***************************************************************** 09/27/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.231 ***************************************************************** 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 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea Warns of War on Peninsula 2 Xinhuanet: US wants to see six-party talks resume 3 Xinhuanet: Backgrounder: Key events of South Korea's nuclear issue 4 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: UN Nuclear Inspectors Leave South Korea 5 US: CBS Admits it Killed Iraq Story Because of November Elections 6 US: nwitimes.com: Power trips: Congress hits the road 7 UN Panel Working To Keep Chemical, Germ And Nuclear Arms Out Of Terr 8 Daily Times: US wants regime change at IAEA 9 Khaleej Times: New IAEA board meets, with ElBaradei trying to remain 10 IAEA: IAEA Board of Governor 11 St. Petersburg Times: Calls to Boost Security of Radioactive Materia 12 AFP: South African police says no new nuclear arrests 13 UK Independent: The shadow over Blair NUCLEAR REACTORS 14 US: Portsmouth Herald Editorial: Airspace over nuclear plant should 15 US: AP Wire: Irvine nuclear reactor poses security threat, candidate 16 US: Bangornews.com: Power Ties 17 Xinhuanet: Nigeria to launch first nuclear reactor 18 US: Quad-City Times: Nuclear industry wants to expand 19 Reuters: Kansai Elec told to keep reactor shut for checks 20 US: Newsday.com: Nuclear power plant shut down again for valve repai 21 US: ENN: U. of Chicago study finds nuclear power competitive with 22 US: thenews-messenger.com: Reports add to doubts about Davis-Besse, 23 US: USATODAY.com: Nuclear power slides back onto the agenda NUCLEAR SAFETY 24 US: Washington Times: Contaminants threaten Iraqis 25 BBC: Kyrgyzstan 'foils plutonium plot' 26 china daily: New test will monitor ailing British Gulf veterans for 27 Japan Today: Ibaraki town still shaken 5 years after nuclear acciden 28 US: NBC Newschannel 6: MEETING ABOUT RADIATION POISONING EXPERIENCES 29 US: Hawk Eye: Shouldn't 'count on a nickel' 30 US: Columbus Dispatch: Armor Toxic To Troops, Ex-Officer Says 31 US: Pocatello Idaho State Journal: Test fallout NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 32 BBC: North set for nuclear opportunity 33 Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Bush hasn't lied on Yucca dump, rationale for 34 US: Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Store nuke waste where it is made 35 Nevada Appeal - Opinion: Keeping the Yucca watchdog fed 36 Ealing Times: Decision Halts Incinerator 37 The Australian: Nelson slams nuclear 'hysteria' 38 AU ABC: Govt dismisses nuclear waste dump site list 39 AU ABC: Govt asked to explain nuclear waste dump plan 40 IAEA: Nuclear Fuel Cycle at Centre of IAEA Scientific Forum NUCLEAR WEAPONS 41 Annan Urges Nations To Ratify Nuke Test-Ban Treaty 42 asahi.com: EDITORIAL:Nuclear nonproliferation 43 Arizona Republic: Nuclear diplomacy US DEPT. OF ENERGY 44 Tri-City Herald: Treatment of uranium shavings wraps up 45 AN: Energy Dept. official explains how Bush administration fights 46 Rocky Mountain News: Hangarful of questions 47 Charleston.Net: Opinion: Editorials Program reduces nuclear threat OTHER NUCLEAR ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea Warns of War on Peninsula From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday September 28, 2004 12:31 AM AP Photo UNDK114 By EDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press Writer UNITED NATIONS (AP) - North Korea has turned the enriched uranium from 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods into weapons to serve as a deterrent against a possible nuclear strike by the United States, a North Korean minister said Monday. Warning that the danger of war on the Korean peninsula ``is snowballing,'' Vice Foreign Minister Choe Su Hon blamed the United States for intensifying threats to attack the communist nation and destroying the basis for negotiations to resolve the dispute over Pyongyang's nuclear program. Without specifying what kinds or the number of weapons it has, Choe said North Korea has been left with ``no other option but to possess a nuclear deterrent'' because of U.S. policies that he claimed were designed to ``eliminate the DPRK by force while designating it as part of an `axis of evil' and a target of pre-emptive nuclear strikes.'' DPRK stands for Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the North's official name. When asked if the fuel had been turned into actual weapons, not just weapons-grade material, Choe said: ``We declared that we weaponized this.'' In Washington, a State Department official noted that the administration has long believed North Korea has at least one or two nuclear weapons. The official, who asked not to be identified, also said the North Koreans have made conflicting statements about how far along their weapons development programs have come. But Choe told the U.N. General Assembly that North Korea is still ready to dismantle its nuclear program if Washington abandons its ``hostile policy'' and is prepared to coexist peacefully. At the moment, however, he said ``the ever intensifying U.S. hostile policy and the clandestine nuclear-related experiments recently revealed in South Korea are constituting big stumbling blocks'' and make it impossible for North Korea to participate in the continuation of six-nation talks on its nuclear program. A State Department official said North Korea should take part in six-the party discussions and noted that Secretary of State Colin Powell has said repeatedly that the United States has no plans to attack that country. At a press conference afterward with reporters, the North Korean ambassador was asked what was included in the nuclear deterrent. ``We have already made clear that we have already reprocessed 8,000 wasted fuel rods and transformed them into arms,'' he said. Julie Enzer, head of the Washington-based Nuclear Policy Research Institute, when asked about Choe's comments, said ``it certainly sounds like they've taken the spent fuel rods and further enriched them to be weapons grade uranium and put them in some kind of weapon.'' North Korea said earlier this year that it had reprocessed the spent nuclear fuel rods and was increasing its ``nuclear deterrent'' but had not provided any details. South Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Soo-hyuck said in late April that it was estimated that eight nuclear bombs could be made if all 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods were reprocessed. Before the reprocessing, South Korea said it believed the North has enough nuclear material to build one or two nuclear bombs. The crisis erupted in 2002 when the United States accused North Korea of running a secret nuclear weapons program. The United States, the two Koreas, Japan, China and Russia since have held three rounds of talks on curbing the North's nuclear ambitions but have produced no breakthroughs. Choe said the ``truth'' of South Korea's nuclear experiments had to be clarified if the talks were to resume. South Korea has disclosed that it conducted a plutonium-based nuclear experiment more than 20 years ago and a uranium-enrichment experiment in 2000. It denied having any weapons ambitions; an investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency is under way. Choe told reporters that North Korea wants an explanation because Pyongyang believes it is impossible that such experiments took place ``without U.S. technology and U.S. approval.'' North Korea and South Korea have been divided since the Korean War. Choe reiterated that Pyongyang's goal remains the peaceful reunification of the countries. But he accused U.S. ``unilateralism and high-handedness'' of trying to sabotage reunification and charged that Washington is deploying sophisticated war equipment targeting North Korea. ``On the Korean peninsula ... the danger of war is snowballing owing to the U.S. extreme moves to isolate and stile the DPRK and threats of preemptive strikes against it,'' Choe said. The State Department official noted that Secretary of State Colin Powell has said repeatedly that the United States has no plans to attack North Korea. At the third round of talks in June, the United States proposed that the North disclose all its nuclear activities, help to dismantle facilities and allow outside monitoring. Under the plan, some benefits would be withheld to ensure the North cooperates. North Korea said it would never scrap its nuclear programs first and wait to get rewarded later. Instead, it insisted on ``reward for freeze.'' Choe told the General Assembly North Korea's proposal was aimed at building ``mutual confidence'' and a freeze would be ``the first step toward eventual dismantlement of our nuclear program.'' But he said the dispute must be solved step-by-step. A freeze will be followed by ``objective verification,'' he said, telling reporters that the way to do this would be discussed later. Choe indicated there was a chance for revival of the talks. ``If the United States has the will to co-exist peacefully with the DPRK by abandoning its hostile policy on the DPRK, the nuclear issue will be resolved properly,'' he said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 2 Xinhuanet: US wants to see six-party talks resume www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-09-28 05:29:19 WASHINGTON, Sept. 27 (Xinhuanet) -- The United States said on Monday that it would like to see another round of the six-party talks on the nuclear issue of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) take place, though it was likely that the six-party talks would not be held this month. "I think it is more than likely that six-party talks won't happen in September," State Department deputy spokesman Adam Erelisaid at a news briefing. "We certainly want to see another round take place ... We hope that the North Koreas will realize that the sooner they return to the six-party format and begin discussions, the sooner we will be able to help them deal with their very serious economic problems,"Ereli said. Ereli said the United States was continuing to work with the other parties to move the six-party process forward and "it is notsomething we are giving up on." Three rounds of the six-party talks, hosted by China, have beenheld to try to end the nuclear confrontation between the DPRK and the United States. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 Xinhuanet: Backgrounder: Key events of South Korea's nuclear issue www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-09-27 12:44:18 BEIJING, Sept. 27 (Xinhuanet) -- Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has concluded a week-long investigation into South Korea's past controversial nuclear experiments, taking with them about 20 samples from nuclear material and waste left over by the experiments. This is the second investigation by the UN nuclear watchdog in less than one month over the issue, which have brought Seoul at the center of an international controversy for the past few weeks ever since its scientists were found to have conducted two controversial laboratory experiments, one in 1982 and the other in2000, without reporting to the government. The following are some key events of South Korea's nuclear issue. The IAEA discovered the sign of nuclear experiments in South Korea by environmental sampling analyses in 1998 and 2003 respectively and informed Seoul of the findings, but the South Korean governmental did not report to the IAEA until August 17 this year. From Aug. 29 to Sept. 5, the IAEA conducted its first check in South Korea and took away the 0.1g enriched uranium produced by South Korean scientists. During the IAEA investigation, the South Korean government admitted that two groups of scientists conducted plutonium extraction experiment and uranium separation experiment in 1982 and 2000 respectively at the Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI), the country's main nuclear research center, in Daejeon city, and another nuclear research center in central Seoulwithout reporting to the government. On Sept. 13, the UN agency's board of governors discussed SouthKorea's alleged violation of its non-proliferation obligations. IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei expressed "serious concern" over South Korea's experiments at the first day of the meeting. The IAEA also said South Korea produced 150 kg of uranium metalat one of the three nuclear facilities unreported to the IAEA and that as much as 13.5 kg of the metal remained unaccounted for. On Sept. 11, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) said it would link the South Korea's secret nuclear experiments toa new round of six-party talks scheduled for late September. On Sept. 18, the South Korean government said it has no plan to develop nuclear weapons. On Sept. 22, the South Korean government said it opposes including its nuclear issue into the upcoming six-party talks. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: UN Nuclear Inspectors Leave South Korea Updated Sep.27,2004 10:30 KST United Nations inspectors have left South Korea after a week-long investigation into the country's secret experiments in the past with nuclear material. The five-member team from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) left Seoul for Vienna Sunday, taking with them about 20 samples of nuclear material and waste. Members of the team inspected a nuclear research center in central Seoul and the Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute in Daejeon, about 160 kilometers south of Seoul. Another team of IAEA inspectors visited South Korean nuclear facilities earlier this month, after Seoul revealed that its scientists secretly enriched a tiny amount of plutonium in 1982 and uranium in 2000. The inspectors are expected to report the results of their inspections to the Vienna-based IAEA by November. VOA News ***************************************************************** 5 CBS Admits it Killed Iraq Story Because of November Elections Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:40:57 -0500 (CDT) CBS Admits it Killed Iraq Story Because of November Elections CBS News has taken the unusual step of publicly admitting that it has killed a major story because the network feels it would be QUOTE "inappropriate" to air it before the presidential election. The story is the result of a major six-month investigation into how the Bush administration obtained forged documents that made it appear Saddam Hussein was trying to buy uranium from the African nation Niger. The uranium claim was cited by President Bush during his 2002 State of the Union as a reason to go to attack Iraq. The segment was originally to air on Sept. 29 but was pulled to make room for the now infamous segment on President Bush's military records. [Ah the irony! IF only they had the backbone to report about THAT story insted..] Source: www.DemocracyNow.org ***************************************************************** 6 nwitimes.com: Power trips: Congress hits the road Northwest Indiana News: Monday, September 27, 2004 Power trips: Congress hits the road CONGRESS: Watchdog groups raise concerns about lawmakers stepping over the line By STEPHEN BAXTER and JUSTIN D. FOX Medill News Service WASHINGTON -- Crisscrossing the globe for speeches, conferences and fact-finding missions, members of Congress and their families have taken nearly $14.4 million worth of trips in the last 4 1/2 years -- with private interests picking up the tab. An analysis of congressional trips by Medill News Service in partnership with American Public Media's Marketplace program and American RadioWorks found that private interests spent $14,388,672 since Jan.1, 2000, to send House and Senate members on 4,851 trips. The academic groups, think tanks and corporate sponsors say the trips allow lawmakers to learn valuable information without spending taxpayer money. But critics say sponsors are buying special access to lawmakers, often in congenial surroundings. While some members took privately funded trips to make speeches in places like Pittsburgh and Peoria, others went on fact-finding jaunts to Aspen, Colo., or spent $3,000 on meals at a five-day conference in Barcelona, Spain. The most popular destination was Florida, with 558 trips, followed by California with 386 and New York with 354. West Virginia, home to the luxurious Greenbrier resort in White Sulphur Springs, was the fourth most popular destination, with 223 trips. Many of the 159 sponsored trips to Nevada -- the fifth most common destination -- mixed tours of the proposed nuclear waste disposal site at Yucca Mountain with the lure of adult playgrounds in Las Vegas. While domestic destinations dominated the list of travel hot spots, Israel, Mexico, Italy, the United Kingdom and Cuba also made the top 20 most-visited list. In all, senators took 1,071 trips, House members 3,781. The House and Senate allow the trips if they are part of official duties and if lawmakers disclose where they went, the amount spent and the sponsor. Senate rules limit domestic trips to three days and international trips to seven days, excluding travel time. Disclosure forms often are filed late or are incomplete, and the only place to find them is in House and Senate office buildings. Sen. John Breaux, D-La., traveled the most at others' expense, taking 56 trips costing more than $158,000. On average, Breaux accepted a free trip a month, every month, over the period analyzed. "These conferences play an important role in interacting with groups affected by the workings of Congress," said Breaux, who is retiring this year after 32 years on Capitol Hill. "In addition, these trips are approved by the Senate Ethics Committee as appropriate and proper, and at no cost to the American taxpayers." Bill Nell of the Aspen Institute, a left-leaning international relations think tank that sponsored 488 trips, said sending lawmakers on trips helps them better understand issues. "If we discuss China, Latin America, or Russia, for example," he said, "it is much more meaningful to do it in the country we're studying with people from that country." The Aspen Institute topped the list of money spent by sponsors at more than $2.5 million. Second place went to the Ripon Educational Fund, a program of the conservative Ripon Society. It doled out more than $600,000 to pay for 59 trips. Spending about $575,000 on 70 trips, the American Israel Education Foundation came in third. Opinions on privately sponsored trips range from enthusiasm to skepticism to outright disapproval. While some lawmakers and sponsors say the trips promote understanding, some government watchdog groups say they give sponsors disproportionate influence on Capitol Hill. Gary Ruskin of the Congressional Accountability Project said: "Typically these trips help educate members of Congress only about one side of an issue. As such, sometimes they're worse than not traveling at all." "It's for the most part only wealthy institutions that can do this," said Danielle Brian, director of the non-partisan Project on Government Oversight, referring to groups that sponsor trips. "So in itself there is definitely a skewed leaning towards powerful special interests versus the average citizen." The most expensive trip was taken by Rep. Tom Bliley, R-Va., whose fact-finding journey to England in July 2000 cost Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corp. more than $31,000. The tobacco company paid nearly $24,000 to transport Bliley and his wife to England, where they spent more than $4,000 on lodging and almost $3,000 on entertainment and other costs. House ethics rules prohibit private parties from providing more than $50 for entertainment Bliley, who declined to comment, retired from Congress four months after the trip to work for Collier Shannon Scott, a lobbying firm that has represented the Tobacco Products Manufacturing Coalition. Tighter controls considered Over the years, efforts have been made to tighten congressional rules related to privately sponsored trips and make the information more easily available to the public. But all have become stuck in the gears of the political machine. In 1998, former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind., introduced a resolution that would have required any House member taking a trip to submit a report on how the travel was related to official House business, including findings and recommendations as well as a detailed itinerary of all meetings, interviews, inspection tours and other official functions. Hamilton also wanted to require the disclosure forms and reports be posted on the Internet, but his resolution never got to the floor of the Republican-controlled House. Currently, members need only name the sponsor, destination and purpose of the trip, and list transportation, lodging, meal and other costs. Steven Weiss of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan watchdog group that examined congressional travel in 1998, said people are no more aware of privately sponsored trips today than they were six years ago. While Weiss noted that not all trips are paid for by groups with legislative agendas, Gary Ruskin of the Congressional Accountability Project said it is important for citizens to examine lawmakers' privately sponsored trips "to find out what there is to be learned about members' ethics and their propensity for accepting graft and reasonable facsimiles of graft." || Next Story: Bayh, Lugar busy travelers >> ©2003 copyright nwitimes.com. Reproduction or redistribution of content is expressly forbidden without the express written consent of nwitimes.com. ***************************************************************** 7 UN Panel Working To Keep Chemical, Germ And Nuclear Arms Out Of Terrorist Hands Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 17:00:18 -0400 X-Temp-Whitephrase: YES UN PANEL WORKING TO KEEP CHEMICAL, GERM AND NUCLEAR ARMS OUT OF TERRORIST HANDS New York, Sep 27 2004 5:00PM The ability of countries to prevent terrorists, black marketers and other private interests from acquiring weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) will soon get needed help from a Security Council committee set up to monitor the problem, the panel's chairman said today. The so-called 1540 Committee, named after the Security Council <"http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=s/res/1540(2004)">resolution which established the body in April, has already received reports from Turkmenistan and Malta and would soon be fully functional, Ambassador Mihnea Ioan Motoc of Romania told reporters at UN Headquarters in New York. Numerous national leaders addressing the General Assembly during its annual high-level debate have been warning that the risk of WMDs reaching terrorists is the most ominous current security threat, he said. Resolution 1540 calls on States to adopt legislative and administrative regulations to deal with WMD proliferation and to report within six months on their efforts to execute the measure's requirements. The deadline for the first reports is 28 October. Because the text was adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, in theory the 15-member Council has the power to enforce decisions relating to it through tribunals, embargoes or military force after all peaceful means of persuading delinquent Member States have been exhausted. As chairman of the WMD committee, Ambassador Motoc has contacted the Directors-General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in a bid to coordinate their work on non-proliferation. 2004-09-27 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml ***************************************************************** 8 Daily Times: US wants regime change at IAEA Tuesday, September 28, 2004 * Puts El Baradei under pressure VIENNA: A new board of governors of the UN nuclear watchdog was to meet in Vienna on Monday to set procedures for electing a new director general, with current chief Mohamed El Baradei seeking to remain in office despite US opposition. El Baradei had earlier this month put his hat into the ring for a third term at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) despite opposition from the United States and possibly other top UN funding states to his continuing in the job. US officials have said the United States, the largest contributor to the United Nations, supports the position of the Geneva group of top 10 contributors that heads of international organisation should not serve more than two terms. “This policy has nothing to do with the director general’s qualifications. The United States thinks that he’s done a very good job leading the agency at a very difficult time but it’s simply a matter of principle and good governance,” a Western official familiar with the US position said. But El Baradei, who is supported by the 13 non-aligned countries on the IAEA’s 35-nation board, may get a boost in October as he is an apparent favourite to win the Nobel Peace Prize, after his work in monitoring nuclear activities in hot spots Iran, Iran, North Korea and Libya. An IAEA spokesman said the board, which was elected last week at an IAEA general conference, “has to decide today procedures for the appointment of a new director general.” He said the board would probably close applications for candidacies by December 31 and seek to have the new director general named by a board meeting in June 2005, in order to be formally elected at the next IAEA general conference in September 2005. El Baradei, 61, who is Egyptian, has been at the Vienna-based IAEA for two decades and has as director general since 1997 become a world figure campaigning for nuclear non-proliferation. afp Home | Daily Times - All Rights Reserved Site developed and hosted by WorldCALL Internet Solutions [http://www.wcis.com.pk] ***************************************************************** 9 Khaleej Times: New IAEA board meets, with ElBaradei trying to remain in charge www.khaleejtimes.com (AFP) 27 September 2004 VIENNA - A new board of governors of the UN nuclear watchdog was to meet in Vienna Monday to set procedures for electing a new director general, with current chief Mohamed ElBaradei seeking to remain in office despite US opposition. ElBaradei had earlier this month put his hat into the ring for a third term at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) despite opposition from the United States and possibly other top UN funding states to his continuing in the job. US officials have said the United States, the largest contributor to the United Nations, supports the position of the Geneva group of top 10 contributors that heads of international organization should not serve more than two terms. “This policy has nothing to do with the director general’s qualifications. The United States thinks that he’s done a very good job leading the agency at a very difficult time but it’s simply a matter of principle and good governance,” a Western official familiar with the US position said. But ElBaradei, who is supported by the 13 non-aligned countries on the IAEA’s 35-nation board, may get a boost in October as he is an apparent favorite to win the Nobel Peace Prize, after his work in monitoring nuclear activities in hot spots Iran, Iran, North Korea and Libya. An IAEA spokesman said the board, which was elected last week at an IAEA general conference, “has to decide today procedures for the appointment of a new director general.” He said the board would probably close applications for candidacies by December 31 and seek to have the new director general named by a board meeting in June 2005, in order to be formally elected at the next IAEA general conference in September 2005. ElBaradei, 61, who is Egyptian, has been at the Vienna-based IAEA for two decades and has as director general since 1997 become a world figure campaigning for nuclear non-proliferation. His agency is also at the center of determining the alleged nuclear weapon ambitions of the three countries US President George W. Bush has labeled an “axis of evil” -- Iran, North Korea, and Iraq when under the rule of now-deposed Saddam Hussein. © 2004 Khaleej Times All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 IAEA: IAEA Board of Governor [IAEA.ORG :: Atoms for Peace] The Board of Governors is composed of 35 Member States, as designated and elected by the General Conference. + Related Resources + Rules and Procedures of the Board of Governors + IAEA Statute The Board of Governors generally meets five times per year -- in March and June, twice in September (before and after the General Conference) and in December. At its meetings, the Board examines and makes recommendations to the General Conference on the IAEA's accounts, programme, and budget and considers applications for membership. It also approves safeguards agreements and the publication of the IAEA's safety standards and has the responsibility for appointing the Director General of the IAEA with the approval of the General Conference. Board Members for 2004-2005 Member States represented on the IAEA Board for 2004-2005 are Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Ecuador, France, Germany, Ghana, Hungary, India, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Tunisia, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Venezuela, Vietnam and Yemen. Board Officers [Ms. Ingrid Hall] The Chair of the Board of Governors for 2004-2005 is the Ambassador and Permanent Representative from Canada, Ambassador and Permanent Representative from Canada, Ms Ingrid Hall. She succeeded the Governor from Spain, Mr. Antonio Núñez García-Saúco. Elected as Vice-Chairpersons for 2004-05 were Mr. Parvez Butt, the Governor from Pakistan, and Mr. Jerzy Niewodniczanski, the Governor from Poland. Copyright 2003, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 200, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (431) 2600-7; E-mail: Official.Mail@iaea.org Disclaimer and Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 11 St. Petersburg Times: Calls to Boost Security of Radioactive Material General news from St.Petersburg and Russia #1007, Tuesday, September 28, 2004 By Irina Titova STAFF WRITER Russia must develop responses on how to store the growing stocks of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive atomic waste at nuclear power stations, and how to defend the world from the increased threat of nuclear terrorism, a St. Petersburg conference was told Monday. "Russia should be ready to deal with accumulated radioactive waste at its nuclear plants, and the possible threat of terrorists getting their hands on that waste," Valery Bezzubtsev, deputy head of the Federal Nuclear Supervision Service, said at the annual international conference on the safety of nuclear technologies. The conference, which runs until Friday, is dedicated to finding solutions to legislative, social, scientific, technical, technological, ecological, economic, and safety problems in treating stored and new radioactive waste derived from nuclear energy production. Alexander Agapov, head of the nuclear and radioactive safety department at the Federal Nuclear Power Agency, said the level of safety of nuclear technology in Russia is "very high." "The level is that of one of the leading countries in the world," he said. "If nuclear enterprises fulfill the safety standards there won't be any emergencies." However, Agapov said Russia does have a financial problem that has an impact on safety, unlike in Soviet times when funding was ample. In the U.S.S.R, the state budget paid for guarding nuclear installations and the transportation of nuclear waste and construction of nuclear storage facilities, he said. However, after 1991 the state budget was restricted and some nuclear power stations became commercial enterprises and are able to take care of some safety expenses themselves. "The state budget is not obliged to participate in the commercial activities of private [nuclear] enterprises," he said. Nevertheless, in such cases some monitoring of safety is needed so that safety is not the responsibility of not only the enterprise, but also of the state, which can require the enterprise to fulfill its safety obligations, Agapov said. [Copyright] copyright The St. Petersburg Times 1993-2004 ***************************************************************** 12 AFP: South African police says no new nuclear arrests [http://www.spacewar.com/] [http://www.spacewar.com/] CAPE TOWN (AFP) Sep 27, 2004 South African police Monday said no new arrests had been made in connection with the suspected trafficking of nuclear equipment as was reported by a Swiss newspaper at the weekend. "We have not arrested any people in Cape Town. The two arrests you are referring to is probably that of the two men we arrested earlier this month. There has been no further arrests," national police spokeswoman Sally de Beer told AFP. The Swiss foreign ministry on Sunday confirmed a media report that a man bearing dual Swiss-South African nationality had been arrested in Cape Town. The Swiss German paper SonntagsZeitung reported that the man, who was not named, had been accused of importing and exporting equipment for enriching uranium, a stage in the development of nuclear weapons. The man's superior in the establishment where he works, a German national, is also suspected of illegal possession and production of nuclear material, the paper said. But South African authorities Monday said the report probably referred to German Gerhard Wisser, 65, and Daniel Geiges, 65, a Swiss national, who were arrested on September 8 in South Africa. South African police originally reported that Geiges was German, but later said he was in fact a Swiss national. Wisser and Geiges, who both live permanently in South Africa, appeared on four counts of contravening the Nuclear Energy Act and a law banning the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction the following day. "Wisser and Geiges are in the process of applying for bail and will appear in court in Vanderbijlpark on Tuesday," de Beer added. South Africa is currently investigating ties with a nuclear smuggling network thought to be linked to Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan who admitted in February to helping Libya and other nations develop their weapons programme. Libya announced late last year that it was abandoning attempts to develop nuclear, biological and chemical weapons after months of secret negotiations with London and Washington. All rights reserved. © 2004 [http://www.afp.com/] . Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, ***************************************************************** 13 UK Independent: The shadow over Blair By Colin Brown and Hugh Macleod in Damascus 27 September 2004 The war in Iraq last night cast a pall over Tony Blair's hopes for using the Labour Party conference in Brighton as the springboard for his ambitions for a third term. The Prime Minister, who was swept to power on a wave of optimism about the new politics he would introduce, was brought down to earth by the hostage crisis surrounding Kenneth Bigley, the assassination a Palestinian Hamas leader in Syria, death and suicide bombs in Iraq and a rebel vote by delegates to force Iraq on to the agenda for the conference. Mr Blair, who prayed for Mr Bigley yesterday at a church service with his wife, Cherie, was left wondering how he can draw a line under the war and move back on to the domestic agenda, on which he has to fight the general election. Nothing seems to be working for him. Iraq's collapse into chaos has made the country a rallying point for an endless supply of young extremists willing to die in a jihad, or holy war. Iraq has now replaced Afghanistan and Chechnya as the magnet for foreign fighters. New American new figures also show that insurgent attacks on contractors and US, British and Iraqi forces have increased dramatically since sovereignty was handed back in June. As many as seven car bombs have been detonated in a single day this month and two more detonated yesterday. The US also claimed to have killed or captured more than 100 militants loyal to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Fallujah over the past four weeks, while local doctors and residents say the US attacks have killed innocent women and chidren. Attacks on the insurgents continued over the weekend as appeals went out for the release of Mr Bigley who was abducted in Baghdad 11 days ago. Two American contractors taken with him have been beheaded with the grisly video evidence broadcast on the internet. Yesterday the temperature escalated once again as the Hamas leader Izz El-Deen Sheikh Khalil was killed when his car exploded as he tried to start it at about 10.45 am outside his home in the south of Damascus. Israel refused to confirm or deny its involvement, but unofficial sources said its security services carried out the attack. Damascus denounced the bombing as an act of "Israeli terror". Three years ago, Mr Blair spoke of the "high ideals" that were the driving force behind his Government. When he makes his keynote speech to the conference tomorrow, he is planning to strike a defiant note, insisting that the war on Iraq was right. The Prime Minister dismissed reports on BBC's Breakfast with Frost that he had undergone a "wobble" earlier this year over his low personal standing in the polls as a result of the Iraq war. "I am not the wobbling sort," he said. Iraq now threatens to be his nemesis. One poll yesterday showed that Labour's majority could be slashed to 24 seats at the general election. The Cabinet, as this newspaper revealed last week, has been warned that Labour could lose three million votes because voters are dismayed at the way Mr Blair has been blown off course. The leadership planned to recover the momentum at this week's conference, by rolling out policies on pensions, working families and schools that will form the centrepiece of the general election manifesto. Mr Blair prepared the ground by announcing that the second war for Iraq had begun, thus challenging supporters to back him or the terrorists who are wreaking mayhem in Iraq. The hostage crisis brought home the bloody conflict that ordinary Iraqis are living each day. Paul Bigley, a brother of the hostage, issued a warning to Mr Blair yesterday at an anti-war rally at the conference: "My brother is still alive - and you need to keep him alive." He bitterly protested that Mr Blair would have "blood on his hands" if his brother is murdered. The Prime Minister used a series of interviews to stand firm over his policy on Iraq, insisting that he could not countenance giving in to the terrorists. He invoked the wartime spirit in an interview in The Observer to rally support in the country for the war. He did concede, however, that the coalition had made an error in disbanding the Iraqi army after the war. UK Independent Ltd. ***************************************************************** 14 Portsmouth Herald Editorial: Airspace over nuclear plant should be off-limits to aircraft Mon. September 27, 2004 To write a letter to the editor please email [opinion@seacoastonline.com] Apparently there is nothing in the law that prohibits helicopters - or anything else, for that matter - from flying directly over the Seabrook Station nuclear power plant. How’s that for homeland security? Last week, the Air National Guard at Otis Air Force Base on Cape Cod scrambled two F-15 fighter jets after a security guard at Seabrook Station noticed a helicopter flying over the nuclear power plant. The same type of fighters were scrambled from Otis after terrorists crashed two hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. The situation at Seabrook escalated quickly after the helicopter’s pilot did not respond when officials tried to make radio contact. When contact was finally made, the helicopter pilot was ordered to land at Manchester Airport. And that was it. End of story. Because there’s no law against flying over the nuclear power plant. "(Pilots) have an advisory not to circle over the plant, but there is no direct prohibition of it," Jim Peters, a spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration New England Region, told the Herald. Is he kidding? Is this really possible? How, when every other word we read in our newspapers or hear on our TVs is about terrorists coming to get us, can we possibly allow free access from the air over our local nuclear power plant? Are we really that stupid? The Federal Aviation Administration and every other comatose agency charged with keeping us safe needs to wake up. What if the helicopter pilot wasn’t just a confused citizen, but a terrorist? It doesn’t take a counter-terrorism expert to see that this situation poses a danger. We need laws that tighten up the airspace over our nuclear power plant, and we need them now. This latest idiocy would be funny if it weren’t so frightening. - Portsmouth Herald Seacoast Online is owned and operated by Seacoast Newspapers. Copyright © 2004 Seacoast Online. All rights reserved. Please ***************************************************************** 15 AP Wire: Irvine nuclear reactor poses security threat, candidate says | 09/27/2004 | Associated Press IRVINE, Calif. - A low-level nuclear reactor used for university research poses a security threat at a time of terrorism and should be shut down, a candidate for Congress said Monday. The University of California, Irvine dismisses the safety concerns, but John Graham, a Democratic candidate for Congress and a business professor at the school, said terrorists could undermine the security and spark panic in a heavily populated region. Because of a lack of full-time guards, the building where the reactor is located is vulnerable to a car bomb attack that could result in the release of radiation and chemicals, said Graham, a former Navy commando running in a Republican-leaning district. "You could attack this reactor in a lot of different ways," he said at a news conference. "What makes this a particularly attractive target is it's easy. ... This has virtually no security." University officials say the reactor, which began operating in 1969, is under 25 feet of water in a 23,000-gallon pool and is designed to shut down if the reactor's fuel temperature increases. It is protected by an alarm system and motion-sensor devices, and university police can respond within minutes to any security breach, the school said in a statement. In addition, the fuel cannot explode and is at such a low radioactive level that it is comparable to a hospital's radiation therapy equipment, the university said. Graham is making his third attempt to defeat Rep. Christopher Cox, a Republican, in the 48th district, which includes such Orange County cities as San Juan Capistrano, Newport Beach, Tustin and Laguna Beach. ***************************************************************** 16 Bangornews.com: Power Ties Monday, September 27, 2004 If a new power line needs to be built connecting Maine to eastern Canada - and the governing body of New England's power grid says it does - the new route chosen by Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. is a good one. Recently, Bangor Hydro announced plans to build a new $90 million electricity transmission line across portions of Hancock, Washington and Penobscot counties to connect the New England and Canadian power grids. The 85-mile route would parallel existing industrial development most of the way. For most of the route it would run along the Stud Mill Road, a private logging road owned by International Paper. Much of the road is already bordered by the Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, which carries natural gas from Canada to Maine. Currently, just one power line connects New England to Canada. Another line is needed to increase reliability and to allow more power to flow to and from Canada and the project already has been supported by ISO New England, the region's electricity grid administrators. Currently, power producers in Maine often cannot ship electricity to Canada because the existing line is already fully loaded. The new line could increase the demand for clean power produced in Maine. The connection to New Brunswick is a good fit because power demand there peaks in the winter, while the New England peak is in the summer. When Bangor Hydro first proposed this line more than a decade ago, it was meant to allow more power from Canada to enter the United States. Now, due to concerns that two power plants in New Brunswick, one nuclear and one oil-fired, may have to be shut down, perhaps permanently, the intent is to transmit power from Maine and New England to the Canadian maritime provinces. It is unclear how this will impact Maine rate-payers, a concern that must be addressed by the Public Utilities Commission, which will rule on the need for the new line. ISO New England agreed this summer to distribute the cost of building the new line among its 6.5 million customers in the region. Maine would be responsible for 8 percent of the cost and power costs would increase about $1 a year for customers of Bangor Hydro and Central Maine Power Co., which are members of the regional group. That increase could be eliminated by future cost savings, according to Bangor Hydro officials. The PUC must be satisfied that there will be benefits for Maine power consumers before it approves the project. As for the route, Bangor Hydro initially proposed to build the line through largely undeveloped forest north of the current proposed location. The landowner, International Paper, suggested part way through review of the project by the Board of Environmental Protection that the power line parallel the Stud Mill Road. Bangor Hydro disputed this route and the project was ultimately rejected by the BEP. Putting the power line next to the road and pipeline, as has been done in other states, makes much more sense that building in undeveloped forestland. If this project will benefit Maine, it is going in the right place. ©2004 Bangor Daily News. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 17 Xinhuanet: Nigeria to launch first nuclear reactor www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-09-28 01:48:26 ABUJA, Sept. 27 (Xinhuanet) -- Nigeria will launch its first nuclear reactor on Thursday for research and development in different fields of human endeavor, the News Agency of Nigeria reported Monday. The reactor called "NIRR-1" will be located at the Center for Energy Research and Training on the campus of Ahmadu Bello University in Nigeria's northern state of Kaduna, which is designed for research in nuclear technology and its uses. An official of Nigeria's Ministry of Science and Technology whosaid on condition of anonymity told reporters that Science and Technology Minister Turner Isoun would inaugurate the facility to enable it go into full operation. He added that the reactor was acquired, installed and inaugurated through a technical cooperation between Nigeria and the International Atomic Energy Agency. "The safe operation and utilization of NIRR-1 will contribute to the socioeconomic development of Nigeria and various areas of human development," he said. Various facilities relating to the nuclear reactor had been installed at the center to enhance research work, he added. Nigeria had in recent times delved into space technology, biotechnology and information and communication technology to ensure sustainable development of the country. According to the official, the nuclear research reactor will benefit Nigeria in the fields of agricultural production, solid minerals development, industrial production, health care water resources management and environmental protection, among others. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 Quad-City Times: Nuclear industry wants to expand 11:31 pm, Sunday, September 26th, 2004 By Gannett News Service NEW YORK — Reviled for more than a quarter of a century, nuclear energy is poised for a comeback..Soaring energy costs, worries about energy dependence and growing fears of global warming have combined to revive a once-doomed industry that remains the butt of pop-culture satire such as “The Simpsons” and “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.”. Three utility consortiums — Entergy, Dominion Resources and Exelon, which owns the Quad-Cities Nuclear Generating Station — recently filed early site applications with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for new plants. They would be the first in almost three decades..“ We believe that a renaissance has begun,” says Michael Wallace, president of generation at Baltimore-based Constellation Energy, operator of five nuclear reactors and part of the Exelon consortium. “While environmentalists are not advocates (of nuclear power), they are not the detractors that they once were eight or 10 years ago.”. Not everyone is as sanguine about the prospect of new reactors being built, possibly as early as 2010. Anti-nuclear groups argue new plants would be prohibitively expensive, generate radioactive waste, risk catastrophic meltdown and be terrorist targets..“ These reactors are pre-positioned weapons of mass destruction, and it is about time the government treated them as such and shut them down,” says Greenpeace nuclear policy analyst Jim Riccio.. But with record energy costs and global electricity consumption expected to double by 2020 — including a 40 percent jump in the USA — the future of nuclear power is popping up on political agendas around the world. The threats of global warming, nuclear proliferation and terrorism amplify the debate..“ I suspect in the next 10 years, we’ll see one or more new nuclear plants being constructed here,” says William “Nick” Timbers, CEO of USEC, the world’s sole supplier of nuclear fuel from old Soviet warheads.. Polls suggest nuclear power is becoming more palatable as the public tires of turmoil in the oil-rich Middle East. In March, a Gallup Poll found 56 percent of Americans favored nuclear energy, up from 46 percent three years earlier. But only 37 percent backed building a nuclear plant in their area.. Many in the scientific community believe it would be a mistake to omit nuclear power from initiatives to limit reliance on oil, natural gas and coal, and to reduce carbon dioxide emissions; they say it should be considered along with efforts to increase energy efficiency and expand use of renewable energy sources, such as hydro, wind and solar power..“ Deciding to pull the trigger on a nuclear plant is difficult because no one knows where energy prices are going to be in five years,” says Bob Bellemare, CEO of energy consulting firm Utilipoint International. “The good news about nuclear energy for customers is that its cost is very predictable year-to-year.”. Celebrated in the 1960s as an energy source that was too cheap to meter, 442 nuclear plants today produce about one-sixth of the world’s power, says the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog. An additional 27 are under construction: 18 in Asia. In the USA, 103 reactors at 65 sites account for 20 percent of the nation’s energy needs. The last U.S. plant went online in 1996. Germany and Sweden are phasing out reactors. Finland is building one. France, which relies on nuclear plants for almost 80 percent of its electricity needs, has joined Italy and the United Kingdom in contemplating expansion.. Global warming. The IAEA says that electricity generation is responsible for about one-third of worldwide greenhouse gases. The use of emission-free nuclear power saves roughly 600 million tons of carbon emissions annually — twice what the unratified Kyoto treaty is designed to save. Total man-made annual greenhouse gas emissions are estimated at 27 billion tons; the USA accounts for 23 percent, followed by China at 14 percent.. A recent Massachusetts Institute of Technology study suggests nuclear power offers one of few realistic options to combat global warming. The only issue is the $1-billion-plus upfront cost of a new reactor..“ Nuclear power is not an economically competitive choice,” says MIT’s report, “The Future of Nuclear Power.” “Unlike other energy technologies, nuclear power requires significant government involvement because of safety, proliferation and waste concerns.”. Industry leaders admit they may need federal loan guarantees and investment tax credits during construction of the first of a new generation of reactors.. With a streamlined regulatory approval process, improved plant designs and construction timetables down to as little as four years — from 15 two decades ago — they believe start-up costs will come down dramatically. A new University of Chicago study found that “first-of-a-kind” engineering costs disappear by the time a third or fourth plant comes online. “ We have been working hard as an industry to try and bring the initial costs down,” says Angela Howard, executive director of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI).. Getting private financing to build plants is still almost impossible because of lingering safety fears from the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 and 1986 Chernobyl disaster. And safety is still a headache.. Four workers at a nuclear plant in Japan died recently after a cooling pipe burst. Two years ago, staff at the Davis-Besse plant near Toledo, Ohio, found a pineapple-size cavity in the reactor lid. NRC inspectors estimated the FirstEnergy facility was as close as 60 days to a major nuclear accident. FirstEnergy had to pay $400 million for repairs and upgrades..“ The Homer Simpsons at the plant weren’t doing their jobs,” says Charles Ferguson, scientist at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. “I don’t know if it’s indicative of the industry, but it’s still worrying.”. Assuming it is built and run properly, a plant’s financial performance is laudatory. A series of mergers and joint ventures has consolidated the industry into the hands of experienced managers, who have used economies of scale to cut costs and increase output by upgrading and extending the life of plants, according to an industry report by Moody’s Investors Service.. But many environmental groups want the government to give up on nuclear energy and embrace conservation. They accuse the Bush administration of ignoring renewable sources, such as wind, solar and hydrogen power cells, saying the NEI met with Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force 19 times — more than any other energy interest group..“ Every dollar invested in electric efficiency displaces between five and seven times as much carbon dioxide as each dollar invested in nuclear power, even assuming the significant advances in nuclear power technology,” says Kyle Datta, managing director of research at the Rocky Mountain Institute. “If climate change is the problem, nuclear power isn’t the solution. It’s simply too expensive. Wind-power-hydropower combinations provide the same firm baseload power as nuclear plants but at lower cost.”. Disposal of waste. Storage of the nation’s 70,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel, currently housed next to plant sites around the country, is emerging as an election-year debating point. Most experts agree that handling of nuclear waste has been solved technically with the long-proposed nuclear waste depository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. But a political consensus remains elusive: President Bush backs the plan; Sen. John Kerry, Bush’s Democratic challenger, rejects it as unsound.. Anti-nuclear groups say nuclear power reduces the nation’s security. In a new TV documentary, “Indian Point: Imagining the Unimaginable,” director and activist Rory Kennedy says that the Indian Point nuclear plant, 35 miles up the Hudson River from Midtown Manhattan, is vulnerable to an attack or accident.. Industry leaders say such talk is scare-mongering and that since the Sept. 11 attacks, more than $1 billion has been spent on security upgrades. The guard force stands at 8,000, up from 5,000 three years ago. However, a congressional report claims critical “force-on-force” mock attacks to test security at the plants will not be completed at all facilities until late 2007. NRC officials dispute this, saying the agency has increased inspection hours at the plants fivefold.. When talking about energy security, environmentalists often mention last summer’s blackout that left 50 million people in the Northeast and Midwest without electricity. “Nuclear power plants dislike sudden shutdowns and don’t restart gracefully,” Datta says. “They are the opposite of a peaking plant, guaranteed to be unavailable when they are the most needed.”.Ferguson acknowledges all energy options have drawbacks. “A revamping of our energy strategy is going to take serious leadership from above, and I mean the White House,” he says. © 2004, Quad-City Times [http://www.qctimes.com] , Davenport, ***************************************************************** 19 Reuters: Kansai Elec told to keep reactor shut for checks Sun Sep 26, 2004 11:47 PM ET TOKYO, Sept 27 (Reuters) - Japan's Kansai Electric Power Co. will not be allowed to restart an accident-hit nuclear power unit until the government confirms the company has met the required technical standards, the industry ministry said on Monday. The No. 3 generation unit at Kansai's Mihama plant in western Japan has been closed since August, when hot water and steam leaked from a broken pipe, killing five people in the worst accident at a nuclear power plant in Japan. The pipe had not been checked since the unit started operating in 1976 and several other pipes at the unit had also not been checked properly. "We issued the order because Kansai Electric's management looked loose to us," Naoki Kajita, an official from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, told a briefing. The ministry wants to confirm that the company has met standards covering pipe strength before the unit can restart, Kajita said. A spokesman for Kansai, Japan's second-biggest power producer, said the company would follow the order. Neither the ministry official nor the Kansai spokesman said how long the unit would stay closed. Kansai Electric has covered the shortfall in output since the accident by buying power from competitors and restarting two idled thermal power plants. ***************************************************************** 20 Newsday.com: Nuclear power plant shut down again for valve repair [September 27, 2004] BUCHANAN, N.Y. (AP) _ The Indian Point 2 nuclear power plant is back in service after being taken off-line for the third time this month because of valve problems. Entergy Nuclear Northeast, owner of Indian Point 2 and Indian Point 3 in Buchanan, said the reactor was shut down Friday and was back online Saturday. Indian Point 3 was not affected. Spokesman Jim Steets said different valves were involved in each of the three episodes and there was no apparent connection among them and no sign of sabotage. In each case, the plant was taken out of service safely and there was no release of radiation, he said. Steets said the valve that prompted Friday's shutdown regulated the flow of water to a steam generator. He said that although there appeared to be nothing in common in the valve failures, a scheduled shutdown of Indian Point 2 next month will give workers the opportunity to study them. "It behooves us to look at these valves to see if there's anything we can take from the three, anything we can learn from them," Steets said. Diane Screnci, a spokeswoman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said Monday that the commission's inspectors at Indian Point would make sure Entergy follows up on the valve problems. "What we expect is that the company not only address the issue as it is _ if something needs replacing your replace it _ but that you determine what the root cause is and take action that would prevent a recurrence," she said. The earlier shutdowns this month occurred on Sept. 1 and Sept. 15. Copyright © 2004, The Associated Press ***************************************************************** 21 ENN: U. of Chicago study finds nuclear power competitive with coal & natural gas [Environmental News Link] WASHINGTON (09/27/04) -- The University of Chicago has completed the first exhaustive study examining the economic competitiveness of nuclear power which concludes that the future costs of nuclear power production is comparable with gas and coal-based energy generation. The principal findings of the Chicago study demonstrate that future nuclear power plants in the United States can be competitive with either natural gas or coal. The study pointed out that the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for coal is $33 to $41 per MWh and $35 to $45 per MWh for gas-fired production, new nuclear plants would have costs of $31 to $46 per MWh once early plant costs are absorbed. Currently, nuclear power accounts for 20 percent of the nation's energy mix, second only to coal at 50 percent. Natural gas is a close third by meeting 17 percent of America's energy needs. The LCOE is the amount invested to cover operating costs plus annualized capital costs of operating a nuclear generating facility. "This study shows that nuclear power can be a competitive source of energy production in the future and will help meet our environmental goals," said Deputy Energy Secretary Kyle McSlarrow. "We appreciate the University of Chicago's exhaustive analyses." Expansion of nuclear power in the United States is a major objective of the Administration's National Energy Policy. In addition, the Department of Energy initiated the Nuclear Power 2010 program, a joint government-industry cost-shared effort involved with identifying sites for new nuclear power plants, developing advanced nuclear plant technologies, evaluating the business case for building new nuclear plants, and demonstrating untested regulatory processes. The study notes that the principal economic barrier to nuclear power will be the ability to address the elevated costs associated with building and operating the first few nuclear plants. Those early plant costs, which can include "first-of-a-kind" engineering costs and the elevated construction and financing expenses expected for the first U.S. nuclear plants initiated since the 1970's, disappear by the time a third or fourth plant comes online. The study also notes that the costs estimates for generating in the U.S. compare favorably to the cost of generating nuclear energy worldwide. The independent study, sponsored by the Department of Energy, was conducted by professors and students of the University of Chicago's Department of Economics with support from DOE's Argonne National Laboratory and reflects considerable contact with the investment community, the electric utility industry and other experts. The report is available from the DOE online [http://nuclear.gov/] Us [capitol@caprep.com] Cameron Park, California 95682 Telephone: (530) 676-9334 FAX: (530) 676-9387 Email: capitol@caprep.com [capitol@caprep.com] Copyright © 2004 Capitol Reports. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 22 thenews-messenger.com: Reports add to doubts about Davis-Besse, NRC - Monday, September 27, 2004 Our View Questions remain about the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station. Your view Let us know what you think. Information about getting your opinions published appears at the bottom of this page. EDITORIAL It's official, but hardly surprising. The extensive corrosion found on the reactor head at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station officially has been rated among the top five most serious accidents or near-accidents since Three Mile Island, according to a Nuclear Regulatory Commission report. NRC staff reported that there was a six in 1,000 chance that the plant could have had a meltdown in the year before it was shut down for routine maintenance in February 2002. The normal risk is six in 100,000, according to an NRC spokesman. Soon after the shutdown began, Davis-Besse workers discovered the corrosion on the reactor head. Leaking boric acid had eaten away a football-sized chunk of carbon steel, leaving only a thin layer of stainless steel to keep radioactive coolant water inside the reactor. Later still, investigators determined that the stainless steel cladding also was bulging at the spot of the corrosion, indicating that the intense pressure of the coolant water system was straining the spot. Now, in order for a meltdown to occur, other safety systems would have had to fail as well. But during the shutdown, investigators figured that an undersized sump in the containment building could have been clogged during an accident, possibly stopping the flow of water to cooling pumps. Richard Wilkins, a spokesman for Davis-Besse owner FirstEnergy, noted that the NRC analysis assumed that all pumps and safety systems would have failed, which is unlikely, according to an Associated Press report. In the past, we've been highly critical of the NRC and FirstEnergy for their response to the Davis-Besse problems and -- in some cases -- their comments that seemed to downplay the danger that the corrosion posed. In the AP story last week, Wilkins also said that the conditions at the plant were unacceptable. He's right, and we're happy that there's less of a spin being put on reports on the problems. In the meantime, another report last week found that the NRC has not done a good job in responding to lessons it learns from incidents like the one at Davis-Besse. The agency's report finds many of the same problems that were outlined in a review earlier this year from the General Accounting Office. Agency leaders had complained about the findings of the GAO report, but now are changing their tune. It's about time, but questions still remain about whether the NRC is capable of changing the way it operates. Originally published Monday, September 27, 2004 Copyright ©2004 The News-Messenger. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 USATODAY.com: Nuclear power slides back onto the agenda Posted 9/26/2004 10:17 PM Updated 9/26/2004 11:40 PM By Thor Valdmanis, USA NEW YORK — Reviled for more than a quarter of a century, nuclear energy is poised for a comeback. Soaring energy costs, worries about energy dependence and growing fears of global warming have combined to revive a once-doomed industry that remains the butt of pop-culture satire such as The Simpsons and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. The Davis-Besse nuclear power plant on the shore of Lake Erie near Port Clinton, Ohio. Three utility consortiums  Exelon, Entergy and Dominion Resources  recently filed early site applications with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for new plants  the first in nearly three decades. "We believe that a renaissance has begun," says Michael Wallace, president of generation at Baltimore-based Constellation Energy, operator of five nuclear reactors and part of the Exelon consortium. "While environmentalists are not advocates (of nuclear power), they are not the detractors that they once were eight or 10 years ago." Not everyone is as sanguine about the prospect of new reactors being built, possibly as early as 2010. Anti-nuclear groups argue new plants would be prohibitively expensive, generate radioactive waste, risk catastrophic meltdown and be terrorist targets. CEO uses warheads to power U.S. homes By Thor Valdmanis, USA TODAY NEW YORK — William "Nick" Timbers has a dream: a world full of commercial nuclear power plants powered by excess nuclear warheads. For the CEO of USEC, a company that traces its roots to the Manhattan Project, the vision is heavy with irony. But Timbers is making it happen. As the world's sole supplier of nuclear fuel from old Soviet warheads, USEC helps power one in 10 homes and businesses in the nation. Since the government-sanctioned "Megatons to Megawatts" program launched in 1993, USEC has spent almost $4 billion buying nuclear material from about 9,000 Russian nuclear warheads. By the time the program ends in 2013, USEC will have spent $8 billion, eliminating 20,000 warheads — most of which were once pointed at the USA. The program provides jobs for Russian nuclear engineers, who if not gainfully employed might be tempted to sell their expertise to rogue nations such as Iran and North Korea. The engineers remove the highly enriched uranium from warheads and dilute it until suitable for use as reactor fuel — an irreversible process. The fuel is loaded into 2 1/2-ton steel containers for a land journey to St. Petersburg. From there, it is shipped to USEC's plant in Paducah, Ky. USEC then sells the fuel to its utility customers. Not a penny of U.S. taxpayer money is used. "People are always amazed at how large and successful this project is," Timbers says. "And the question is: 'Why don't you do more of it?' " Now, Timbers, 54, is pressing government policymakers and industry leaders to embrace his vision and build a new generation of plants that would consume increasing amounts of weapons-derived fuel. While conceding the need for a diverse portfolio of energy resources, Timbers believes new warhead-consuming reactors could help governments reduce their nuclear stockpiles, reduce the threat of nuclear terrorism and enhance domestic energy security. "In recognition of this 'swords to plowshares' goal," Timbers told British and American business executives in London earlier this month, "We call it the Isaiah Project." "These reactors are pre-positioned weapons of mass destruction, and it is about time the government treated them as such and shut them down," says Greenpeace nuclear policy analyst Jim Riccio. But with record energy costs and global electricity consumption expected to double by 2020  including a 40% jump in the USA  the future of nuclear power is popping up on political agendas around the world. The threats of global warming, nuclear proliferation and terrorism amplify the debate. "I suspect in the next 10 years, we'll see one or more new nuclear plants being constructed here," says William "Nick" Timbers, CEO of USEC, the world's sole supplier of nuclear fuel from old Soviet warheads. Polls suggest nuclear power is becoming more palatable as the public tires of turmoil in the oil-rich Middle East. In March, a Gallup Poll found 56% of Americans favored nuclear energy, up from 46% three years earlier. But only 37% backed building a nuclear plant in their area. Many in the scientific community believe it would be a mistake to omit nuclear power from initiatives to limit reliance on oil, natural gas and coal, and to reduce carbon dioxide emissions; they say it should be considered along with efforts to increase energy efficiency and expand use of renewable energy sources, such as hydro, wind and solar power. "Deciding to pull the trigger on a nuclear plant is difficult because no one knows where energy prices are going to be in five years," says Bob Bellemare, CEO of energy consulting firm Utilipoint International. "The good news about nuclear energy for customers is that its cost is very predictable year-to-year." Celebrated in the 1960s as an energy source that was too cheap to meter, 442 nuclear plants today produce about one-sixth of the world's power, says the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations' nuclear watchdog. An additional 27 are under construction: 18 in Asia. In the USA, 103 reactors at 65 sites account for 20% of the nation's energy needs. The last U.S. plant went online in 1996. Germany and Sweden are phasing out reactors. Finland is building one. France, which relies on nuclear plants for almost 80% of its electricity needs, has joined Italy and the United Kingdom in contemplating expansion. Global warming The IAEA says that electricity generation is responsible for about one-third of worldwide greenhouse gases. The use of emission-free nuclear power saves roughly 600 million tons of carbon emissions annually  twice what the unratified Kyoto treaty is designed to save. Total man-made annual greenhouse gas emissions are estimated at 27 billion tons; the USA accounts for 23%, followed by China at 14%. A recent Massachusetts Institute of Technology study suggests nuclear power offers one of few realistic options to combat global warming. The only issue is the $1-billion-plus upfront cost of a new reactor. "Nuclear power is not an economically competitive choice," says MIT's report, "The Future of Nuclear Power." "Unlike other energy technologies, nuclear power requires significant government involvement because of safety, proliferation and waste concerns." Industry leaders admit they may need federal loan guarantees and investment tax credits during construction of the first of a new generation of reactors. With a streamlined regulatory approval process, improved plant designs and construction timetables down to as little as four years  from 15 two decades ago  they believe start-up costs will come down dramatically. A new University of Chicago study found that "first-of-a-kind" engineering costs disappear by the time a third or fourth plant comes online. "We have been working hard as an industry to try and bring the initial costs down," says Angela Howard, executive director of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). Getting private financing to build plants is still almost impossible because of lingering safety fears from the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 and 1986 Chernobyl disaster. And safety is still a headache. Four workers at a nuclear plant in Japan died recently after a cooling pipe burst. Two years ago, staff at the Davis-Besse plant near Toledo, Ohio, found a pineapple-size cavity in the reactor lid. NRC inspectors estimated the FirstEnergy facility was as close as 60 days to a major nuclear accident. FirstEnergy had to pay $400 million for repairs and upgrades. "The Homer Simpsons at the plant weren't doing their jobs," says Charles Ferguson, scientist at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. "I don't know if it's indicative of the industry, but it's still worrying." Assuming it is built and run properly, a plant's financial performance is laudatory. A series of mergers and joint ventures has consolidated the industry into the hands of experienced managers, who have used economies of scale to cut costs and increase output by upgrading and extending the life of plants, according to an industry report by Moody's Investors Service. But many environmental groups want the government to give up on nuclear energy and embrace conservation. They accuse the Bush administration of ignoring renewable sources, such as wind, solar and hydrogen power cells, saying the NEI met with Vice President Cheney's energy task force 19 times  more than any other energy interest group. "Every dollar invested in electric efficiency displaces between five and seven times as much carbon dioxide as each dollar invested in nuclear power, even assuming the significant advances in nuclear power technology," says Kyle Datta, managing director of research at the Rocky Mountain Institute. "If climate change is the problem, nuclear power isn't the solution. It's simply too expensive. Wind-power-hydropower combinations provide the same firm baseload power as nuclear plants but at lower cost." Disposal of waste Storage of the nation's 70,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel, currently housed next to plant sites around the country, is emerging as an election-year debating point. Most experts agree that handling of nuclear waste has been solved technically with the long-proposed nuclear waste depository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. But a political consensus remains elusive: President Bush backs the plan; Sen. John Kerry, Bush's Democratic challenger, rejects it as unsound. Anti-nuclear groups say nuclear power reduces the nation's security. In a new TV documentary, Indian Point: Imagining the Unimaginable, director and activist Rory Kennedy says that the Indian Point nuclear plant, 35 miles up the Hudson River from Midtown Manhattan, is vulnerable to an attack or accident. Industry leaders say such talk is scare-mongering and that since the Sept. 11 attacks, more than $1 billion has been spent on security upgrades. The guard force stands at 8,000, up from 5,000 three years ago. However, a congressional report claims critical "force-on-force" mock attacks to test security at the plants will not be completed at all facilities until late 2007. NRC officials dispute this, saying the agency has increased inspection hours at the plants fivefold. When talking about energy security, environmentalists often mention last summer's blackout that left 50 million people in the Northeast and Midwest without electricity. "Nuclear power plants dislike sudden shutdowns and don't restart gracefully," Datta says. "They are the opposite of a peaking plant, guaranteed to be unavailable when they are the most needed." Ferguson acknowledges all energy options have drawbacks. "A revamping of our energy strategy is going to take serious leadership from above, and I mean the White House," he says. Nuclear power slides back onto the agenda9/26/2004 11:40 PMBy Thor Valdmanis, USA TODAYNEW YORKThe Davis-Besse nuclear power plant on the shore of Lake Erie near Port Clinton, Ohio.--> © Copyright 2004 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. ***************************************************************** 24 Washington Times: Contaminants threaten Iraqis Briefings - September 27, 2004 Zarocostas in Geneva recently interviewed Pekka Haavisto, 46, a former Finnish environment minister who now chairs the U.N. Environment Program's post-conflict environmental-assessments task force on Iraq. Question: Your agency recently announced a new project with the Iraqi government to help clean up some contaminated sites in Iraq from recent wars and conflicts. What are the priorities? Answer: This has now been approved by the Iraq Trust Fund in Amman [Jordan], which is the main channel for the donor community to address the urgent problems in Iraq, and we are very happy that the environment is looked upon as a priority issue. ***************************************************************** 25 BBC: Kyrgyzstan 'foils plutonium plot' Last Updated: Monday, 27 September, 2004 By Ian MacWilliam BBC correspondent in Central Asia [Map of Kyrgyzstan] Authorities in Kyrgyzstan say they have arrested two men who were trying to sell a large quantity of plutonium on the black market. The men were detained last week near the capital, Bishkek, but the news was not immediately released. There has been growing concern that radioactive materials from former Soviet military or research sites could fall into the hands of extremists. Plutonium is very toxic and can be used in atomic weapons or as reactor fuel. The highly radioactive material could be used to make a dirty bomb - a non-nuclear explosive which scatters radioactive material packed inside it. Concern The national security service in the remote mountainous republic says it arrested two Kyrgyz citizens and confiscated 60 small containers containing plutonium-239. There is no information on exactly what quantity of plutonium was in the containers. Kyrgyz security agents tracked the men who were attempting to sell the plutonium and arrested them while posing as buyers. The origin of the material is unknown. Security officials say it is not used in Kyrgyzstan, so they think it may have come from one of the neighbouring republics or from Russia. Earlier this year, another man was arrested in Kyrgyzstan attempting to sell a quantity of caesium-137, another highly radioactive substance. This came from a Soviet-era military establishment in the south of the country. There has been growing international concern about the quantities of unguarded or poorly guarded radioactive material left behind in Central Asia by the Soviet military establishment. Uranium was extensively mined in Kyrgyzstan in Soviet days and there are many sites where radioactive tailings are still stored. On a number of occasions scrap metal from Kyrgyzstan sold to Chinese companies has been turned back at the border because of its high radioactivity. ***************************************************************** 26 china daily: New test will monitor ailing British Gulf veterans for uranium [http://sms.chinadaily.com.cn] | Updated: 2004-09-27 10:22 Depleted uranium is used in armour-piercing shells (BBC) Britain is to test thousands of veterans of the 1991 Gulf War who have suffered a range of unexplained ailments for the possible presence of depleted uranium in their bodies, a report said. Four clinics will undertake the tests in a attempt to explain so-called Gulf War Syndrome. Both British and US forces in the conflict used armour-piercing shells tipped with depleted uranium, and veterans' groups have long argued that radioactive dust from the shells could have caused illnesses. However previous British tests have failed to establish a link, although some of the research has been condemned as unreliable. Britain's Ministry of Defence is set to announce the establishment of four specialist screening centres where Gulf veterans, as well as soldiers who served in the 1999 Kosovo war, where the uranium shells were also used, can be properly tested. David Coggan, the scientist overseeing the programme, told reporters that the new tests would be able to detect any amounts of depleted uranium in veterans' urine sufficient to cause ill-health. The tests would be sufficiently "sensitive and accurate" to uncover even "tiny traces" of uranium, he said. Around 5,000 British troops have complained of experiencing a range of mysterious maladies after taking part in the Gulf War, in which British troops joined a US-led campaign to liberate Kuwait, invaded the previous August by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Common symptoms -- also reported by many American veterans -- include neurological problems, headaches, depression, weakness, joint and muscle pain, rashes and shortness of breath. Veterans' groups have slammed the British government's response to the situation as insufficient and demanded a public inquiry. Vocabulary: depleted : no longer sufficient£¨²»×ãµÄ£¬Æ¶·¦µÄ£© depleted uranium (DU): uranium which has had most of the fissile isotope U-235 and the highly radioactive but rare isotope U-234 removed, and consists of mostly U-238. The U-235 is concentrated into enriched uranium through the process of isotope separation for use in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons. The remaining U-238 is 60% as radioactive as natural uranium. It is waste material from this enrichment process. During the Manhattan Project depleted uranium had the codename tuballoy, a term that is still occasionally used. Uranium is mined mainly for its U-235 content, so the excess U-238 can be obtained cheaply and is used for its extremely high density, only slightly less than that of tungsten. £¨Æ¶ÓË£© oversee: to watch over and direct; supervise£¨¿´¹Ü¡¢Ö¸µ¼¡¢¼à¶½£© neurological: of or relating to or used in or practicing neurology£¨Éñ¾­²¡Ñ§µÄ£© Copyright by chinadaily.com.cn. All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 27 Japan Today: Ibaraki town still shaken 5 years after nuclear accident http://www.japantoday.com/] Keiji Hirano TOKAIMURA — A nuclear fuel processing facility, at which a fatal accident took place five years ago, is to be demolished, despite calls for preserving it as evidence to pass down memories of the tragedy. Japan's first critical accident in the village of Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture, on Sept 30, 1999, killed two workers at JCO Co, a nuclear fuel processor, and exposed hundreds of people to radiation. Read more... ***************************************************************** 28 NBC Newschannel 6: MEETING ABOUT RADIATION POISONING EXPERIENCES Sep 27, 2004 A panel from the National Academy of Sciences schedules a meeting in Idaho to hear from residents about their experiences with radiation poisoning. Those residents want the federal government to extend its compensation program to Idaho residents. Currently, only residents with certain kinds of cancers who lived in Southern Utah, Nevada and Arizona during testing qualify for a $50,000 dollar payment under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. A national cancer institute study found that four Idaho counties: Blaine, Gem, Custer and Lemhi received some of the highest levels of iodine-131, one of the radioactive elements released by the tests. The meeting is set for November sixth in Boise. The board has already received about 450 messages from Idaho residents. That's on top of the letters, faxes, and e-mails that have been forwarded by the state's congressional delegation. ©Copyright 2004 Oregon Trail Broadcasting KPVI ***************************************************************** 29 Hawk Eye: Shouldn't 'count on a nickel' thehawkeye.com Monday, September 27, 2004, By MATTHEW LeBLANC mleblanc@thehawkeye.com [mleblanc@thehawkeye.com] The Department of Energy in August ordered a Texas–based weapons manufacturer not to contest workers' compensation claims filed by ailing former Iowa Army Ammunition Plant employees, sending waves of optimism through the hundreds of former nuclear weapons workers who have yet to be paid under a program designed to compensate them. Also in August, a policy analyst with a government watchdog group warned that the order would be unlikely to bring compensation payments to any of the more than 600 workers who have filed claims under the program. Now, one month after Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said his agency would do "all it can to make sure those who deserve compensation receive it as quickly as possible," Sen. Charles Grassley has expressed skepticism over whether the move will make a difference. In a letter to Abraham sent last week, the Iowa Republican asked Energy officials to outline the change in more detail. "This is the bottom line: Is this going to help deserving Iowans receive compensation quicker?" Grassley said in a prepared statement. "I want to make sure that the Energy Department hasn't just put out a press release, but actually done their research to make sure this works." The Energy plan makes BWXT–Pantex, which operates an Amarillo, Texas–based sister plant to IAAP, unable to contest state workers' compensation claims filed in Iowa. The move makes Pantex a "willing payer" through which claims can be processed under a federal program, a necessary item the Iowa plant lacked prior to the August announcement. The contractor responsible for the operations that sickened the workers — Mason and Hanger–Silas Mason — no longer exists, leaving the Middletown plant's workers without a willing payer responsible for claims deemed valid by a team of government doctors. Since a willing payer had not been identified, the Iowa claims had been moved back in the processing queue to allow DOE contractor employees with an identified willing payer a chance to have their applications processed more quickly. Richard Miller, a senior policy analyst with watchdog group Government Accountability Project, said shortly after the willing payer announcement was made that payment to any former IAAP worker is unlikely. A similar plan to designate a third–party willing payer in Colorado failed after a confusing debate among insurance companies and contractors over whether and what amounts to pay workers. "No one should count on a nickel any time soon from this DOE announcement," Miller said. Grassley, in his letter to Abraham, asked for specifics including whether the state of Iowa has been alerted to the change, whether the Energy Department will pay for Pantex's legal costs should it choose to contest the move and the total estimated cost of paying compensation claims. He requests the information by Oct. 8. "I want results for these Iowans, and I want to make sure the Department of Energy has all their ducks in a row," Grassley said. The letter comes on the heels of a continuing debate in Congress over whether to overhaul the compensation program, passed in 2000 to pay workers who were injured as a result of their work in Energy plants. Workers at IAAP built, test–fired and disassembled components of nuclear weapons from the 1940s to the mid–1970s. The work has been linked to cancers and lung diseases in former workers. A House conference committee is expected to hear arguments about whether to move control of the compensation program from the Energy Department to the Department of Labor, which has handled compensation claims successfully in the past. [http://www.thehawkeye.com/weekly/weekend.html] The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 · 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · webmaster@thehawkeye.com [webmaster@thehawkeye.com] ***************************************************************** 30 Columbus Dispatch: Armor Toxic To Troops, Ex-Officer Says [http://www.dispatch.com/] U.S. military's use of depleted uranium in 3 wars criticized By Suzanne Hoholik Sunday, September 26, 2004 The Columbus Dispatch The protective suit he wore when he handled depleted uranium during the 1991 Gulf War wasn't enough, said retired U.S. Army Maj. Doug Rokke. He has cataracts, takes two medications a day for respiratory problems and uses a salve on the rashes that cover his body. As former director of the Army's depleted-uranium project, it was his job to clean up destroyed tanks clad in the dangerous metal and ship the scraps back to the United States for full decontamination. The military uses depleted uranium as armor on tanks to protect the troops inside. Depleted uranium is also used in armor-piercing ammunition. It was used during the Gulf War, in the Balkans and in the current war with Iraq. Rokke said what's not cleaned up contaminates the air, water and soil in those countries. "It's America's dirty bomb,'' said Rokke, who was one of the speakers yesterday at a conference at Columbus State Community College called "Red Alert: Nuclear Dollars vs. The Common Good.'' About 30 people attended the conference. Rokke blames the radioactive metal for various cancers and respiratory problems, as well as the deaths of Gulf War veterans and deformities among their children. "There's no way they're going to give this up,'' he said. "It's absolutely effective.'' Not everyone agrees that its use is so dangerous. Contacted at his home near Los Angeles, Robert G. Williscroft, a former Navy submarine officer who specialized in nuclear weapons, said uranium is abundant in the Earth's crust and is not harmful to soldiers or their families. "He's absolutely lying through his teeth when he says it will hurt children, cause cancers and deformities,'' Williscroft said. "That's total malarkey. It's not dangerous and no credible scientist would admit to it. "There simply isn't any evidence anywhere going on 80 years.'' Some studies have suggested a connection. In 2002, the Royal Society, Britain's academy of scientists, reported that troops who served in the Persian Gulf and Balkans could suffer kidney damage from the depleted-uranium munitions that were used if they swallowed or inhaled enough of the dust. Bonnie Awan, of Columbus, organized yesterday's conference. She said the world is "getting smaller'' and the public needs to care about the issue. "Is it an effective weapon when you kill innocent civilians and your own soldiers?'' she asked. Jack Byrum, a science teacher at Independence High School, attended the conference. "I was shocked,'' he said of Rokke's talk. "I had no idea to what extent it's being used.'' Rokke said the problem isn't just half a world away, but here in the United States. He said the danger exists at a weapons plant in Indiana and a former weapons plant in Piketon. "We're building them, we're testing them right here,'' he said. "People are sick building these.'' Williscroft said workers could be sick for other reasons. "There simply isn't a shred of evidence that it causes any harm at all,'' he said. "Any heavy metal you get in your system causes problems. They're all toxic. But lead is more toxic than depleted uranium.'' shoholik@dispatch.com [shoholik@dispatch.com] ***************************************************************** 31 Pocatello Idaho State Journal: Test fallout After reading the Sept. 7 article in the Idaho State Journal concerning Valerie Brown and others, and thyroid cancer, I believe it would be less than honest not to relate my experience while employed at the "Site." In the early days at the site, routine urine analysis samples were required of all employees whose work involved dealing with radioactivity. On one occasion I provided the sample of urine. Several days later I was asked to provide another sample. Some time later I was asked for another sample. Since no explanation was offered, I asked my supervisor, Dr. James Rein, what was going on. He investigated and found out that my urine contained a radioisotope not present at the site. The most likely source was from the Nevada test site, although worldwide fallout could possibly be responsible. My parents who lived on Cottage Avenue north of Pocatello always grew a large garden, and my family enjoyed the fruits of their labor. Radioactive fallout upon the garden was probably the source of my contamination. Talk among site employees at the time was that smears of some automobiles in Idaho Falls yielded positive results for radiation. In the recent past I had the physical examination arranged by PACE. The only item noted was decreased lung capacity. One of our sons was born in 1965, with birth defects. - Fred W. Dykes, Pocatello Copyright © 2004 Pocatello Idaho State Journal P O Box 431 Pocatello, ID 83204-0431 ***************************************************************** 32 BBC: North set for nuclear opportunity Last Updated: Monday, 27 September, 2004 [Nuclear fuel flasks] The nuclear industry produces tonnes of spent waste Marine, offshore and engineering industries in the north-east of England could benefit from major new markets opening up across the country. The government announced plans last year to start a decommissioning programme of ageing nuclear reactors. Regional development agency One NorthEast is working to help local firms identify market opportunities. It is joining forces with the British Nuclear Energy Society (BNES) on Monday to promote potential business. Access markets The two organisations will host an event at Newcastle Civic Centre to examine the future of the industry. The BNES, which brings together scientists and engineers to exchange best practice, is also launching a new North East branch. The safe clean-up of more than 22 civil nuclear sites across the UK could be worth £48bn over the next 50 years and One NorthEast says the region's track record in offshore marine and chemicals means it is well placed to benefit. David Allison, One NorthEast director of business and industry, said: "North East firms have shown that they have the ability to successfully execute multi-partner contracts and effectively deliver projects. "It is our job to help the firms access these markets and prepare them with any additional skills or learning they may need." ***************************************************************** 33 Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Bush hasn't lied on Yucca dump, rationale for war Today: September 27, 2004 at 9:01:16 PDT This is in response to the Aug. 29 letter from Della Press, "Bush doesn't deserve support for re-election." It has been pointed out many times, in many different media, that what President Bush actually promised Gov. Kenny Guinn was that he would not make Nevada a nuclear waste site until he had heard all the scientific facts. He did not tell a lie. He also did not lie about WMD. He made his decisions based on the intelligence he had before him. It was bad intelligence, yes, but he did not know that at the time. Also, if Ms. Press had read the local papers in 2001 when the No Child Left Behind Act was signed, she would have learned that the act did provide funding -- $41.1 billion for fiscal year 2003-2004. She should already know that the U.S. Constitution does not designate an education role for the federal government. Responsibility for K-12 secondary education falls to the states. Since the government has a vested interest in the quality of education, however, it has provided assistance to the states where possible. Finally, I defy Ms. Press to show me one example where President Bush has indicated he is "worried about what John Kerry did during the Vietnam War," as she stated. When he was asked about Mr. Kerry's service in Vietnam, he responded that he "believed he served honorably in a very unpopular war." RICHARD ST. JOHN ***************************************************************** 34 Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Store nuke waste where it is made Jim Raleigh was incorrect on a few comments in his Sept 16 letter, "Feds, not plants, own nuke waste." He was correct when he said the federal government owns the nuclear waste. Another way to say this, however, is that the American people were sold out when Congress gave them the liability of nuclear waste storage. Who has responsibility for the ashes in a coal-fired power plant? Certainly not the American people. He was wrong when he said that the $23 billion to $25 billion in surcharges paid so far by ratepayers was for the development of a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. The surcharge was for storage. Yucca Mountain, selected by Congress in 1987 in the so-called "screw Nevada bill" as the only site in the nation to be considered for nuclear waste storage, was a political sellout. What was scientific in selecting only one site, and that in a politically weak state? It was politics then and it is politics now! Nuclear waste should remain where it is -- in dry cask storage. Why risk accidents and terrorism in transporting this toxic waste? As far as the state reaping federal benefits in exchange for storing it, I ask: Benefits? What benefits? Thyroid cancer? FRANK PERNA ***************************************************************** 35 Nevada Appeal - Opinion: Keeping the Yucca watchdog fed September 26, 2004 With higher taxes and a galloping economy, the Nevada Legislature next year expects to be in the happy position of having plenty of money for its two-year budget. A good investment would be continued oversight of the Department of Energy's work on the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission recently turned down a request from Nevada's Nuclear Projects Office for a $13.75 million grant. At a time the state needs to step up its efforts, the amount of money available to Bob Loux and his watchdogs has been dwindling. That money usually comes from Congress, which promised to provide adequate money for the state to monitor independently the research into Yucca Mountain's suitability as a waste-disposal site. The state may now need to increase its share, or risk losing some of its credibility in the scientific debate. There is no doubt the Nevada watchdogs have done important work over the years. Their research and analysis has repeatedly exposed flaws and deficiencies in the Energy Department's conclusions. It's not enough to cry "foul" in the political arena - Nevada needs the facts to back up its claims. Although a solid majority of Nevadans still opposes the Yucca project, recent polls have shown an increase in the number of Nevadans willing to "negotiate" the issue. Last week, Carson City Assemblyman Ron Knecht told a forum audience that "Yucca Mountain is probably as good a place as any for nuclear storage." The truth or falsity of that statement relies entirely on the performance of waste-storage containers - something scientists admitted last week they still can't predict. We're not prepared to stand aside to let the Energy Department carry on, given its record on safety issues such as the exposure of Yucca workers to silica dust, only to find out years from now just how wrong it could be. All contents © Copyright 2004 nevadaappeal.com Nevada Appeal - 580 Mallory Way - Carson City, NV 89701 ***************************************************************** 36 Ealing Times: Decision Halts Incinerator [http://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk] By Rachel Sharp CAMPAIGNERS against the incinerator planned at Colnbrook have won a small reprieve. Councillors from the West London Waste Authority (WLWA) have voted to go out to tender, rather than sign a lucrative contract immediately. Campaigners say the incinerator, would spread radioactive waste across a 17-mile radius, including Ealing. For the planned incinerator to go ahead, the company building it, Grundon Waste Management, need contracts from the six London boroughs through the WLWA to agree to dispose of their waste. But at a meeting on Friday, September 17th, councillors on the WLWA voted for a compromise. The contract would have been for 100,000 tones of waste a year for the next 20 years to be burnt by Grundon. But the councillors agreed, by a majority of four to two, to go out to tender to dispose of 100,000 tonnes of waste for a shorter period. Cllr John Delaney (Ealing, Labour), was one of the councillors in favour of the compromise contract. Bill Perry, campaigner for SAIN (Slough Anti-Incinerator Network) said: "This represents a sensible compromise. We are still very unhappy about West London Waste signing contracts before they have even drafted their waste strategy. But they are now embracing more sustainable methods of waste methods which avoid the air pollution and health risks associated with incineration." Margaret Salasidis, waste campaigner for West London Friends of the Earth, said: "We have recently heard a major speech by Tony Blair where he talked about the huge threat of climate change. But the proposed incinerator at Colnbrook would pump out vast quantities of greenhouse gases, accelerating climate change. "Perhaps some at least some of the councillors were mindful of his comments when they took the vote on Friday." Grundon did not wish to comment. 12:18pm Monday 27th September 2004 Privacy Policy © Copyright 2001-2004 Newsquest Media Group - A ***************************************************************** 37 The Australian: Nelson slams nuclear 'hysteria' [September 28, 2004] [http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/ SPECULATION about potential nuclear waste dump sites was being whipped up into hysteria for political purposes, Science Minister Brendan Nelson said today. Dr Nelson said it would be at least two years before an examination of potential sites for a low level nuclear waste dump was completed. His comments followed renewed speculation that a list of potential sites had been chosen and criticism from the New South Wales Government of the selection process. "What it means, obviously, is that we naturally would, over the next couple of years, be examining whatever commonwealth sites we have," Dr Nelson said on ABC radio. "We'll also be looking at offshore sites for it. "If we begin the process from scratch, it will take the best part, I would think, of about two years to actually go through the necessary processes to find an appropriate site for it. "But the kind of hysteria which is being whipped up for purely political reasons, which I think borders on obscene by some of the political players including the states, I think does a great injustice to our need to care for this and look after this nuclear waste, which is produced for our human and industrial purposes." NSW Environment Minister Bob Debus complained that the NSW public did not know what the commonwealth strategies were and did not have any sensible dialogue with the Commonwealth on the issue. "None of these things are known to us and the NSW Government has got no choice but to oppose the establishment of a waste facility in this state, to oppose the transportation of NSW waste and, in the meantime, to ask at the very least that there is a sensible dialogue and some honesty about it all," he said. privacy terms © The Australian ***************************************************************** 38 AU ABC: Govt dismisses nuclear waste dump site list [http://abc.net.au/] [ABC Utilities Navigation Bar] Tuesday, 28 September 2004 The Federal Government has denied claims it is considering up to 22 different sites around Australia for a nuclear waste dump after abandoning plans for one at Woomera in South Australia. The Sydney Morning Herald newspaper has reported that the National Store Advisory Committee has drawn up a list of sites for a low-level dump which includes nine possible locations in New South Wales. A spokeswoman for the Science Minister Peter McGauran says that list is now obsolete. The spokeswoman says the Federal Government is considering what it calls a "co-location" facility to store Commonwealth waste but that all states and territories will now have to store their own waste. Four potential sites were also identified in the Northern Territory, three in the ACT and two each in Queensland, South Australia and Victoria. [ more news ] Last Updated: 7:42:00 AM (AEST) [http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm] ***************************************************************** 39 AU ABC: Govt asked to explain nuclear waste dump plan . 28/09/2004. ABC News Online [http://www.abc.net.au/] [The Federal Government says the list is obsolete.] Govt asked to explain nuclear waste dump plan The New South Wales Government is calling on the Federal Government to come clean ahead of the election on its plans for storing nuclear waste, now that it has abandoned plans for Woomera in South Australia. Claims have resurfaced that the Federal Government has a secret list of up to 22 sites for a nuclear waste dump. The list, including up to nine possible locations in New South Wales for a low-level dump, was compiled last year by the National Store Advisory Committee. New South Wales Environment Minister Bob Debus says voters deserve an explanation. "Do they mean to build a permanent nuclear waste storage facility at Lucas Heights, or in Jervis Bay?" he said. New South Wales Greens MP Ian Cohen says he will be introducing a private members bill to prohibit the storage and transport of nuclear waste in the State. Four potential sites were also identified in the Northern Territory, three in the ACT and two each in Queensland, South Australia and Victoria. Federal Education, Science and Training Minister Brendan Nelson told Sky News that the states would have to find their own sites to store waste and that the Federal Government was still looking for a site. "None of the sites [on the list] are being considered at all," he said. Federal Science Minister Peter McGauran says that the list is obsolete. "We've started all over again, we're only at the very earliest stage of looking for an entirely different kind of facility," he said. [http://www.abc.net.au] © 2004 Australian Broadcasting Corporation ***************************************************************** 40 IAEA: Nuclear Fuel Cycle at Centre of IAEA Scientific Forum + [IAEA.ORG :: Atoms for Peace] Nobel Laureate Carlo Rubbia Calls for "New Methods, New Ideas" IAEA General Conference 21 September 2004 [Carlo Rubbia] Carlo Rubbia delivering his opening statement at the IAEA Scientific Forum. (Photo credit: D. Calma/IAEA) + Story Resources + IAEA Director General Statement + Carlo Rubbia [http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1984/rubbia-autobio.html ] + Scientific Forum Pages Leading experts, including Nobel Prize winner Carlo Rubbia, opened the IAEA Scientific Forum this morning. The focus of the two-day session is on the nuclear fuel cycle - including presentations on advanced fuel cycles and reactor concepts, waste management issues and the research reactor fuel cycle. Prof. Rubbia, winner of the 1984 Nobel Prize for physics, and President of Italy´s nuclear energy agency (ENEA), urged research into new sources of energy. He said new methods and new ideas were needed in order to harness, on a vast scale, the immense potentials of nuclear energy. Prof. Rubbia outlined a scenario where it was no longer necessary to enrich uranium, now needed to fuel nuclear power plants; and where the highly radioactive nuclear waste produced by power plants would be entirely recycled. "In these conditions, the totality of the fuel is burnt and the energy extracted from a given supply of natural element could be about two hundreds times larger than the one presently in use," Prof. Rubbia said. Prof. Rubbia also spoke of a "far fetched future" where an ultimate nuclear energy, void of radioactivity could be exploited. "Radioactivity is one of the main shortcomings of nuclear energy... There are several exothermic reactions which produce no neutrons, neither directly nor indirectly through secondary reactions. Since neutrons are the primary sources of activation, their absence will be a tremendous asset, making the process inherently ´clean´," he said. In his welcoming remarks to the Forum, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei also emphasized the need for technological and institutional innovation. "For nuclear power to be sustainable as a global source of emission-free energy, the reactor fuel cycle must also remain sustainable." See the Director General´s full statement under Story Resources for more. Tomorrow´s Scientific Forum session will cover research reactors, including HEU fuel issues, utilization, decommissioning, and spent fuel management. Copyright 2003-2004, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: Official.Mail@iaea.org [Official.Mail@iaea.org] Disclaimer ***************************************************************** 41 Annan Urges Nations To Ratify Nuke Test-Ban Treaty Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 00:11:43 -0500 (CDT) http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0409/S00297.htm Annan Urges Nations To Ratify Nuke Test-Ban Treaty Friday, 24 September 2004, 12:23 pm Press Release: United Nations Annan urges remaining countries to sign and ratify nuclear test-ban treaty Welcoming today's statement of 42 countries in support of the global pact banning nuclear tests, Secretary-General Kofi Annan has urged those countries which have not yet signed or ratified the treaty to do so immediately so that it takes effect. The Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) is still not in force, seven years after it was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in a bid to bring to an end half a century of nuclear testing. The CTBT contains an international monitoring system, unannounced on-site inspections and other verification provisions to ensure countries comply with the convention. So far 172 nations have signed the CTBT and 116 have ratified it, but it will not have force until all 44 States which have nuclear power or research reactors have ratified it. Only 12 of those States have not ratified: China, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Egypt, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, the United States and Viet Nam. In a message to the launch of the joint ministerial statement of the 42 nations, delivered on his behalf by Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs Nobuyasu Abe, Mr. Annan said the longer the treaty's entry into force "is delayed, the more likely that nuclear testing will resume. "Were this to happen, it would be a major setback in non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament efforts. In the era in which we live, we cannot afford such a setback." Home Page | International | Previous Story | Next Story Copyright (c) Scoop Media ***************************************************************** 42 asahi.com: EDITORIAL:Nuclear nonproliferation The black market can no longer be ignored. ``We obtained all of our uranium-related materials and technology from the black market. There is a virtual underground supermarket out there, selling most anything you could possibly need.'' So said Abdulrahman Shalgham, foreign minister of Libya, in a recent interview with The Asahi Shimbun. Last December Libya declared it would junk its nuclear development program. That announcement has obviously made it easier for the Libyans to discuss their history of nuclear involvement to date, with Shalgham's admissions underscoring the degree to which the black market for nukes is corrupting the world. Libya was not the only black market shopper. Investigations by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reveal that North Korea and Iran have also been active in the smuggling of uranium enrichment-related parts. This goes to show that the threat of terrorists planning a ``nuclear 9/11'' with technology and raw materials acquired from the black market is no longer the stuff of science fiction fantasy. The goals of the nuclear nonproliferation movement include halting the spread of nukes to nonnuclear countries and reducing the atomic stockpiles of existing nuclear powers. But increasingly these efforts are being met with resistance and confusion. What should be done to head off this mounting crisis? To help prevent the situation from worsening, we offer three proposals. First, there should be a bigger push to promote implementation of Resolution No. 1540, adopted by the United Nations Security Council in April, which seeks to halt trafficking in weapons of mass destruction (WMD). This resolution demands that U.N. member countries criminalize the proliferation of nuclear arms and other WMD while implementing export control systems to root out illicit sales of such weapons. In practice, the industrialized countries have introduced a license system under which they are permitted to export technologies and materials that could be diverted for WMD. But there are ample loopholes in this scheme. In developing countries, where such systems are already vague, such regulatory attempts have been met with a deep-rooted backlash. The primary argument is that export controls impede free trade. Secondly, we support an increase in the signatory parties to the additional protocol designed to streamline compliance snap inspections by the IAEA. If the agency were able to steadily increase the number and frequency of its surprise checks under this protocol, even if uranium-enriching facilities were constructed and other activities advanced through the black market, the odds of being able to detect secret testing of weapons early in the game would be improved. Only about 60 countries, including Japan, have signed this additional protocol. We believe that the world should accept the protocol as standard and that the signing this code be a condition for use of nuclear power. Thirdly, we propose a treaty to ban production of fissionable materials for use in weapons. Calls for an accord to fully ban the production of highly enriched uranium, plutonium and other materials capable of diversion into nuclear arms, in both nuclear and nonnuclear powers, have been voiced for well over a decade now. But as things stand today, these demands have failed to prompt even official negotiations. This standoff is mainly because of the conflicts in interests that exist among the nuclear powers themselves. Inking such a treaty would be a means to stop the arms race, and simultaneously block proliferation of nuclear weapons to nuclear-free countries. It will also be important, meanwhile, to equip the treaty adopted with an inspection system capable of verifying implementation. If introduced, we are confident that the synergistic effects of these three proposals would provide a strong deterrent to black market-based nuclear proliferation. Next May, a conference will be held chiefly to review the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and other pressing themes. Because this meeting is held only once every five years, we hope the opportunity will be seized as a precious chance to thwart any further setbacks in the battle against nuclear proliferation. --The Asahi Shimbun, Sept. 26(IHT/Asahi: September 27,2004) (09/27) ***************************************************************** 43 Arizona Republic: Nuclear diplomacy [http://www.azcentral.com September 27, 2004 U.N. must enforce non-proliferation strategy here and now in Iran, North Korea You won't find a scarier scenario than this at the movies: Imagine the mullahs of Iran with an atomic bomb. Picture the paranoid leaders of North Korea with nuclear weapons. Both countries are defying international calls to back off from nuclear activities. Iran insists that its uranium enrichment program is just to make fuel for power plants. North Korea may have atomic weapons. A recent blast there could have been a nuclear test. The world can't put up with this. We can't allow the ultimate weapon to spread to more countries. In the movies, a few action heroes and heroines could end the entire threat in less than two hours. In the real world, we have to worry that confrontation could backfire and military intervention could be disastrous. Diplomacy can seem frustratingly slow, with nine-tenths of a step backward for every step forward. But we can't give up on that course. The strategy needs to be firmer, with a more united front, and a willingness to ratchet up the pressure. At its annual meeting last week, the International Atomic Energy Agency took a few steps in that direction. The IAEA, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, adopted a resolution calling on Iran to freeze its uranium enrichment activities before the agency's next meeting in November. That sets the stage for referring the matter to the Security Council and imposing sanctions. As for North Korea, the IAEA on Friday adopted a unanimous resolution urging it to dismantle any nuclear weapons program rapidly and verifiably. The real push is that case is coming from the six-party talks in which China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the United States have been trying to persuade North Korea to end its nuclear ambitions. In exchange, Pyongyang would get security guarantees and energy aid. That carrot-and-stick approach may eventually work. North Korea desperately needs the assistance it could get by giving up nukes. While North Korea is the more immediate threat, Iran is the stickier issue. The Bush administration is divided between hard-liners, who are talking of regime change, and proponents of diplomatic engagement. Many Iranians are indeed fed up with their repressive leaders and sympathetic to the United States. But student demonstrations are far different from organized resistance. Iranians have never liked outside meddling. If the United States interferes or invades, Iranians will close ranks and moderates will lose the traction they have managed to gain. The United States has differed with Europe over how hard to press Tehran. Britain, France and Germany have been a tad too ready to put on kid gloves. But they have an argument in saying that it's pointless to threaten sanctions, such as cutting off oil purchases, that have little chance of being carried out. The United States has more than two decades of experience with sanctions on Iran, and we should draw on it to determine the most effective way to apply pressure. We should also think about a big, fat carrot: incentives that Iran would find difficult to turn down. The lure of ending its economic and political exile was a major factor in Libya's agreement last year to abandon its weapons of mass destruction programs and to allow international weapons inspectors into the country. Iran and North Korea are critical tests for the United Nations and the international approach to non-proliferation. If that approach is going to succeed, it needs to succeed here and now. Print This | Email This | Most Popular [http://www.azcentral.com/php-bin/clicktrack/popular.php] | Subscribe | Steve Benson See what The Arizona Republic's Pulitzer [http://www.arizonarepublic.com/opinions/benson/] . Copyright 2004, azcentral.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 44 Tri-City Herald: Treatment of uranium shavings wraps up This story was published Monday, September 27th, 2004 By Annette Cary Herald staff writer Hanford is about to put another environmental headache behind it. In 1998, workers digging up an old waste burial site just north of the 300 Area in southeast Hanford began finding deteriorating drums with shavings of depleted uranium, just yards from the Columbia River. Hanford officials had expected to find the unexpected in the burial pit, but the drums of uranium were a particularly nasty surprise. Depleted uranium can spontaneously ignite if exposed to air. To prevent that, oil had been added to the uranium. But the drums were so deteriorated that the oil had begun to leak from some of the containers into the dirt. In 2000, about 300 drums had been excavated from the burial ground when a massive range fire swept across the Hanford nuclear reservation. "It came close enough we were anxious," said Greg Borden, task lead for Bechtel Hanford, a Department of Energy contractor. If the fire had reached the drums, it could have sent a plume of uranium up with the smoke. A total of 786 drums were excavated from 1998 through 2002. The majority, 520, contained uranium chips and oil. The waste is presumed to have come from the 300 Area, where uranium fuel was prepared for Hanford reactors to produce plutonium and research was conducted. Hanford produced plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program for 50 years. Uranium naturally has mostly isotopes of uranium 238 and small amounts of uranium 235. For some of the fuel used at Hanford, the uranium 235 content was increased, or enriched. The uranium buried in the drums was from byproducts of that, the depleted uranium. It's not known why some of the depleted uranium had been machined to produce the shavings that were buried, according to Bechtel Hanford. In addition to the 520 drums of shavings found, 35 more were filled with oil waste from the leaking drums. The 30-gallon drums were packaged in 55-gallon drums. Then the 30-gallon drums could be pierced so more oil could be added. The 55 gallon drums were then sealed inside even larger drums to be shipped for treatment to PermaFix Environmental in Oak Ridge, Tenn. The Tennessee company used a proprietary method to separate the oil and other organic materials from the uranium shavings, then washed the uranium. The oil was sent to commercial and government incinerators and the ash will not be returned to Hanford. But the clean shavings were stabilized by adding a cement-type material to turn it into solid blocks and packed into 12 boxes that were shipped back to Washington. Treatment, which took nearly a year, was completed last month. Including shipping, it cost DOE about $7 million. The boxes, which measure 4-by-3-by-6 feet, now are sitting at Hanford's Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, a huge landfill in central Hanford, and should soon to be permanently buried. © 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 45 AN: Energy Dept. official explains how Bush administration fights global warming The Athens NEWS: Twice weekly alternative 2004-09-27 By Megan Miladinov Athens NEWS Campus Writer David Conover, director of the U.S. Department of Energy's Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP), spoke to Ohio University students Friday about methods the government is researching to slow down climate change. President Bush established the CCTP in Feb. 2002, and according to its Web site (www.climatetechnology.gov), its research goals include "enhancing energy security ... aggressively developing alternative fuels and hydrogen, advancing carbon sequestration technologies, and promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy." Conover explained, "We have taken a three-pillar approach--science, technology and international cooperation." As a result, the CCTP works closely with the Climate Change Science Program, and Conover refers to this group as a "sister program." Together, they work globally to stabilize the atmospheric greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This effort, though, raises the question, "What about the Kyoto Protocol?" This international protocol, which calls for the industrialized nations to lower their emissions of greenhouse gases, has been under debate since it was introduced in the mid-90s, and the United States still refuses to sign on to it. Conover argued that "we can't cap emissions without an alternate source of energy." Hence the research and development efforts of the CCTP. According to Conover, sequestering the carbon dioxide emitted from burning fossil fuels currently seems to be the most costly long-term solution. "Our goals are to both validate this technology and demonstrate it to others," he said. Seven regional partnerships have been formed in the U.S. to determine the specific approach best suited for each region. As Conover explained, the carbon dioxide that is emitted when fossil fuels are burned for energy can be captured and stored underground. "We are looking at underwater saline reserves. The sequestered CO2 would be stored in porous rock underground." The CCTP also researches using hydrogen fuel to keep Bush's promise that everyone in the younger generation will drive a hydrogen-powered vehicle at some time in his or her life. "We're trying to sequester hydrogen from clean sources, such as biomass, solar, wind and hydro-power, and dirty sources such as fossil fuels and nuclear power," Conover said. Other areas of research and development focus on nuclear power. "Although it is costly to build a nuclear plant, it remains economic to operate one," he said. Accordingly, research on what to do with nuclear waste is a main focus. "We are concentrating on proliferation issues, plant safety and the problem of waste." In the long run, roughly by 2050, the CCTP also plans to include nuclear fusion as an alternate source of energy. The CCTP has made short-term progress in many areas, as well. Conover said that industries in this country could already participate in many environmentally friendly programs. For instance, a program called Climate VISION helps companies utilize energy forms that emit lower carbon levels, and Climate Leaders encourages companies to set realistic emissions reduction goals. "There are some big companies participating in these government-industry partnerships already, such as AEP and Dow," he said. Tax incentives are another tool. "Renewable energy tax cut incentives have caused wind power to be among the fastest growing energy sources in the country," Conover said. Clean cities grants and technology grants are also being discussed as options. The main goal, though, he said, is making sure that we're spreading the earth's resources efficiently and in an environmentally safe manner. ***************************************************************** 46 Rocky Mountain News: Hangarful of questions Air Force recommends further investigation of past activities at Lowry By Todd Hartman, Rocky Mountain News September 27, 2004 A building once known as the "Black Hangar," where personnel worked with depleted uranium and other radioactive components, is one of seven sites at the former Lowry Air Force Base that the military has targeted for investigation. Building 1499, which earned its nickname because of the secretive work that took place there in the 1950s and '60s, is now the Big Bear Ice Arena, a public skating and hockey rink. In a recent environmental study of the former base, ordered last year by state health officials, the Air Force recommends further study of what went on in the Black Hangar and what became of the toxic materials used there. The matter is one of several environmental questions raised by the $2 million study of the 1,866-acre site in east Denver and the western fringe of Aurora, which is being redeveloped into a model community. In addition to the former Black Hangar, the Air Force has recommended further investigation of underground storage tanks, old dental buildings where mercury may have been released, and an area of soil disturbance that could have been a dump site, among other sites. But Air Force and Lowry officials say there is no evidence that the sites pose any danger. Several soil and groundwater studies already have been done around the former Black Hangar and "nothing has been found," said Tom Markham, executive director of the Lowry Redevelopment Agency. Officials with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment complimented the thoroughness of the Air Force report, but pointed out several of what they consider to be shortcomings: • Conflicting information as to whether "dangerous chemical agents" were used in chemical warfare training at Lowry. At one point, the report says no such agents were used, but other documents suggest that some buildings were used for activities such as "napalm mixing" or "napalm gas storage." • Incomplete information on several underground fuel storage tanks, including some as large as 50,000 gallons. State regulators complain that it isn't clear whether these tanks were ever removed and the area cleaned. • Seventeen sites or facilities described as "unidentified and unevaluated." These include sites labeled "radioactive waste disposal areas." An Air Force official said the sites are mislabeled in the report and are, in fact, not "unevaluated." Overall, state officials said, the Air Force too often concludes that no further investigation or cleanup of a questionable site is needed, even when it cites a lack of information about what may have occurred at a site or what might have become of hazardous wastes. "I was disappointed that in many instances the lack of information was used as a reason for 'no further action' rather than a reason for 'further investigation,' " wrote Sheila Gaston, part of the health department's unit that is overseeing Lowry, in her initial response to the Air Force report. Doug Karas, spokesman for the Air Force Real Property Agency, said that in most cases the Air Force has provided justification for taking no further action and that those reasons are spelled out deep within databases attached to the report. "We're hoping that (the database) resolves those kind of things," Karas said. If not, he said, further discussions with state regulators would likely answer most questions, including those about the use of chemical weapons, the status of underground tanks and the disposal of most wastes. In all, Karas noted, of 1,650 locations evaluated at Lowry, the Air Force found that 98 percent of them, or 1,616, required no further work. Eighteen others are on property still owned by the Air Force and work is ongoing at nine others. At the remaining seven, the Air Force recommends further study. Officials at the LRA, the quasi-governmental entity organizing the redevelopment of the base, said they welcome the new Air Force report, but say little, if any, of the information is new and that past activities at the base already have been exhaustively reviewed. "The state health department, the Air Force and the (Environmental Protection Agency) have been working on this site for 10 years, and the Air Force has spent $82 million to date on the sampling and cleanup," said Hilarie Portell, spokeswoman for the LRA. "We feel this site has been well-characterized." But state regulators say that discoveries in recent years, such as asbestos-tainted soil, ordnance remains and leaking underground tanks holding hazardous waste, were unexpected. That's why they ordered a more in-depth study of the site. Currently, the conversion of Lowry into a residential and business community is about 70 percent complete, with 3,000 homes and apartments built. In its environmental report, which fills three CD-ROMs, the Air Force said it needs more information on the Black Hangar, where windows were once blacked out to prevent anyone from viewing activities inside. Those activities, the report said, included training personnel on how to work with nuclear weapons. The report recommends more research "to obtain more specific information on the activities that occurred in (the building) and the potential disposal of solvents . . . in the vicinity of the building." It also advises finding more former base personnel who can provide more detailed information on specific activities there. State regulators say documents suggest that training capsules used in the building contained cobalt-60 and plutonium-239, both of which emit radiation. But it's the 445 pounds of uranium-238, also referred to as depleted uranium, that were apparently used in the building, then discarded, that remain of concern to state officials. "The statement (in the Air Force report) that 'the disposition of these training aids has not been determined,' is a concern," Gaston wrote in the state health department's response to the military. Air Force Real Property Agency spokesman Karas noted that a lack of information about how the material was disposed of doesn't mean it was disposed of improperly, but "we're trying to close the loop." Howard Roitman, director of environmental programs at the state health department, called the Air Force report "a work in progress" and said the state wants to ensure that the Air Force produces a "complete and accurate a report." The Air Force has pledged to continue studying environmental concerns at the former base and respond to questions raised by state health officials. hartmant@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-5048 ***************************************************************** 47 Charleston.Net: Opinion: Editorials Program reduces nuclear threat 09/27/04 A shipment of 300 pounds of plutonium left Charleston without any apparent problems last week on its way to France, while some 20 protesters watched from shore. Certainly, their concerns for the security of the shipment are shared by those who are accompanying the weapons material. While details are scarce, Bryan Wilkes of the National Nuclear Security Administration offered assurances that security measures are sufficient to the task. "We're confident this material will be fully protected every step of the way. Each one is equipped with heavy weaponry ... and a specialized guard force," Mr. Wilkes said, in comments quoted by The Associated Press. A local Coast Guard spokesman said that "every effort has been made for safe, unimpeded transit of all commercial vessels in the Port of Charleston." The Coast Guard accompanied the shipment out of the harbor. The fact that there are terrorists who desire possession of nuclear material wasn't a reason to halt the shipment, which originated at Los Alamos (N.M.) National Laboratory. Rather, it should encourage more support and funding for a program that will transform large stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium into reactor fuel to produce electricity for domestic use. That will help the United States reduce its plutonium stockpile, but more importantly, will enable Russia to do the same. The absence of adequate security at defense sites where plutonium is stored in Russia is well established, and constitutes a serious, continuing threat. Unfortunately, the construction of plants in the United States and Russia to turn the plutonium into a nuclear material that can be used for fuel, not weapons, has failed to advance as expected. The terror threat should encourage the program to receive priority treatment. Shipping nuclear bomb material to be effectively neutralized for weapons use should not be considered nuclear proliferation -- a term used by a protester. Instead, it will diminish the likelihood of proliferation, once the method is generally applied. z The material eventually will be returned to the United States via Charleston, and Department of Energy officials will determine if it is usable for a Duke Power reactor near Charlotte. As our report noted, that test is preliminary to the construction of this nation's first plutonium-to-fuel plant at Savannah River Site. Protesters of the shipment displayed a "Stop Plutonium" banner. Ultimately, the plutonium-to-fuel program can be expected to accomplish that in a larger sense, and negate a long-term nuclear threat. [letters@postandcourier.com] Copyright © 2004, The Post and Courier, All Rights Reserved. webmaster@postandcourier.com [webmaster@postandcourier.com] ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************