterranean workshops are designed to 
prevent the spread of radioactivity in the unlikely event of an 
accidental blast. The cells are supposed to collapse inward and 
trap radioactive debris. 
  
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
*****************************************************************
 33 Times-News: Computer helps archeologists sift through historic data on INEEL 
site

Online -- Twin Falls, Idaho
 			 			 			 			 			 				 
    www.magicvalley.com         The Times-News | AG Weekly |
    
    Monday, August 23, 2004   •   Twin Falls, Idaho   

BOISE (AP) -- Computer scientists have developed new software 
that will allow archaeologists at the Idaho National Engineering 
and Environmental Laboratory to simply turn to their PCs to dig 
through data about the history, anthropology and archaeology 
underneath the lab's 890-square-mile site.

Scientists in the INEEL's Ecological and Cultural Resources 
Department created a geographic computer and software program 
that merges the terrain's data into one integrated system.

Three research groups of the INEEL site -- historical, 
archaeological and anthropological -- support the system, which 
is tied together with Geographic Information System technology to 
create layered maps that can highlight different geological 
structures and archaeological sites in the area.

Computer scientist Sera White said the system will save 
archaeologists time handling maps and geographical data.

"Before they had to hand-draw maps, then copy them and scan 
them," she said. "Now all they have to do is hit 'print'."

Federal law requires that archeologists work with state, local 
and Shoshone-Bannock tribal governments to preserve the INEEL 
area.

Combined with legislation to preserve resources on Department of 
Energy sites across the nation and high-security rules that have 
kept people off the land, artifacts on DOE land are relatively 
untouched, which allows governmental agencies and researchers to 
study and protect the area, said Brenda Ringe Pace, lead INEEL 
archaeologist on the development team.

The computer program will help archeologists keep tabs on 
artifacts ranging from 12,000-year-old mammoth bones to 
150-year-old pioneer homesteads and help them find other 
artifacts, Pace said.

Only about 10 percent of the site has been explored, and already 
1,200 archaeological sites have been found.

An experimental tool developed by INEEL and Idaho State 
University researchers uses a mathematical model to predict where 
new archaeological sites could be in the unexplored desert.

The model incorporates data such as water resources and old 
travel routes to map potential places where primitive people 
could have traveled and rested.

"Wherever the hunter-gatherer families were likely to be, that's 
where we have the best chance of finding the artifacts that tell 
their stories," Pace said.

Pace said the software could also create a virtual world where 
developers could see the lasting effects of a proposed building 
on the surrounding landscape before constructing anything.                      

Copyright © 2004, Lee Publications Inc.

Magicvalley.com is an on-line division of The Times-News, 
published daily at 132 W. Fairfield St., Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 
by Lee Publications, Inc., a subsidiary of Lee Enterprises.  
*****************************************************************
 34 PRN: CH2M HILL Hanford Celebrates Key Milestone in Hanford Tank Farm
Cleanup Effort 

 [http://www.prnewswire.com/]

Completion of Liquid Waste Transfer is Critical Step Toward

Ensuring a Safer Site

    HANFORD, Wash., Aug. 23 /PRNewswire/ -- Today, CH2M HILL 
Hanford Group is celebrating an important milestone -- completion 
of the removal of more than 3 million gallons of pumpable liquids 
from the single-shell underground radioactive waste storage tanks 
on the U.S. Department of Energy's Hanford Site in Washington 
State.  This completes the field work portion of the project, 
which is now awaiting State of Washington concurrence. CH2M HILL 
Hanford and the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection 
are hosting an employee celebration at the site.

    "While this is just one step on the path to completing 
Hanford tank cleanup, it has great significance to our workers, 
the community and the environment.  We reached this milestone 
five months ahead of schedule, in large part due to the hard work 
and commitment of our workers. They are our greatest asset," said 
Ed Aromi, President and General Manager of CH2M HILL Hanford 
Group.

    The completion of the liquid transfer is a significant safety 
milestone. The aging single-shell waste storage tanks, some of 
which date back to the beginning of the Manhattan Project, will 
be much less likely to leak liquids to the surrounding soil while 
they await final cleanout and closure.  As many as 67 of these 
tanks are suspected of leaking as much as a million gallons of 
waste to the soil.

    The transfer of liquid waste from the single-shell tanks to 
safer, double- shell tank storage, commonly called "interim 
stabilization," began in the early stages of Hanford cleanup.  In 
1999, the Department of Energy and the State of Washington agreed 
to a more aggressive cleanup schedule to eliminate liquids from 
the remaining 29 tanks.  The new schedule reflected a commitment 
to keeping the project on track and ensuring a safer Hanford. 
Pumping of the more than 3 million gallons was finished in April 
2004.

    "We have worked extremely hard to complete this work safely, 
on schedule and within budget and we accomplished all three 
objectives. This work also builds the foundation for the next 
phase of tank waste cleanup, the removal of solids and sludges 
and the ultimate decisions on closure of the tanks," said Waste 
Retrieval and Closure Project director Terry Hissong. Hissong 
said the lessons learned over the five-year span of this project 
are being applied to the retrieval project, which is already 
under way.

    "At CH2M HILL the health and safety of our workers is our top 
priority. We know first hand that the work we are doing is 
complex and difficult. However, we are committed to doing 
everything we can to secure the health and safety of our 
workers," said Aromi.  "That was the case as we worked toward 
this most recent milestone, and will continue to guide our 
efforts until the job is done."

    Speakers at today's celebration include Washington Fourth 
District Congressman Doc Hastings, Washington State Attorney 
General Christine Gregoire, Washington State Department of 
Ecology Nuclear Waste Program Manager Mike Wilson, and the 
director of the Oregon Department of Energy, Mike Grainey.

 SOURCE CH2M HILL
 
 Copyright © 1996-2004 PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights
*****************************************************************
 35 DOE: Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act
 
                        FR Doc 04-19228 
[Federal Register: August 23, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 162)] 
[Notices] [Page 51825-51831] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr23au04-36]                         
 
of 2000; Revision to List of Covered Facilities AGENCY: 
Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice of revision of listing of covered facilities.
 
SUMMARY: Periodically, the Department of Energy (``Department'' 
or ``DOE'') publishes a list of facilities covered under the 
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 
2000 (``Act''), Title 36 of Public Law 106-398 (66 FR 4003; 66 FR 
31218). The Act establishes a program to provide compensation to 
individuals who developed illnesses as a result of their 
employment in nuclear weapons production-related activities and 
at certain federally owned facilities in which radioactive 
materials were used. This notice revises the previous lists and 
provides additional information about the covered facilities, 
atomic weapons employers, and beryllium vendors. The original 
notice provides detailed background information about this 
matter. Previous lists were published on July 21, 2003, December 
27, 2002, June 11, 2001, and January 17, 2001.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of Worker Advocacy, 
1-877-447- 9756.
 
 
ADDRESSES: The Department welcomes comments on this list.
 
Individuals who wish to suggest changes should provide 
information to: Office of Worker Advocacy (EH-8), U.S. Department 
of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585; 
e-mail: worker_advocacy@eh.doe.gov [worker_advocacy@eh.doe.gov] ; 
toll free: 1-877-447-9756; URL: http://www.eh.doe.gov/advocacy/ 
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving 
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.eh.doe.gov/advocacy/] .
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose The Energy Employees 
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (``Act''), 
Title 36 of Public Law 106-398, establishes a program to provide 
compensation to individuals who developed illnesses as a result 
of their employment in nuclear weapons production-related 
activities and at certain federally owned facilities in which 
radioactive materials were used. On December 7, 2000, the 
President issued Executive Order 13179 (``Order'') directing the 
Department of Energy (``Department'' or ``DOE'') to list covered 
facilities in the Federal Register. This notice revises the 
previous lists and provides additional information about the 
covered facilities, atomic weapons employers, and beryllium 
vendors.
 
Section 2.c.iv of the Order instructs the Department to 
designate, pursuant to sections 3621(4)(B) and 3622 of the Act, 
atomic weapons employers (AWE's). In addition, Section 2.c.vii of 
the Order instructs the Department to list three types of 
facilities defined in the Act: (1) Atomic weapons employer 
facilities, as defined in section 3621(4); (2) Department of 
Energy facilities, as defined by section 3621(12); and (3) 
Beryllium vendors, as defined by section 3621(6).
 
Compensation options and mechanisms are defined differently for 
each of these facility categories. The atomic weapons employer 
category includes atomic weapons employer facilities in which the 
primary work was not related to atomic weapons, and consequently 
these facilities are not commonly known as atomic weapons 
facilities. Their inclusion in this list is consistent with the 
Act, and is not intended as a classification for any other 
purpose.
 
The list at the end of this notice represents the Department's 
best efforts to date to compile a list of facilities under these 
three categories. This listing includes 363 facilities in 46 
jurisdictions. Today's publication of the list newly designates 
General Electric's X- ray Division in Milwaukee, WI as an AWE, 
and additionally designates the Nevada Site Office as a DOE 
facility. It also alters slightly the designation for Blockson 
Chemical (broadens it by saying ``building 55 and related 
activities'' which is meant to include the AEC-funded laboratory, 
pilot plant and oxidation process). Other corrections include: B 
Metals (OH) (the DOE designation was in error and has been 
removed), Foote Mineral (PA) (the BE designation has been on the 
program's Web site (noted below) since inception, but was 
inadvertently missing from the Federal Register notice), Swenson 
Evaporator (is located in Harvey, not Chicago, IL) and C.H. 
Schnorr, PA (previously Schnoor). This notice also deletes the 
listing for Ledoux (NY) entirely because it was learned that no 
radioactivity was used at that location.
 
In addition to continuing its research efforts, the Department 
has developed information dissemination mechanisms to make 
facility- specific data available to the public. Information 
about each listed facility, including the dates and type of work 
done there, is available by contacting the Office of Worker 
Advocacy. These descriptions are available in print form and also 
electronically (via the World Wide Web at 
http://tis.eh.doe.gov/advocacy/ 
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving 
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://tis.eh.doe.gov/advocacy/] ). The 
list that follows covers facilities under the three categories of 
employers defined by the Act: atomic weapons employers (``AWE''), 
Department of Energy facilities (``DOE''), and beryllium vendors 
(``BE''). Each of the categories has been defined in the original 
notice and include: 1. Atomic Weapons Employers and Atomic 
Weapons Employer Facilities The lines between research, atomic 
weapons production, and non- weapons production are often 
difficult to draw. For the purposes of this notice, and as 
directed by the Act, only those facilities whose work involved 
radioactive material that was connected to the atomic weapons 
production chain are included. This includes facilities that 
received radioactive material that had been used in the 
production of an atomic weapon, or the ``back end'' of the 
production cycle, such as waste handling or reprocessing 
operations. For the purposes of this listing, the Department 
considers commercial nuclear fuel fabrication facilities to be 
covered facilities for those periods when they either supplied 
radioactive materials to the Department or received radioactive 
materials that had been used in the Department's production 
reactors.
 
Corporate information regarding many of the listed facilities is 
often not readily available. The Department welcomes comments or 
additional information regarding facilities that may have 
supported atomic weapons production that are not on this list, as 
well as information that clarifies the work done at facilities 
named below.
 
 
[[Page 51826]] 2. Department of Energy Facilities The listing of 
Department of Energy facilities is only intended for the context 
of implementing this Act and does not create or imply any new 
Departmental obligations or ownership at any of the facilities 
named on this list.
 
3. Beryllium Vendors and Beryllium Vendor Facilities Section 
3621(6) of the Act defines beryllium vendor as the following: 
``(A) Atomics International.
 
(B) Brush Wellman, Incorporated, and its predecessor, Brush 
Beryllium Company.
 
(C) General Atomics.
 
(D) General Electric Company.
 
(E) NGK Metals Corporation and its predecessors, Kawecki-Berylco, 
Cabot Corporation, BerylCo, and Beryllium Corporation of America.
 
(F) Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation.
 
(G) StarMet Corporation, and its predecessor, Nuclear Metals, 
Incorporated.
 
(H) Wyman Gordan, Incorporated.
 
(I) Any other vendor, processor, or producer of beryllium or 
related products designated as a beryllium vendor for purposes of 
this title under Section 3622.'' The list identifies facilities 
that processed, produced, or provided beryllium metal for the 
Department, as defined by the Act.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------------------- Jurisdiction and facility name Location                                
Facility type State 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------------------- AL--Southern Research Institute... 
Birmingham....................................... 
AWE.............................  Alabama. AL--Speedring, 
Inc................ 
Culman........................................... 
BE..............................  Alabama. AL--Tennessee Valley 
Authority....  Muscle Shoals.................................... 
AWE.............................  Alabama. AK--Amchitka Nuclear 
Explosion      Amchitka Island.................................. 
DOE.............................  Alaska. Site.
 
AK--Project Chariot Site..........  Cape 
Thompson.................................... 
DOE.............................  Alaska. AZ--Ore Buying Station 
at Globe... Globe............................................ 
DOE.............................  Arizona. CA--Arthur D. Little 
Co...........  San Francisco.................................... 
AWE.............................  California. CA--Atomics 
International.........  Los Angeles 
County...............................  BE 
DOE..........................  California. CA--California 
Research Corp...... 
Richmond......................................... 
AWE.............................  California. CA--Ceradyne, 
Inc.................  Costa 
Mesa....................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Ceradyne, 
Inc.................  Santa 
Ana........................................ 
BE..............................  California. CA--City Tool & Die 
MFG...........  Santa Clara...................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--C.L. Hann 
Industries..........  San 
Jose......................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Dow Chemical 
Co...............  Walnut 
Creek..................................... 
AWE.............................  California. CA--EDM 
Exotics................... 
Hayward.......................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Electro 
Circuits, Inc......... 
Pasadena......................................... 
AWE.............................  California. 
CA--Electrofusion................. 
Fremont.......................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Energy 
Technology Engineering   Santa Susana, Area 
IV............................  DOE............................. 
California.
 
Center (ETEC).
 
CA--General Atomics...............  La 
Jolla.........................................  AWE BE 
DOE......................  California. CA--General Electric 
Vallecitos... Pleasanton.......................................  
AWE DOE.........................  California. CA--Hafer 
Tool.................... 
Oakland.......................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Hexcel 
Products............... 
Berkeley......................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Hunter Douglas 
Aluminum Corp.. Riverside........................................ 
AWE.............................  California. CA--Jerry Carroll 
Machining.......  San 
Carlos....................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Lab. for 
Energy-Related Health 
Davis............................................ 
DOE.............................  California. Research.
 
CA--Lab. of Biomedical &            Los 
Angeles...................................... 
DOE.............................  California. Environmental 
Sciences.
 
CA--Lab. of Radiobiology and        San 
Francisco.................................... 
DOE.............................  California. Environmental 
Health.
 
CA--Lawrence Berkeley National 
Berkeley......................................... 
DOE.............................  California. Laboratory.
 
CA--Lawrence Livermore National 
Livermore........................................ 
DOE.............................  California. Laboratory.
 
CA--Lebow......................... 
Goleta........................................... 
BE..............................  California. 
CA--Philco-Ford...................  Newport 
Beach.................................... 
BE..............................  California CA--Pleasanton Tool 
& Pleasanton....................................... 
BE..............................  California. Manufacturing.
 
CA--Poltech Precision............. 
Fremont.......................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Robin 
Materials...............  Mountain 
View.................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Ron 
Witherspoon, Inc.......... 
Campbell......................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--Sandia 
Laboratory, Salton Sea   Imperial 
County.................................. 
DOE.............................  California. Base.
 
CA--Sandia National Laboratories-- 
Livermore........................................ 
DOE.............................  California. Livermore.
 
CA--Stanford Linear Accelerator...  Palo 
Alto........................................ 
DOE.............................  California. CA--Stauffer 
Metals, Inc.......... 
Richmond......................................... 
AWE.............................  California. 
CA--Tapemation....................  Scotts 
Valley.................................... 
BE..............................  California. CA--University of 
California...... 
Berkeley.........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  California. CO--Coors 
Porcelain............... 
Golden........................................... 
BE..............................  Colorado. CO--Grand Junction 
Operations       Grand 
Junction................................... 
DOE.............................  Colorado. Office.
 
CO--Green Sludge Plant............ 
Uraven........................................... 
DOE.............................  Colorado. CO--Project Rio 
Blanco Nuclear Rifle............................................ 
DOE.............................  Colorado. Explosion Site.
 
CO--Project Rulison Nuclear         Grand 
Valley..................................... 
DOE.............................  Colorado. Explosion Site.
 
CO--Rocky Flats Plant............. 
Golden........................................... 
DOE.............................  Colorado. CO--Shattuck 
Chemical............. 
Denver........................................... 
AWE.............................  Colorado. CO--University of 
Denver Research Denver...........................................  
AWE BE..........................  Colorado. Institute.
 
CO--Uranium Mill in Durango....... 
Durango.......................................... 
DOE.............................  Colorado. CT--American Chain 
and Cable Co... Bridgeport....................................... 
AWE.............................  Connecticut. CT--Anaconda 
Co................... 
Waterbury........................................ 
AWE.............................  Connecticut. CT--Bridgeport 
Brass Co., Havens 
Bridgeport....................................... 
AWE.............................  Connecticut. Laboratory.
 
CT--Combustion Engineering........ 
Windsor.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Connecticut. CT--Connecticut 
Aircraft Nuclear 
Middletown.......................................  BE 
DOE..........................  Connecticut. Engine Laboratory.
 
CT--Dorr Corp..................... 
Stamford......................................... 
AWE.............................  Connecticut. CT--Fenn 
Machinery................ 
Hartford......................................... 
AWE.............................  Connecticut. CT--Machlett 
Laboratories......... 
Springdale....................................... 
BE..............................  Connecticut. CT--New England 
Lime Co........... 
Canaan........................................... 
AWE.............................  Connecticut.
 
[[Page 51827]] CT--Seymour Specialty Wire........ 
Seymour..........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Connecticut. CT--Sperry Products, 
Inc.......... Danbury.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Connecticut. CT--Torrington 
Co................. 
Torrington....................................... 
AWE.............................  Connecticut. DE--Allied 
Chemical and Dye Corp..  North 
Claymont................................... 
AWE.............................  Delaware. DC--National Bureau 
of Standards.. Washington....................................... 
AWE.............................  District of Columbia. DC--Naval 
Research Laboratory..... 
Washington.......................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  District of Columbia. FL--American 
Beryllium Co......... 
Sarasota......................................... 
BE..............................  Florida. FL--Armour Fertilizer 
Works....... Bartow........................................... 
AWE.............................  Florida. FL--Gardinier, 
Inc................ 
Tampa............................................ 
AWE.............................  Florida. FL--International 
Minerals and Mulberry......................................... 
AWE.............................  Florida. Chemical Corp.. 
FL--Pinellas Plant................ 
Clearwater....................................... 
DOE.............................  Florida. FL--University of 
Florida......... 
Gainesville...................................... 
AWE.............................  Florida. FL--Virginia-Carolina 
Chemical Nichols.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Florida. Corp.
 
FL--W.R. Grace Co., Agricultural 
Ridgewood........................................ 
AWE.............................  Florida. Chemical Div.
 
HI--Kauai Test Facility........... 
Kauai............................................ 
DOE.............................  Hawaii. ID--Argonne National 
Laboratory-- Scoville......................................... 
DOE.............................  Idaho. West.
 
ID--Idaho National Engineering 
Scoville......................................... 
DOE.............................  Idaho. Laboratory.
 
ID--Northwest Machining & 
Meridian......................................... 
BE..............................  Idaho. Manufacturing.
 
IL--Allied Chemical Corp. Plant... 
Metropolis....................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--American Machine 
and Metals,    E.
 
Moline........................................ 
AWE.............................  Illinois. Inc.
 
IL--Argonne National Laboratory-- 
Argonne.......................................... 
DOE.............................  Illinois. East.
 
IL--Armour Research Foundation.... 
Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Blockson Chemical 
Co. Joliet........................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. (Building 55 and 
related activities).
 
IL--C-B Tool Products Co.......... 
Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Crane 
Co...................... 
Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Dow Chemical 
(Madison Site)... 
Madison.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--ERA Tool and 
Engineering Co... 
Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Fansteel 
Metallurgical Corp...  North 
Chicago.................................... 
BE..............................  Illinois. IL--Fermi National 
Accelerator Batavia.......................................... 
DOE.............................  Illinois. Laboratory.
 
IL--Granite City Steel............  Granite 
City.....................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Illinois. IL--Great Lakes Carbon 
Corp....... Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--GSA 39th Street 
Warehouse..... Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--International 
Register........ 
Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Kaiser Aluminum 
Corp.......... Dalton........................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Lindsay Light and 
Chemical Co.  W. Chicago....................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Metallurgical 
Laboratory...... 
Chicago..........................................  AWE BE 
DOE......................  Illinois. IL--Midwest Manufacturing 
Co...... Galesburg........................................ 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Museum of Science 
and Industry Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--National Guard 
Armory......... Chicago..........................................  
AWE DOE.........................  Illinois. IL--Podbeliniac 
Corp.............. 
Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Precision 
Extrusion Co........ 
Bensenville...................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Quality Hardware 
and Machine Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. Co.
 
IL--R. Krasburg and Sons 
Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. Manufacturing Co.
 
IL--Sciaky Brothers, Inc.......... 
Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Swenson 
Evaporator Co......... 
Harvey........................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--W.E. Pratt 
Manufacturing Co... 
Joliet........................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IL--Wyckoff Drawn 
Steel Co........ 
Chicago.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Illinois. IN--American Bearing 
Corp......... Indianapolis..................................... 
AWE.............................  Indiana. IN--Dana Heavy Water 
Plant........ Dana............................................. 
DOE.............................  Indiana. IN--General Electric 
Plant........ Shelbyville...................................... 
AWE.............................  Indiana. IN--Joslyn 
Manufacturing and        Ft.
 
Wayne........................................ 
AWE.............................  Indiana. Supply Co.
 
IN--Purdue University............. 
Lafayette........................................ 
AWE.............................  Indiana. IA--Ames 
Laboratory............... 
Ames............................................. 
DOE.............................  Iowa. IA--Bendix Aviation 
(Pioneer Davenport........................................ 
AWE.............................  Iowa. Division).
 
IA--Iowa Ordnance Plant........... 
Burlington....................................... 
DOE.............................  Iowa. IA--Titus 
Metals.................. 
Waterloo......................................... 
AWE.............................  Iowa. KS--Spencer Chemical Co., 
Jayhawk Pittsburgh....................................... 
AWE.............................  Kansas. Works.
 
KY--Paducah Gaseous Diffusion 
Paducah.......................................... 
DOE.............................  Kentucky. Plant.
 
LA--Ethyl Corp....................  Baton 
Rouge...................................... 
BE..............................  Louisiana. MD--Armco-Rustless 
Iron & Steel... Baltimore........................................ 
AWE.............................  Maryland. MD--W.R. Grace and 
Company........  Curtis 
Bay....................................... 
AWE.............................  Maryland. MA--American Potash & 
Chemical....  West Hanover..................................... 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--C.G. Sargent 
& Sons........... 
Graniteville..................................... 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--Chapman 
Valve.................  Indian 
Orchard...................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Massachusetts. MA--Edgerton 
Germeshausen & Grier, 
Boston........................................... 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. Inc.
 
MA--Fenwal, Inc................... 
Ashland.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--Franklin 
Institute............ 
Boston........................................... 
BE..............................  Massachusetts. MA--Heald 
Machine Co.............. 
Worcester........................................ 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--La Pointe 
Machine and Tool Co. 
Hudson........................................... 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. 
MA--Massachusetts Institute of 
Cambridge........................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Massachusetts. Technology.
 
MA--Metals and Controls Corp...... 
Attleboro........................................ 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--National 
Research Corp........ 
Cambridge........................................ 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--Norton 
Co..................... 
Worcester........................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Massachusetts.
 
[[Page 51828]] MA--Nuclear Metals, Inc........... 
Concord..........................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Massachusetts. MA--Reed Rolled 
Thread Co......... 
Worcester........................................ 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--Shpack 
Landfill............... 
Norton........................................... 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--Ventron 
Corporation........... 
Beverly..........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Massachusetts. MA--Watertown 
Arsenal............. 
Watertown........................................ 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--Winchester 
Engineering & Winchester....................................... 
DOE.............................  Massachusetts. Analytical 
Center.
 
MA--Woburn Landfill............... 
Woburn........................................... 
AWE.............................  Massachusetts. MA--Wyman Gordon 
Inc..............  Grayton, North 
Grafton........................... 
BE..............................  Massachusetts. MI--AC Spark 
Plug................. 
Flint............................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Michigan. MI--Baker-Perkins 
Co.............. 
Saginaw.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Michigan. MI--Bridgeport Brass 
Co........... Adrian...........................................  
AWE DOE.........................  Michigan. MI--Brush Beryllium 
Co............ Detroit.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Michigan. MI--Carboloy 
Co................... 
Detroit.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Michigan. MI--Extruded Metals 
Co............  Grand Rapids..................................... 
AWE.............................  Michigan. MI--Gerity-Michigan 
Corp.......... Adrian........................................... 
BE..............................  Michigan. MI--Mitts & Merrel 
Co............. Saginaw.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Michigan. MI--Oliver 
Corp...................  Battle 
Creek..................................... 
AWE.............................  Michigan. MI--Revere Copper and 
Brass....... Detroit..........................................  
AWE BE..........................  Michigan. MI--Speedring 
Systems, Inc........ 
Detroit.......................................... 
BE..............................  Michigan. MI--Star Cutter 
Corp.............. 
Farmington....................................... 
AWE.............................  Michigan. MI--University of 
Michigan........  Ann 
Arbor........................................ 
AWE.............................  Michigan. MI--Wolverine Tube 
Division....... Detroit..........................................  
AWE BE..........................  Michigan. MN--Elk River 
Reactor.............  Elk 
River........................................ 
DOE.............................  Minnesota. MS--Salmon Nuclear 
Explosion Site. Hattiesburg...................................... 
DOE.............................  Mississippi. MO--Kansas City 
Plant.............  Kansas 
City...................................... 
DOE.............................  Missouri. MO--Latty Avenue 
Properties....... 
Hazelwood........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Missouri. MO--Mallinckrodt Chemical 
Co.,      St. Louis........................................ 
DOE.............................  Missouri. Destrehan St. Plant. 
MO--Medart Co.....................  St. 
Louis........................................ 
AWE.............................  Missouri. MO--Roger Iron 
Co................. 
Joplin........................................... 
AWE.............................  Missouri. MO--St. Louis Airport 
Storage Site  St. Louis........................................ 
AWE.............................  Missouri. (SLAPS).
 
MO--Tyson Valley Powder Farm......  St. 
Louis........................................ 
AWE.............................  Missouri. MO--United Nuclear 
Corp........... Hematite......................................... 
AWE.............................  Missouri. MO--Weldon Spring 
Plant...........  Weldon 
Spring.................................... 
DOE.............................  Missouri. NE--Hallam Sodium 
Graphite Reactor 
Hallam........................................... 
DOE.............................  Nebraska. NV--Nevada Site 
Office............  North Las 
Vegas.................................. 
DOE.............................  Nevada. NV--Nevada Test 
Site.............. 
Mercury.......................................... 
DOE.............................  Nevada. NV--Project Faultless 
Nuclear       Central Nevada Test Site.........................  
DOE............................. Nevada.
 
Explosion Site.
 
NV--Project Shoal Nuclear 
Fallon........................................... 
DOE.............................  Nevada. Explosion Site.
 
NV--Tonopah Test Range............ 
Tonopah.......................................... 
DOE.............................  Nevada. NV--Yucca Mountain Site             
Yucca Mountain................................... 
DOE.............................  Nevada. Characterization 
Project.
 
NJ--Aluminum Co. of America 
Garwood.......................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. (Alcoa).
 
NJ--American Peddinghaus Corp..... 
Moonachie........................................ 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Baker and 
Williams Co......... 
Newark........................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Bell Telephone 
Laboratories...  Murray 
Hill...................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Bloomfield Tool 
Co............ Bloomfield....................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Bowen 
Laboratory..............  North 
Branch..................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Callite 
Tungsten Co...........  Union 
City....................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Chemical 
Construction Co...... 
Linden........................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Du Pont 
Deepwater Works....... 
Deepwater........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  New Jersey. NJ--International 
Nickel Co., Bayonne.......................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. Bayonne 
Laboratories.
 
NJ--J.T. Baker Chemical Co........ 
Philipsburg...................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. 
NJ--Kellex/Pierpont...............  Jersey 
City......................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  New Jersey. NJ--Maywood Chemical 
Works........ Maywood.......................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Middlesex 
Municipal Landfill.. 
Middlesex........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  New Jersey. NJ--Middlesex Sampling 
Plant...... Middlesex........................................ 
DOE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--National 
Beryllia............. 
Haskell.......................................... 
BE..............................  New Jersey. NJ--New Brunswick 
Laboratory......  New 
Brunswick.................................... 
DOE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Picatinny 
Arsenal............. 
Dover............................................ 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--Princeton 
Plasma Physics Princeton........................................ 
DOE.............................  New Jersey. Laboratory.
 
NJ--Rare Earths/W.R. Grace........ 
Wayne............................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  New Jersey. NJ--Standard Oil 
Development Co. Linden........................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. of NJ.
 
NJ--Stevens Institute of 
Hoboken.......................................... 
BE..............................  New Jersey. Technology.
 
NJ--Tube Reducing Co.............. 
Wallington....................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NJ--U.S. Pipe and 
Foundry......... 
Burlington....................................... 
BE..............................  New Jersey. NJ--United Lead 
Co................ 
Middlesex........................................  AWE 
BE..........................  New Jersey. NJ--Vitro Corp. of 
America (New     West 
Orange...................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. Jersey).
 
NJ--Westinghouse Electric Corp 
Bloomfield....................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. (New Jersey).
 
NJ--Wykoff Steel Co............... 
Newark........................................... 
AWE.............................  New Jersey. NM--Accurate 
Machine & Tool....... 
Albuquerque...................................... 
BE..............................  New Mexico. NM--Albuquerque 
Operations Office. 
Albuquerque...................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. NM--Chupadera 
Mesa................  Chupadera 
Mesa................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. NM--Los Alamos 
Medical Center.....  Los 
Alamos....................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. NM--Los Alamos 
National Laboratory  Los 
Alamos....................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. NM--Lovelace 
Respiratory Research 
Albuquerque...................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. Institute.
 
 
[[Page 51829]] NM--Ore Buying Station at Grants.. 
Grants........................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. NM--Ore Buying 
Station at Shiprock 
Shiprock......................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. NM--Project 
Gasbuggy Nuclear 
Farmington....................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. Explosion Site.
 
NM--Project Gnome Nuclear 
Carlsbad......................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. Explosion Site.
 
NM--Sandia National Laboratories.. 
Albuquerque...................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. NM--South 
Albuquerque Works....... 
Albuquerque...................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. NM--Trinity Nuclear 
Explosion Site  White Sands Missile Range........................  
DOE............................. New Mexico.
 
NM--Waste Isolation Pilot Plant... 
Carlsbad......................................... 
DOE.............................  New Mexico. 
NY--Allegheny-Ludlum Steel........ 
Watervliet....................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--American Machine 
and Foundry.. Brooklyn......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Ashland 
Oil................... 
Tonawanda........................................ 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Baker and 
Williams Warehouses.  New 
York.........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  New York. NY--Bethlehem 
Steel............... 
Lackawanna....................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Bliss & Laughlin 
Steel........ Buffalo.......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Brookhaven 
National Laboratory 
Upton............................................ 
DOE.............................  New York. NY--Burns & Roe, 
Inc.............. 
Maspeth.......................................... 
BE..............................  New York. NY--Carborundum 
Company...........  Niagara 
Falls.................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Colonie Site 
(National Lead)..  Colonie 
(Albany).................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  New York. NY--Crucible Steel 
Co............. Syracuse......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Electro 
Metallurgical.........  Niagara 
Falls.................................... 
DOE.............................  New York. NY--Environmental 
Measurements      New 
York......................................... 
DOE.............................  New York. Laboratory.
 
NY--Fairchild Hiller Corporation.. 
Farmingdale...................................... 
BE..............................  New York. NY--General 
Astrometals........... 
Yonkers.......................................... 
BE..............................  New York. NY--Hooker 
Electrochemical........  Niagara 
Falls.................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--International 
Rare Metals       Mt.
 
Kisco........................................ 
AWE.............................  New York. Refinery, Inc.
 
NY--Ithaca Gun Co................. 
Ithaca........................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Lake Ontario 
Ordnance Works...  Niagara 
Falls.................................... 
DOE.............................  New York. NY--Linde Air 
Products............ 
Buffalo.......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Linde Ceramics 
Plant.......... Tonawanda........................................  
AWE DOE.........................  New York. NY--New York 
University...........  New 
York......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Peek Street 
Facility\1\....... 
Schenectady...................................... 
DOE.............................  New York. NY--Radium Chemical 
Co............  New York.........................................  
AWE BE..........................  New York NY--Rensselaer 
Polytechnic Troy............................................. 
BE..............................  New York. Institute.
 
NY--Sacandaga Facility\1\......... 
Glenville........................................ 
DOE.............................  New York. NY--SAM Laboratories, 
Columbia      New York......................................... 
DOE.............................  New York. University.
 
NY--Seaway Industrial Park........ 
Tonawanda........................................ 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Seneca Army 
Depot............. 
Romulus.......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Separations 
Process Research 
Schenectady...................................... 
DOE.............................  New York. Unit (at Knolls Lab.) 
\1\. NY--Simonds Saw and Steel Co...... 
Lockport......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Staten Island 
Warehouse.......  New 
York......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Sylvania Corning 
Nuclear Bayside..........................................  AWE 
BE..........................  New York. Corp.--Bayside Lab. 
NY--Sylvania Corning Nuclear 
Hicksville....................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. Corp.--Hicksville 
Plant. NY--Titanium Alloys Manufacturing.  Niagara 
Falls.................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--Trudeau 
Foundation............  Saranac 
Lake..................................... 
BE..............................  New York. NY--University of 
Rochester Atomic 
Rochester........................................ 
DOE.............................  New York. Energy Project.
 
NY--Utica St. Warehouse........... 
Buffalo.......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NY--West Valley 
Demonstration       West 
Valley......................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  New York. Project.
 
NY--Wolff-Alport Chemical Corp.... 
Brooklyn......................................... 
AWE.............................  New York. NC--Beryllium Metals 
and Chemical   Bessemer City.................................... 
BE..............................  North Carolina. Corp.
 
NC--University of North Carolina..  Chapel 
Hill...................................... 
BE..............................  North Carolina. OH--Ajax 
Magnethermic Corp........ 
Youngstown....................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Alba 
Craft.................... 
Oxford...........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Ohio. OH--Associated Aircraft Tool 
and Fairfield........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Ohio. Manufacturing Co.
 
OH--B & T Metals.................. 
Columbus......................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Baker 
Brothers................ 
Toledo...........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Ohio. OH--Battelle 
Laboratories--King 
Columbus.........................................  AWE BE 
DOE......................  Ohio. Avenue.
 
OH--Battelle Laboratories--West 
Columbus.........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Ohio. Jefferson.
 
OH--Beryllium Production Plant 
Luckey...........................................  BE 
DOE..........................  Ohio. (Brush Luckey Plant).
 
OH--Brush Beryllium Co. 
Cleveland........................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Ohio. (Cleveland).
 
OH--Brush Beryllium Co. (Elmore).. 
Elmore........................................... 
BE..............................  Ohio. OH--Brush Beryllium Co. 
(Lorain).. Lorain........................................... 
BE..............................  Ohio. OH--Cincinnati Milling 
Machine Co. Cincinnati....................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Clifton Products 
Co........... Painesville...................................... 
BE..............................  Ohio. OH--Copperweld 
Steel.............. 
Warren........................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Du Pont-Grasselli 
Research Cleveland........................................ 
AWE.............................  Ohio. Laboratory.
 
OH--Extrusion Plant (Reactive 
Ashtabula........................................ 
DOE.............................  Ohio. Metals Inc.). OH--Feed 
Materials Production 
Fernald.......................................... 
DOE.............................  Ohio. Center (FMPC).
 
OH--General Electric Company 
Cincinnati/Evendale..............................  AWE BE 
DOE......................  Ohio. (Ohio).
 
OH--Gruen Watch................... 
Norwood.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Harshaw Chemical 
Co........... Cleveland........................................ 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Herring-Hall Marvin 
Safe Co... Hamilton.........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Ohio. OH--Horizons, 
Inc................. 
Cleveland........................................ 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Kettering Laboratory, 
Cincinnati....................................... 
BE..............................  Ohio. University of Cincinnati.
 
 
[[Page 51830]] OH--Magnus Brass Co............... 
Cincinnati....................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--McKinney Tool and 
Cleveland........................................ 
AWE.............................  Ohio. Manufacturing Co.
 
OH--Mitchell Steel Co............. 
Cincinnati....................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Monsanto Chemical 
Co.......... Dayton........................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Mound 
Plant................... 
Miamisburg....................................... 
DOE.............................  Ohio. OH--Painesville Site 
(Diamond Painesville...................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. Magnesium Co.). OH--Piqua 
Organic Moderated 
Piqua............................................ 
DOE.............................  Ohio. Reactor.
 
OH--Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion 
Piketon.......................................... 
DOE.............................  Ohio. Plant.
 
OH--R. W. Leblond Machine Tool Co. 
Cincinnati....................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Tech-Art, 
Inc................. 
Milford.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Tocco Induction 
Heating Div... Cleveland........................................ 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OH--Vulcan Tool 
Co................ 
Dayton........................................... 
AWE.............................  Ohio. OK--Eagle 
Picher.................. 
Quapaw........................................... 
BE..............................  Oklahoma. 
OK--Kerr-McGee.................... 
Guthrie.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Oklahoma. OR--Albany Research 
Center........ Albany...........................................  
AWE DOE.........................  Oregon. OR--Wah 
Chang..................... 
Albany........................................... 
AWE.............................  Oregon. PA--Aeroprojects, 
Inc.............  West 
Chester.....................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Pennsylvania. PA--Aliquippa 
Forge............... 
Aliquippa........................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Pennsylvania. PA--Aluminum Co. of 
America         New Kensington................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. (Alcoa) 
(Pennsylvania).
 
PA--Beryllium Corp. of America 
Hazleton......................................... 
BE..............................  Pennsylvania. (Hazleton).
 
PA--Beryllium Corp. of America 
Reading.......................................... 
BE..............................  Pennsylvania. (Reading).
 
PA--Birdsboro Steel & Foundry..... 
Birdsboro........................................ 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--C.H. 
Schnorr.................. 
Springdale.......................................  AWE 
DOE.........................  Pennsylvania. PA--Carnegie 
Institute of Pittsburgh....................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. Technology.
 
PA--Carpenter Steel Co............ 
Reading.......................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--Chambersburg 
Engineering Co... 
Chambersburg..................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--Foote Mineral 
Co..............  East Whiteland 
Twp............................... 
AWE/BE..........................  Pennsylvania. PA--Frankford 
Arsenal............. 
Philadelphia..................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--Heppenstall 
Co................ 
Pittsburgh....................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--Jessop Steel 
Co............... 
Washington....................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--Koppers Co., 
Inc.............. 
Verona........................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--Landis 
Machine Tool Co........ 
Waynesboro....................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--McDanel 
Refractory Co.........  Beaver 
Falls..................................... 
BE..............................  Pennsylvania. PA--Nuclear 
Materials and Apollo...........................................  
AWE BE..........................  Pennsylvania. Equipment Corp. 
(NUMEC). PA--Nuclear Materials and           Parks 
Township...................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Pennsylvania. Equipment Corp. 
(NUMEC). PA--Penn Salt Co.................. 
Philadelphia/Wyndmoor............................ 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--Philadelphia 
Naval Yard....... 
Philadelphia..................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--Shippingport 
Atomic Power Shippingport..................................... 
DOE.............................  Pennsylvania. Plant \1\.
 
PA--Superior Steel Co............. 
Carnegie......................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. PA--U.S. Steel 
Co., National Tube 
McKeesport....................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. Division.
 
PA--Vitro Manufacturing 
Canonsburg.......................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Pennsylvania. (Canonsburg).
 
PA--Westinghouse Atomic Power Dev.  East 
Pittsburgh.................................. 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. Plant.
 
PA--Westinghouse Nuclear Fuels 
Cheswick......................................... 
AWE.............................  Pennsylvania. Division.
 
PR--BONUS Reactor Plant...........  Punta 
Higuera.................................... 
DOE.............................  Puerto Rico. PR--Puerto Rico 
Nuclear Center.... 
Mayaguez......................................... 
DOE.............................  Puerto Rico. RI--C.I. Hayes, 
Inc............... 
Cranston......................................... 
AWE.............................  Rhode Island. SC--Savannah 
River Site........... 
Aiken............................................ 
DOE.............................  South Carolina. SD--Ore Buying 
Station at Edgemont 
Edgemont......................................... 
DOE.............................  South Dakota. TN--Clarksville 
Facility.......... 
Clarksville...................................... 
DOE.............................  Tennessee. TN--Manufacturing 
Sciences Corp...  Oak 
Ridge........................................ 
BE..............................  Tennessee. TN--Oak Ridge 
Gaseous Diffusion     Oak 
Ridge........................................ 
DOE.............................  Tennessee. Plant (K-25).
 
TN--Oak Ridge Hospital............  Oak 
Ridge........................................ 
DOE.............................  Tennessee. TN--Oak Ridge 
Institute for         Oak 
Ridge........................................ 
DOE.............................  Tennessee. Science Education.
 
TN--Oak Ridge National Laboratory   Oak 
Ridge........................................ 
DOE.............................  Tennessee. (X-10).
 
TN--S-50 Oak Ridge Thermal          Oak 
Ridge........................................ 
DOE.............................  Tennessee. Diffusion Plant.
 
TN--Vitro Corporation of America    Oak 
Ridge........................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Tennessee. (Tennessee).
 
TN--W.R. Grace (Tennessee)........ 
Erwin............................................ 
AWE.............................  Tennessee. TN--Y-12 
Plant....................  Oak 
Ridge........................................ 
DOE.............................  Tennessee. 
TX--AMCOT.........................  Ft. 
Worth........................................ 
AWE.............................  Texas. TX--Mathieson Chemical 
Co......... Pasadena......................................... 
AWE.............................  Texas. TX--Medina 
Facility...............  San 
Antonio...................................... 
DOE.............................  Texas. TX--Pantex 
Plant.................. 
Amarillo......................................... 
DOE.............................  Texas. TX--Sutton, Steele and 
Steele Co.. Dallas........................................... 
AWE.............................  Texas. TX--Texas City 
Chemicals, Inc.....  Texas 
City....................................... 
AWE.............................  Texas. UT--Ore Buying Station 
at Marysvale........................................ 
DOE.............................  Utah. Marysvale.
 
UT--Ore Buying Station at Moab.... 
Moab............................................. 
DOE.............................  Utah. UT--Ore Buying Station at 
Monticello....................................... 
DOE.............................  Utah. Monticello.
 
UT--Ore Buying Station at White     White 
Canyon..................................... 
DOE.............................  Utah. Canyon.
 
UT--Uranium Mill in Monticello.... 
Monticello....................................... 
DOE.............................  Utah. 
VA--BWXT.......................... 
Lynchburg........................................  AWE 
BE..........................  Virginia VA--Thomas Jefferson 
National       Newport News..................................... 
DOE.............................  Virginia. Accelerator Facility.
 
VA--University of Virginia........ 
Charlottesville.................................. 
AWE.............................  Virginia. 
WA--Hanford....................... 
Richland......................................... 
DOE.............................  Washington. WA--Pacific 
Northwest National 
Richland......................................... 
DOE.............................  Washington. Laboratory.
 
 
[[Page 51831]] WV--Huntington Pilot Plant........ 
Huntington....................................... 
DOE.............................  West Virginia. 
WI--Allis-Chalmers Co.............  West Allis, 
Milwaukee............................ 
AWE.............................  Wisconsin. WI--A.O. 
Smith.................... 
Milwaukee........................................ 
BE..............................  Wisconsin. 
WI--Besley-Wells..................  South 
Beloit..................................... 
AWE.............................  Wisconsin. WI--General Electric 
(X-Ray Milwaukee........................................ 
AWE.............................  Wisconsin. Division).
 
WI--LaCrosse Boiling Water Reactor 
LaCrosse......................................... 
DOE.............................  Wisconsin. WI--Ladish 
Co..................... 
Cudahy........................................... 
BE..............................  Wisconsin. WY--Ore Buying 
Station at Crooks    Crooks 
Gap....................................... 
DOE.............................  Wyoming. Gap.
 
WY--Ore Buying Station at Riverton 
Riverton......................................... 
DOE.............................  Wyoming. MR--Pacific Proving 
Ground \2\....  Marshall Islands................................. 
DOE.............................  Marshall Islands. 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------------------- \1\ Consistent with the Act, coverage is 
limited to activities not performed under the responsibility of 
the Naval Nuclear Propulsion program.
 
\2\ Pacific Proving Ground includes Bikini Atoll, Enewetak Atoll, 
Johnston (U.S. nuclear weapons testing activities only), and 
Christmas Island (U.S. nuclear weapons testing activities only).
 
Issued in Washington, DC, August 17, 2004.
 
T.A. Rollow, Director, Office of Worker Advocacy, Office of 
Environment, Safety and Health.
 
[FR Doc. 04-19228 Filed 8-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 36 [NukeNet] Uranium on Campus: New York Times letter to the
 
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:19:47 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative";
         boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C48950.7EDF956C"

  logoprinter2.gif<http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&page=www.nytimes.com/printer-friendly&pos=Position1&camp=foxsearch50a-nyt5&ad=gardenstate-pf&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efoxsearchlight%2Ecom%2Fgardenstate%2Findex%5Fnyt%2Ehtml> 
<http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&page=www.nytimes.com/printer-friendly&pos=Position1&camp=foxsearch50a-nyt5&ad=gardenstate-pf&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efoxsearchlight%2Ecom%2Fgardenstate%2Findex%5Fnyt%2Ehtml>garden_state_pf.gif<http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/23/opinion/l23uranium.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fLetters&pagewanted=print&position>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/23/opinion/l23uranium.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fLetters&pagewanted
=print&position=



August 23, 2004




Uranium on Campus


To the Editor:

Re "Uranium Reactors on Campus Raise Security Concerns" (news article, Aug. 
15): There is no public mention of any effort by the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission to immediately upgrade security at university research reactors 
to the level needed to prevent thefts of bomb-usable uranium fuel by 
well-armed and -trained terrorists.

In fact, commission regulations specifically exempt university reactors 
from security measures that the commission requires to protect bomb-usable 
materials at other facilities, like the presence of a five-member tactical 
response team whose skills are tested annually.

This exemption, which is a legacy of the 1954 Atomic Energy Act's mandate 
that nuclear research reactors not be overburdened with regulations, is an 
anachronism in the post-9/11 era. If universities cannot afford the 
protection necessary to ensure that bomb fuel is kept out of Al Qaeda's 
hands, they should no longer be entrusted with it.

Edwin S. Lyman
Washington, Aug. 15, 2004
The writer is a senior scientist, Global Security Program, Union of 
Concerned Scientists.


_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>


Attachment Converted: logoprinter2.gif: 00000001,2244faaa,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: garden_state_pf.gif: 00000001,2244faab,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
 37 Google News Alert - nuclear
 
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:16:10 -0700 (PDT)

 
NORTH Korea Nuclear Talks Still Planned, US Government Says
Bloomberg - USA
... The US is working with China and other nations to hold another round
of talks with North Korea on dismantling the communist country's nuclear
program, the ...
<http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000080&sid=aoFT65igK01M&refer=asia>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&num=30&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news%3Fpid%3D10000080%26sid%3DaoFT65igK01M%26refer%3Dasia>

US says diplomacy can resolve Iranian nuclear crisis
Daily Times - Pakistan
VIENNA: The top US disarmament diplomat said on Monday evidence pointed
to an Iranian nuclear weapons programme, but that Washington wanted a
diplomatic ...
<http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_24-8-2004_pg4_12>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&num=30&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp%3Fpage%3Dstory_24-8-2004_pg4_12>

GOVT dismisses nuclear waste dump site reports
ABC Online - Australia
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence has laughed off
reports of plans for a nuclear waste dump on a Victorian military site.
...
<http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200408/s1183512.htm>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&num=30&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200408/s1183512.htm>

EXPENSE not only factor in nuclear fuel issue
Daily Yomiuri - Tokyo,Japan
How can Japan use nuclear power as a major electricity source to maintain
a stable supply of energy in the future? This question ...
<http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20040824wo81.htm>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&num=30&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20040824wo81.htm>

PANTEX Nuclear Facility Repairs Costly
Kansas City Star (subscription) - Kansas City,MO,USA
AMARILLO, Texas - Sealant used in a nuclear weapons plant to prevent plutonium
from leaking in case of an accidental blast is peeling, and a repair job
could ...
<http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/9475036.htm>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&num=30&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/9475036.htm>

IRAN'S nuclear programme peaceful, minister tells PM
New Zealand Herald - Auckland,New Zealand
Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi has given a categorical assurance
to the Prime Minister that his country's nuclear programme is for peaceful
purposes. ...
<http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3586332&thesection=news&thesubsection=general>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&num=30&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm%3FstoryID%3D3586332%26thesection%3Dnews%26thesubsection%3Dgeneral>

UK nuclear sub protest: 28 held
CNN - USA
FASLANE, Scotland (AP) -- Police have arrested 28 people taking part in
a protest at the Scottish naval base that is home to Britain's nuclear-armed
Trident ...
<http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/08/23/uk.faslane.ap/>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&num=30&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/08/23/uk.faslane.ap/>

RENEWED debate over nuclear plant's fish casualties
Newsday - Long Island,NY,USA
LOWER ALLLOWAYS CREEK, NJ -- The debate over whether electricity from a
New Jersey nuclear plant is worth the 3 billion fish eggs and larvae that
are sucked ...
<http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-nj--nuclearplant-fish0823aug23,0,7104573.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&num=30&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-nj--nuclearplant-fish0823aug23,0,7104573.story%3Fcoll%3Dny-ap-regional-wire>

IRAN delays start of first nuclear reactor until 2006
San Francisco Chronicle - San Francisco,CA,USA
Tehran -- Iran said Sunday that it would delay the start of its first nuclear
reactor, in the southern city of Bushehr, until 2006, but that it intended
to ...
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/08/23/MNG0L8CQOM1.DTL>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?ie=utf8&oe=utf8&persist=1&num=30&hl=en&client=google&ncl=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3Ffile%3D/c/a/2004/08/23/MNG0L8CQOM1.DTL>

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/
*****************************************************************
 38 IPS: WIND POWER:: CLEANER, UNLIMITED, AND CHEAPER THAN OIL
 
[http://www.ips.org/

Mark Sommer                                                                                                            

, AUGUST 2004 (IPS) - Renewable energy advocates say that wind 
offers the best near-term option to reduce the demand for oil, 
coal and natural gas, writes Mark Sommer, host of award-winning 
syndicated radio programme, A World of Possibilities.                                          

In this analysis for IPS, the author writes that recent 
technological breakthroughs have greatly increased the efficiency 
of wind turbines, driving the price per kilowatt/hour down to 
levels competitive with oil. And if the hidden costs and 
subsidies incurred by oil and coal were factored into the 
comparison, the true cost of wind energy would be far lower. The 
foreign wars waged, the occupations and military bases built to 
protect supply lines, the degradation of air, water, and human 
health make the true cost of a barrel of crude not 40 but 200 
dollars, or more.

 Yet for all the promise of wind power, its rapid development is 
still thwarted by numerous obstacles, which are less 
technological than political. The multinational companies that 
dominate the energy industry and national energy policies today 
are well aware that oil, coal, and natural gas are finite 
resources but are determined to squeeze the largest profits they 
can before switching to other sources. Their favoured alternative 
is not wind power but nuclear power. (END/2004)
 									 	 
Copyright © 2004 IPS-Inter Press Service. 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: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************