***************************************************************** 11/05/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.265 ***************************************************************** 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 BBC: Iran upbeat over nuclear talks 2 SF Chronicle: Contesting Iran's nuclear future 3 EUbusiness: Iran and EU hold last-chance meeting on nuclear programm 4 US: [NukeNet] REPLY to NPR on new DBT regs in effect 5 Re: [wrlwest] Fwd: Atomic Energy head says U.S. pursues split 6 US: Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Reid takes on top job 7 US: RGJ: Reid has a chance to guide rebirth of Democratic Party 8 [du-list] Ministry of Defence in Brussels closed due to 9 [FOODIRRADIATIONCA] International Anti-Food Irradiation Week 10 Bellona: Jury court declared Russian physicist guilty of state secre 11 Xinhuanet: China to triple nuclear power generation capacity in 15 y NUCLEAR REACTORS 12 [NukeNet] Kashiwazaki-Kariwa No. 7 scrams during earthquake 13 US: NRC: Tennessee Valley Authority; Notice of Consideration of Issu 14 UPI: Russia denies nuke plant accident rumor - 15 Interfax: Emergencies ministry denies rumors of nuclear plant accide 16 Interfax: Repairs finalized at Balakovo NPP 17 US: Brattleboro Reformer: NRC calls off meetings, will reschedule to 18 US: YDR: LICENSING: New reactor is possible - 19 US: APP.COM: NRC reclassifies mistake by Oyster Creek workers as ver 20 US: WCAX: NRC closes meetings on Vermont Yankee, citing safety conce 21 US: NRC: NRC Postpones Two Meetings with Entergy Scheduled for Nov. 22 US: NRC: U.S. Inspection Services; Establishment of Atomic Safety an NUCLEAR SAFETY 23 US: [DU-WATCH] VA Funding of GWI 24 Guardian Unlimited: U.N.: Traces of Plutonium Found in Egypt 25 US: The State: Nuclear laundry to be razed 26 Bellona: Putin ordered to find lost nuclear lighthouses in the Pacif 27 Bellona: Murmansk Governor discussed with Putin nuclear safety probl 28 US: Oregon State Daily Barometer: A new era of nuclear safety, thank 29 US: Tri-City Herald: Health to be key issue in downwinder trial 30 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Parents hear details of school evacuation 31 US: AOL: Breathing Uranium Oxides: Global Medical Crisis of Deplete 32 EurekAlert!: Tumbleweeds good for uranium clean-up 33 ITAR-TASS: Iodine poisoning cases registered in Saratov region 34 US: Idaho Press-Tribune: Crowds are expected to discuss radiation ef NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 35 [du-list] BOEING, HONEYWELL Uranium plant deals - York Daily 36 UPI: Report: Terrorists prowling Yucca site? - 37 Las Vegas RJ: Yucca project polls differ 38 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN PROJECT: Nuclear industry to forge ahea 39 Las Vegas SUN: Survey: Majority of Nevadans still support Yucca figh 40 US: WYMT Mountain News: Nuclear advisory boards raise concerns with 41 Pahrump Valley Times: What repository? 42 Pahrump Valley Times: Yucca is OK NUCLEAR WEAPONS 43 ITAR-TASS: Russia welcomes UN approval of disarmament resolution US DEPT. OF ENERGY 44 EPA: SRS Transuranic waste characterization 45 Fredericksburg.com: DOE OKs North Anna demo 46 Tri-City Herald: Nuclear waste gridlock looms, officials warn 47 Carlsbad Current-Argus: DOE's acting manager is leaving 48 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada 49 DOE: Berwanger, Inc. OTHER NUCLEAR 50 [DU-WATCH] DU: Newspaper Notes Pentagon Inconsistency 51 [du-list] DU in the News - 6th Nov. 04 ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 BBC: Iran upbeat over nuclear talks Last Updated: Friday, 5 November, 2004 [Preliminary installation of a turbo generator at Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant] Iran denies claims that it wants to build nuclear weapons Iran says progress has been made at talks on its nuclear programme with diplomats from western Europe. A senior Iranian negotiator Hossein Mousavian said: "If the discussions continue like this, there is a possibility we will reach a solution." But there has been no official comment so far from the UK, French and German envoys taking part in the Paris talks. The European powers have threatened to refer Iran to the UN Security Council unless it halts uranium enrichment. After seven hours of talks Mr Mousavian described as "very delicate" and "complicated", discussions were still going on. It is thought they might spill into Saturday. Bomb fears Officials would not comment on the substance of the talks, but it is understood Iran may be offered nuclear fuel and promised increased trade if it stops its enrichment activities. Diplomats said Iran was offering a six-month suspension of enrichment, while the European trio want an indefinite moratorium, according to Reuters. EU leaders in Brussels reiterated on Friday that a "full and sustained suspension of all enrichment and reprocessing activities... would open the door for talks on long-term cooperation offering mutual benefits". Europe and the US fear Iran could be planning to use enriched uranium to build a nuclear bomb. Empty threat? The BBC's Frances Harrison in Tehran says Iran maintains it has the right to peaceful nuclear power. It says it will never accept a permanent cessation of enrichment. Two previous summits in Vienna, Austria, failed to reach agreement. Diplomats say there is a deadline of mid-November for a conclusion to these talks and if they fail, Europe will back American calls to refer Iran to the UN Security Council. But Iranian officials have dismissed that as an empty threat. Our correspondent says with oil prices already so high, they believe the West cannot afford to embargo Iranian oil, and they are hoping China will veto any vote against them in the Security Council. ***************************************************************** 2 SF Chronicle: Contesting Iran's nuclear future [http://www.sfgate.com/index/] ] Bennett Ramberg Friday, November 5, 2004 Iran continues to challenge international efforts to hold it accountable for its suspicious nuclear activities. Later this month, the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors will meet to address the issue against the backdrop of growing fear that time to contain the country's nuclear ambitions is running out. This leaves little doubt that Iran will be high on the Bush administration's foreign-policy agenda in the months to come. To date, the IAEA has relied on public shame to force Iran's compliance. In the past two years, agency inspectors laid bare much of Tehran's nuclear program. But suspicions remain that Iran's ruling mullahs have not revealed all. Should Iran continue to waffle, the international community must decide if it must take more aggressive steps to force the revolutionary state to accede. The following options suggest that there is no clear path. The most benign approach would be to continue current IAEA efforts. Arguably, agency inspections and quarterly public reports will, in time, embarrass Iran to resist the nuclear-weapons temptation. This butts against two facts, however. First, suspicions persist that Iran has not come clean about all its nuclear activities. Second, Iran's enrichment and reprocessing endeavors make no sense apart from nuclear weapons. For example, the solitary power reactor Tehran hopes to initiate in 2005 or 2006 does not justify the economic investment in facilities to recycle nuclear fuel into weapons-grade material. Believing that diplomacy had not run its course, Britain, France and Germany opened a dialogue with Iran outside the IAEA framework. In October 2003, the three European powers sent their foreign ministers to Tehran. The diplomats offered economic carrots and peaceful nuclear-energy assistance as a quid pro quo for Iran to halt its developing enrichment program. The meeting prompted cautious optimism: Tehran announced that it would suspend the manufacture of nuclear centrifuges. Nine months later, the mullahs reversed themselves. Chagrined, the Europeans renewed the dialogue. The Iranians stonewalled. They declared that "no country has the right to deprive us of nuclear technology." The Europeans remain undaunted. They continue to try. Today, for instance, they are sitting down with the Iranians in Paris, where they will likely continue to dangle economic incentives in exchange for Tehran's promise of a halt to Iran's enrichment program. Tehran's probable, coy response: It might suspend -- again -- its enrichment activities, but just for a short time, to give diplomacy a chance. Unimpressed, the Bush administration remains convinced that Iran is using diplomacy to buy time for its nuclear ambitions. For months, the administration has pushed the IAEA to declare Tehran in violation of its nuclear nonproliferation obligations. The result would place the matter before the U.N. Security Council, which could impose sanctions. But this is another path to nowhere. Iran's critical vulnerability to sanctions -- reliance on the hard currency earned through oil exports -- is a double-edged sword. The United States is unlikely to generate Security Council support for measures that will restrict the already tight oil market. Washington also is stuck on its own petard -- the Iraq WMD intelligence debacle. In the absence of a nuclear weapons "smoking gun" -- certified by the IAEA -- the Security Council is unlikely to issue more than a rhetorical slap on the wrist that calls upon the mullahs to reconsider their transgressions. Among the dwindling options is confrontation. One option would galvanize members of the Proliferation Security Initiative -- which includes a core group of a dozen or so nations that have agreed to intercept WMD contraband -- to isolate Iran until it disgorges its nuclear weapons capacity. However, building the PSI into a serious new "alliance of the willing," in the absence of a clear and present danger, is unlikely. Then there is military action. Only military occupation can guarantee Iran's nuclear disarmament; limited military strikes will not destroy hidden nuclear facilities. But, in the Iraq aftermath, either option would be a hard sell to the American public. On the other hand, Israel, which considers Iran a mortal enemy, does not require a sales job. Jerusalem repeatedly has declared that it will not allow Iran a nuclear weapons capacity. But Israel is in no better position than the United States to destroy the program. This leaves two factors that may impact Iran's nuclear future. One is peaceful regime change. Although there is some hope that a new generation of Iranians -- who might be more nonproliferation compliant -- will replace the mullahs, there appears to be little prospect in the short term. In time, impetus could come from a thriving democratic Iraq. Unfortunately, Baghdad's political future will not be resolved anytime soon. On the flip side, the United States and its allies could concede that little can be done to halt Iran's nuclear ambitions. By accepting this prospect, the challenge will be to keep the nuclear peace. The solution must include an explicit warning to Tehran from Washington and Jerusalem: Any Iranian nuclear threat or act -- or any complicity in a terrorist nuclear act -- would result in the elimination of the revolutionary regime by any and all means. The time to issue this warning is now, before the mullahs realize their nuclear ambitions. The result might have a sobering impact as Iran weighs a nuclear armed future. Bennett Ramberg served in the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs in the administration of President George H.W. Bush. Page B - 9 ©2004 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback | FAQ | Contact [http://www.sfgate.com/staff/] ***************************************************************** 3 EUbusiness: Iran and EU hold last-chance meeting on nuclear programme url(http://www.eubusiness.com/plone.css); 05/11/2004 Iran and the European Union held last-chance talks in Paris Friday with both sides seeking a compromise over Teheran's nuclear programme in order to head off a US-led bid to bring the matter before the UN Security Council. The negotiations were being held at an undisclosed location in the French capital and conducted at "senior official" level, with the troika of France, Britain and Germany representing the EU. "It is part of the continuing diplomatic process aimed at finding a resolution with Iran ahead of the meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in the week starting November 25," a British diplomat said. "There are various proposals and packages on the table, but our policy is not to discuss them. What I can say is that we are very keen to get an agreement before the IAEA meeting," he said. The United States hopes that the Vienna-based IAEA will decide to take Iran before the Security Council for running what Washington claims is a secret nuclear weapons programme, and that the UN will then impose economic sanctions. To avert that outcome, Europe is trying to persuade the Islamic Republic to suspend uranium enrichment, a process which makes fuel for civilian reactors but which can also be used to manufacture the material for the explosive core of atomic weapons. Diplomats in Vienna told AFP Thursday that the two sides were edging towards a possible compromise under which Teheran would agree to a six-month suspension in order to give time for a broader agreement and avoid the threat of sanctions. The idea was put forward in a paper passed to the Iranian side on Tuesday. "This paper fudges the uranium enrichment question by saying suspension needs to hold until the conclusion of negotiations over the long-term status of Iran's program," said a Western diplomat who requested anonymity. Teheran has till now resisted Europe's demand for an indefinite suspension, arguing that it would infringe its right to maintain a civilian nuclear power programme. Europe's three powers are offering Iran nuclear technology, including access to nuclear fuel, increased trade and help with Tehran's regional security concerns if the Islamic Republic halts enrichment. Officials in Teheran said earlier that the atmosphere surrounding Friday's talks was more relaxed than it had been at previous meetings. "Neither Iranians nor Europeans want to be stuck in a dead end. Both sides are pragmatic, have worked hard and made concessions," Iran's former representative at the IAEA, Ali Akbar Salehi, told AFP. In Teheran Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei used Friday prayers to deny that the country had plans to develop nuclear weapons. Addressing himself to newly-reelected US President George W. Bush live on national television, he said: "No sir, we are not seeking to have nuclear weapons. Our nuclear weapon is this country, and the youth of its people." [Web link: EU relations with Iran] EU relations with Iran Text and Picture Copyright © 2004 AFP. All other copyright © 2004 EUbusiness Ltd. All rights reserved. This material is intended ***************************************************************** 4 [NukeNet] REPLY to NPR on new DBT regs in effect Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:40:15 -0800 Hi, The attach letter was sent to the NPR Ombudsman on Oct. 30, 2004 following the National Public Radio story on nuclear power station security deadline. Paul, NIRS -----Original Message----- From: Nukenet-bounces@energyjustice.net [mailto:Nukenet-bounces@energyjustice.net] On Behalf Of Brendan Hoffman Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 5:42 PM To: nukenet@energyjustice.net Subject: [NukeNet] NPR on new DBT regs in effect too bad they forgot to actually interview anyone except industry and the NRC. >>> Google Alerts 10/29/04 04:57PM >>> NUCLEAR Plants Get Stricter Security Standards NPR (audio) - Washington,D.C.,United States ... The mock terrorist force will be put together by the same company, Wackenhut, that also provides security guards at some nuclear plants. ... This as it happens Google Alert is brought to you by Google... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove this Google Alert: http://www.google.com/alerts/remove?s=d16926d38dd4da9c&hl=en Create another Google Alert: http://www.google.com/alerts?hl=en Sign in to manage your alerts: http://www.google.com/alerts/manage?hl=en _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\Security-Ltr- NPR Ombudsman-10292004.doc" ***************************************************************** 5 Re: [wrlwest] Fwd: Atomic Energy head says U.S. pursues split Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 17:00:34 -0800 Re: [wrlwest] Fwd: Atomic Energy head says U.S. pursues split policy on nuclear arms
------ Forwarded Message
From: Rahul Mahajan <rahul@peaches.ph.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 16:14:15 -0800
To: empirenotes@npogroups.org
Subject: [empirenotes] Fallujah and the Reality of War

Hello, all. This message is about the assault on Fallujah and what we can
expect, and our responsibility to oppose it. For more information, please
visit my blog Empire Notes at http://www.empirenotes.org.

To unsubscribe, send a message (from the subscribed address) to
empirenotes-unsubscribe@npogroups.org.

Best regards,

Rahul Mahajan

Fallujah and the Reality of War
by Rahul Mahajan, Empire Notes

The assault on Fallujah has started. It is being sold as liberation of the
people of Fallujah; it is being sold as a necessary step to implementing
“democracy” in Iraq. These are lies.

I was in Fallujah during the siege in April, and I want to paint for you a
word picture of what such an assault means.

Fallujah is dry and hot; like Southern California, it has been made an
agricultural area only by virtue of extensive irrigation. It has been known
for years as a particularly devout city; people call it the City of a
Thousand Mosques. In the mid-90’s, when Saddam wanted his name to be added
to the call to prayer, the imams of Fallujah refused.

U.S. forces bombed the power plant at the beginning of the assault; for the
next several weeks, Fallujah was a blacked-out town, with light provided by
generators only in critical places like mosques and clinics. The town was
placed under siege; the ban on bringing in food, medicine, and other basic
items was broken only when Iraqis en masse challenged the roadblocks. The
atmosphere was one of pervasive fear, from bombing and the threat of more
bombing. Noncombatants and families with sick people, the elderly, and
children were leaving in droves. After initial instances in which people
were prevented from leaving, U.S. forces began allowing everyone to leave –
except for what they called “military age males,” men usually between 15
and 60. Keeping noncombatants from leaving a place under bombardment is a
violation of the laws of war. Of course, if you assume that every military
age male is an enemy, there can be no better sign that you are in the wrong
country, and that, in fact, your war is on the people, not on their
oppressors,, not a war of liberation.

The main hospital in Fallujah is across the Euphrates from the bulk of the
town. Right at the beginning, the Americans shut down the main bridge,
cutting off the hospital from the town. Doctors who wanted to treat
patients had to leave the hospital, with only the equipment they could
carry, and set up in makeshift clinics all over the city; the one I stayed
at had been a neighborhood clinic with one room that had four beds, and no
operating theater; doctors refrigerated blood in a soft-drink vending
machine. Another clinic, I’m told, had been an auto repair shop. This
hospital closing (not the only such that I documented in Iraq) also
violates the Geneva Convention.

In Fallujah, you were rarely free of the sound of artillery booming in the
background, punctuated by the smaller, higher-pitched note of the
mujaheddin’s hand-held mortars. After even a few minutes of it, you have to
stop paying attention to it – and yet, of course, you never quite stop.
Even today, when I hear the roar of thunder, I’m often transported
instantly to April 10 and the dusty streets of Fallujah.

In addition to the artillery and the warplanes dropping 500, 1000, and
2000-pound bombs, and the murderous AC-130 Spectre gunships that can
demolish a whole city block in less than a minute, the Marines had snipers
criss-crossing the whole town. For weeks, Fallujah was a series of
sometimes mutually inaccessible pockets, divided by the no-man’s-lands of
sniper fire paths. Snipers fired indiscriminately, usually at whatever
moved. Of 20 people I saw come into the clinic I observed in a few hours,
only five were “military-age males.” I saw old women, old men, a child of
10 shot through the head; terminal, the doctors told me, although in
Baghdad they might have been able to save him.

One thing that snipers were very discriminating about – every single
ambulance I saw had bullet holes in it. Two I inspected bore clear evidence
of specific, deliberate sniping. Friends of mine who went out to gather in
wounded people were shot at. When we first reported this fact, we came in
for near-universal execration. Many just refused to believe it. Some asked
me how I knew that it wasn’t the mujaheddin. Interesting question. Had,
say, Brownsville, Texas, been encircled by the Vietnamese and bombarded
(which, of course, Mr. Bush courageously protected us from during the
Vietnam war era) and Brownsville ambulances been shot up, the question of
whether the residents were shooting at their own ambulances, I somehow
guess, would not have come up. Later, our reports were confirmed by the
Iraqi Ministry of Health and even by the U.S. military.

The best estimates are that roughly 900-1000 people were killed directly,
blown up, burnt, or shot. Of them, my guess, based on news reports and
personal observation, is that 2/3 to ¾ were noncombatants.

But the damage goes far beyond that. You can read whenever you like about
the bombing of so-called Zarqawi safe houses in residential areas in
Fallujah, but the reports don’t tell you what that means. You read about
precision strikes, and it’s true that America’s GPS-guided bombs are very
accurate – when they’re not malfunctioning, the 80 or 85% of the time that
they work, their targeting radius is 10 meters, i.e., they hit within 10
meters of the target. Even the smallest of them, however, the 500-pound
bomb, has a blast radius of 400 meters; every single bomb shakes the whole
neighborhood, breaking windows and smashing crockery. A town under
bombardment is a town in constant fear.

You read the reports about X killed and Y wounded. And you should remember
those numbers; those numbers are important. But equally important is to
remember that those numbers lie – in a war zone, everyone is wounded.

The first assault on Fallujah was a military failure. This time, the
resistance is stronger, better-armed, and better-organized; to “win,” the
U.S. military will have to pull out all the stops. Even within horror and
terror, there are degrees, and we – and the people of Fallujah – ain’t seen
nothin’ yet. George W. Bush has just claimed a new mandate – the world has
been delivered into his hands.

There will be international condemnation, as there was the first time; but
our government won’t listen to it; aside from the resistance, all the
people of Fallujah will be able to depend on to try to mitigate the horror
will be us, the antiwar movement. We have a responsibility, that we didn’t
meet in April and we didn’t meet in August when Najaf was similarly
attacked; will we meet it this time?

Rahul Mahajan is publisher of the weblog Empire Notes
(http://www.empirenotes.org), with regularly updated commentary on U.S.
foreign policy, the occupation of Iraq, and the state of the American
Empire. He has been to occupied Iraq twice, and was in Fallujah during the
siege in April. His most recent book is Full Spectrum Dominance: U.S. Power
in Iraq and Beyond
(<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1583225781/empirenotes-20>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1583225781/empirenotes-20).
He can be reached at rahul@empirenotes.org


_________________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     empirenotes@npogroups.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     empirenotes-unsubscribe@npogroups.org

For all list information and functions, including changing
your subscription mode and options, visit the Web page:
     http://npogroups.org/lists/info/empirenotes

------ End of Forwarded Message
 ***************************************************************** 6 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Reid takes on top job LAS VEGAS SUN When Senate Democrats return to Washington they are expected to make Nevada's Sen. Harry Reid their new leader, a situation made possible when Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle lost his re-election bid in South Dakota. Reid, who isn't that well known outside of Nevada or beyond the nation's capital, will have his hands full. The Democrats lost four seats in the Senate, so they've been knocked off stride. Within the ranks of Senate Democrats there will be a reassessment to determine whether they and their party should take a more centrist course, as was charted by former President Bill Clinton, or take a more liberal path. Making matters more difficult, Democrats will have to face an emboldened Bush, who, unlike four years ago, actually won the popular vote this time. Nevada's senior senator has an unassuming, low-key image, and he has shown that he can work with Republicans. But Reid also has demonstrated that he can be tough as nails when it comes to politics. U.S. senators and Nevada politicians -- from both parties -- can attest to how big a mistake it is to underestimate Reid's tenacity. Reid will be more visible nationally, especially when he clashes with the Bush administration over policy differences in Washington, but this heightened profile also can create a perilous situation for him back home. While Reid won re-election this November in a landslide, we're certain that national Republicans already have painted a large bull's-eye on him and six years from now will try repeating the same tactics against Reid that helped lead to Daschle's defeat. Even though it was an unfair portrayal, Daschle's opponent was able to effectively make it seem as if Daschle was more interested in doing the bidding of liberal interest groups than he was in serving the needs of South Dakotans. Nevada already has seen the benefits of having Reid as the assistant minority leader -- getting more federal funding for Nevada, for starters -- and that influence won't wane once he becomes the top Democrat in the Senate. Reid's leadership role also has helped Nevada in slowing down the federal government's efforts to build a nuclear waste dump in Nevada, but it's important to remember that one man in Congress can't do it all. Reid's influence couldn't stop Bush's single-minded determination in 2002 to get Congress to move forward with the Yucca Mountain project. Bush phoned Reid on Wednesday, a measure of the Nevada senator's increasing stature. We hope that Bush will work with Democratic leaders as he pushes his agenda, and that his call for unity isn't a hollow refrain of what we heard from him four years ago. If Bush tries to steamroll a right-wing agenda through Congress, a course that would only further deepen the divisions in this country, it will be up to Reid and other Democrats to put a stop to it. Based on our many years of watching Reid at work, we're confident that he is more than ready to be the Senate's Democratic leader. ***************************************************************** 7 RGJ: Reid has a chance to guide rebirth of Democratic Party [http://www.rgj.com/] [online@rgj.com] RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL 11/4/2004 10:19 pm Twenty-four hours after the Republican Party held onto the White House and improved their majorities in both the House and Senate, it appeared all but certain that the task of leading the loyal opposition would fall to a conservative Democrat from one of the “red” states, Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada. Reid, most recently the Senate’s minority whip, the party’s No. 2 spot, easily won his fourth term in the Senate on Tuesday. With the defeat of the minority leader, Sen. Tom Daschle of South Dakota, and Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd’s announcement that he wouldn’t seek the job, Reid seemed a shoo-in for the party’s top job. That’s quite a coup for Reid and a first for the state. It means that this small state will have more clout in the Congress, and in the Democratic Party, than it has ever had before. It certainly will make it harder for the administration to move ahead with the plan to move nuclear power plant waste to Yucca Mountain (though the election results suggested that Yucca Mountain isn’t nearly as important an issue to Nevadans as Reid and other Democrats hoped it would be). It’s also a unique opportunity for Reid to try to guide the resurgence of a party in decline. To succeed, however, the Democratic Party cannot be satisfied to be the anti-Republicans in the Senate. Americans are sick of partisan infighting, and they will blame the party that’s out of power for the bickering they see. That means that the filibuster — an option still available to Democrats, who will have 45 votes, five more than they need to prevent cloture — will have to be used sparingly and with great discretion. But it also means that Democrats will need a positive program for balancing the budget, for supporting U.S. efforts in the Middle East, for tax reform, intelligence reform and maybe even campaign-finance reform. Nevadans have demonstrated faith in Reid for a long time now, and it appears that Senate Democrats have faith in him, too. The coming session will show whether that faith was deserved. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a [http://www.gannett.com] Newspaper. Use of this site signifies agreement to our terms of ***************************************************************** 8 [du-list] Ministry of Defence in Brussels closed due to Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:39:27 -0800 Photographs available (free of copyright): http://www.motherearth.org/photo.php?album=album102 Ministry of Defence in Brussels closed due to Depleted Uranium International action for a Uranium Weapon Free World 5/11/2004 Brussels ­ This morning, activists of the Belgian Coalition Stop Uranium Weapons! held a protest action in front of the Belgian Ministry of Defence, in order to express their desire for a ban on uranium weapons. Politicians from different political parties were present to support this action. The action symbolically sealed off the Ministry of Defence, as a zone contaminated with toxic and radioactive depleted uranium. A delegation from the coalition also handed over thousands of signatures to the Ministry of Defence (Lambermontstraat 8) calling for a ban on weapon systems containing depleted uranium. After the presentation of the signed petitions the delegation discussed the demands of the coalition towards the Belgian government (included below). These Demands were also presented to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This action is part of an international day of action organised by the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons, which aims to pressure governments to endorse an international treaty for a ban on uranium weapons. The action takes place to mark the United Nations day for the Prevention of the Exploitation of the Environment during wars and armed conflicts, 6th November. When a DU-projectile impacts on a hard object it turns partly to dust particles of uranium oxides. Wind and water can carry along these oxides, which can cause cancers if they enter the body. Under certain conditions depleted uranium may damage the genetic material DNA. A spokesperson of the Belgian Coalition Stop Uranium Weapons! stated “The UN-Sub-Commission on Human Rights has labelled ‘conventional’ weapons that contain depleted uranium as illegal weaponry, because of the indiscriminate nature of the weapons. Uranium weapons cannot make a distinction between civilians and soldiers. Nevertheless, these weapons have been widely used in the US led wars in Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. Belgium has still not ruled out the use of these weapons, and supports NATO operations that use depleted uranium.” Belgische Coalitie Stop Uranium Wapens! Secretariat: Voor Moeder Aarde vzw ­ member of Friends of the Earth International Maria-Hendrikaplein 5, B-9000 Gent Tel.: +32-9-242 87 52 Fax: +32-9-242 87 51 e-mail: willem@motherearth.org --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Demands to the Belgian Government The ‘Belgische Coalitie Stop Uranium Wapens!', consisting of Voor Moeder Aarde - ACV-Brussel - Netwerk-Vlaanderen - Greenpeace ­ Artsen voor Vrede - International Action for Liberation - Geneeskunde voor de Derde Wereld - Forum voor Vredesactie - Vakbondsmensen In Verzet tegen Oorlog - Mouvement Chrétien pour la Paix - Stop United States of Aggression ­ Aktie Vredesbelasting - Pax Christi Vlaanderen - Vlaams Overleg Duurzame Ontwikkeling - Coördination Nationale d'Action pour la Paix et la Démocratie - Pax Christi Leuven - Bond Beter Leefmilieu -Oxfam-Solidariteit - Vrede Demands urgently: - that Belgium will, by no means including third parties be involved in the design, the production, the purchase, the testing, the transport, the storage and the use of weapons that contain uranium* - that Belgium works on an international level in order to prohibit the design, the production, the purchase, the testing, the transport, the storage and the storage of uranium weapons - that Belgium urges NATO to map the regions targeted with uranium weapons and the spots where these weapons are stored. These regions must be made public - that the Belgian government deploys no military and humanitarian missions to uranium-contaminated sites - that Belgium plays a pioneering role in establishing a ‘total ban on uranium weapons’, as it did in the course of the campaign against landmines - that Belgium bears a part of the costs of decontamination, including the costs for medical assistance - that Belgium takes the initiative for the foundation of an aid-fund compensating the victimised populations. * 'Uranium’: 'depleted', 'non-depleted', and uranium 'contaminated with fission products from the nuclear industry' For more information: www.motherearth.org/du ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 9 [FOODIRRADIATIONCA] International Anti-Food Irradiation Week Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 00:43:46 -0600 (CST) International Anti-Food Irradiation Week 2004 It is that time again! As many of you recall, November 21st, 2003 marked the launch of the first International Anti-Food Irradiation Week. One year ago, residents of Milford Square, Pennsylvania were fighting the construction of a food irradiation facility. Unfortunately, the company, CFC Logistics, won and installed a facility in their township. The people of Milford Square are still fighting and have plans for the 2nd International Anti-Food Irradiation Week 2004. In 2003, activists in the Philippines, Australia, Europe and Brazil participated in the International Anti-Food Irradiation Week with lobbying visits, press events, protests and fair activities. There is plenty of time to plan an event this year, starting November 21st. - Organize a teach in, a panel discussion, a town meeting or talk to school children. - Organize a protest, table at a festival. - Lobby your government officials. - Hold a press briefing on food irradiation. - Promote wholesome sustainable foods! Please let me know if you do plan an event during the International Anti-Food Irradiation Week and we will post it on the Public Citizen website. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tracy Lerman Senior Organizer Public Citizen, California Office 1615 Broadway, 9th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 ph: 510-663-0888 x 103 f: 510-663-8569 tlerman@citizen.org http://www.citizen.org/california Keep irradiated food out of your child's lunch! Visit http://www.safelunch.org to find out more. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ********** If you do not wish to recieve these emails in the future, please send a email to tlerman@citizen.org with "unsubscribe foodirradiationca" in the subject line. ***************************************************************** 10 Bellona: Jury court declared Russian physicist guilty of state secret information disclosure The final court decision is to be declared on November 10. 2004-11-05 12:33 Danilov’s lawyer Yelena Yevmenova said to the Moscow radio station Echo Moscow that the trial was very special as the issues of state secret were not discussed in front of the jury, so she cannot understand what Danilov had been declared guilty of. She also said the jury worked with the information they received, and it was incomplete. The lawyer believes, the prosecution should have pointed to the state secret information in the contract signed by Danilov, and then the defence could prove it was not so. However, the judge said the relevance of the information to state secret is a legal issue and he alone would decide it. Danilov was charged with high treason, disclosing state secrets to a foreign organisation, and fraud. Investigators claim Danilov conducted classified research at Krasnoyarsk State University involving top-secret information in 1999, shared the results of studies conducted for the Defence Ministry with a Chinese import-export company and a physics institute. The Federal Security Service also accused him of defrauding Krasnoyarsk State Technical University of 466,000 rubles as director of its thermo-physics centre. On February 16, 2001, charges of high treason were brought against Danilov and he was taken to custody. On December 30, 2003, a jury trial held in the Krasnoyarsk territorial court cleared Danilov of all charges. However, on June 9, 2004, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of a plea filed by the Krasnoyarsk territorial prosecutor's office, overturning Danilov's acquittal verdict and returning the case to the territorial court. The court prohibited disclosure of any trial details fearing the journalists could influence the jury. Danilov does not plead guilty, claims he used only open information and never pocketed any money. The lawyers and Danilov’s colleagues say that the research he conducted was declassified back in 1992, Echo Moscow reported. In today’s interview to the radio station, the physicist said he did not expect such a verdict and that “it is possible to manipulate by the jury”. Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] , President: Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no] Information: info@bellona.no [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway Menu ***************************************************************** 11 Xinhuanet: China to triple nuclear power generation capacity in 15 years www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-11-05 16:22:00 SHANGHAI, Nov. 5 (Xinhuanet) -- China's nuclear power generation capacity will triple to account for 4 percent of its total power output by 2020, General Manager of China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) Kang Rixin said here Friday. At a sideline forum of the 2004 World Engineers' Convention (WEC), Kang said China's power shortage makes it necessary to rapidly develop nuclear power plants in the first two decades of this century. The state has already listed the nuclear power industry as a priority in its high technology research and development plan and called for the industry to grow at an annual rate of 15 percent in the coming five years, Kang said. China now has eight commercial nuclear power stations, either in operation, under construction, or soon to be built. Among their19 reactors, nine are in operation, two are under construction, and four China-designed ones and as many imported ones will soon be built. By the end of 2003, Kang said, nuclear energy accounted for 1.6percent of the country's total power generation capacity. In 2003 the nuclear power plants generated 43.7 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity, or 2.3 percent of the country's total power output. With efforts in the past several decades, China has built a complete nuclear fuel system from resources exploitation to disposal of used fuel rods. In the 1990s China rapidly expanded its applied nuclear technologies to be used in industry, agriculture and medicine. More than 300 domestic enterprises specilize in developing such technologies. Their annual output was valued at 40 billion yuan in2003, or roughly 0.4 percent of the country's gross domestic product. In the coming 15 years, Kang said, CNNC would try all out to upgrade research and development capability in nuclear technologies and create three to five brand names. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 12 [NukeNet] Kashiwazaki-Kariwa No. 7 scrams during earthquake Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:39:25 -0800 Earthquakes continue to hit Niigata Prefecture, Japan. Niigata is home to the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant. Yesterday (Thursday, 4 November) at 8:57am there was a tremor of magnitude 5.2. On the Japanese seven-stage seismic scale it measure 5 in Kariwa Village and 4 in Kashiwazaki City Until now the reactors at Kashiwazaki-Kariwa have continued operating. On this occasion, however, reactor No. 7 scrammed automatically. The other reactors continued to operate, with the exception of No. 4 which is down for a periodic inspection. The owner of the reactor, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) says the cause of the problem was in the turbine. We continue to demand that the plant be closed down until the tremors subside. There is a limit to how much of the plant can be inspected while the reactors are operating, so it is impossible for TEPCO to be sure that there are no other problems. Philip White International Liaison Officer Citizens' Nuclear Information Center 3F Kotobuki Bdg, 1-58-15, Higashi-Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003 Phone: 81-3-5330-9520 Fax: 81-3-5330-9530 http://cnic.jp/english/ cnic@nifty.com _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 13 NRC: Tennessee Valley Authority; Notice of Consideration of Issuance FR Doc 04-24806 [Federal Register: November 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 214)] [Notices] [Page 64596-64598] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05no04-95] of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-90, issued to Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee), Docket No. 50-390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Rhea County, Tennessee. The proposed amendment would provide a one-time change to Function 4a, ``Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Hot Leg Temperature Indication,'' of Technical Specification (TS) Table 3.3.4-1. The proposed amendment would allow Watts Bar Unit 1 to continue operating until the next refueling outage (scheduled for the spring of 2005) with one out of four RCS hot leg temperature indications inoperable in the Auxiliary Control Room. The reason for the exigency is the unanticipated failure of Temperature Indicator (TI) 1-TI-68-65C that provides indication in the Auxiliary Control Room (ACR) for the hot leg temperature of RCS Loop 4. Upon discovery of this condition, TVA entered Action A of TS 3.3.4. The 30-day allowed outage time for Action A of TS 3.3.4 will expire on November 20, 2004, at approximately 2:27 p.m. e.s.t. Based on the actions taken, the problem most likely exists in the instrumentation (transmitter or thermocouple) located within the Reactor Building's Polar Crane Wall. While the plant is operating, the radiological conditions in this area prohibit access by plant personnel. Therefore, the repairs cannot be safely implemented until the unit is shut down. If the proposed amendment is not granted, TS 3.3.4 would require that plant to be shut down by November 20, 2004, as repairs to the Loop 4 TI cannot be made while operating. The shutdown of the plant would result in an unnecessary operational transient since the indication parameters that remain available in the ACR are adequate to safely shut down the plant should an emergency arise. Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? No. The proposed TS change to allow operation with only 3 of 4 loop remote shutdown indications for Reactor Coolant System hot leg temperature until the Spring 2005 refueling outage is only applicable to the following conditions: 1. Fire or smoke in the Main Control Room (MCR), 2 An evacuation of the MCR due to some other (non-fire) unspecified reason, and 3. The design basis flood. The inoperability of the one T(hot) indicator does not change the probability of occurrence for these events since it is not an accident initiator. The T(hot) indicators on the four loops are non- safety related equipment. During safe shutdown for a MCR evacuation event, design basis flood or fire related event, no fuel damage is postulated to occur, nor is the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary or containment barriers postulated to be lost. Sufficient redundancy exists with the operational instrumentation to ensure that decay heat removal functions are not adversely impacted by this change. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? No. The proposed TS change does not alter the function of the Remote Shutdown System which is to achieve and maintain safe reactor shutdown from outside the MCR. The TS instrumentation and controls required will be such that sufficient capability is retained for [[Page 64597]] decay heat removal via the Steam Generators (SGs) to provide the indication required for safe shutdown capabilities. The change will not result in the installation of any new equipment or system. The T(hot) instrument is used for indication only and has no automatic control functions. No new operations procedures will be created by this change. Appropriate operational procedures will be updated to clarify that the Loop 4 T(hot) indication in the Auxiliary Control Room (ACR) is not available during the remainder of Cycle 6. No new operating conditions or modes will be created by this proposed change. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in margin of safety? No. The radiological dose consequences are not impacted since this change is only applicable to the following conditions: 1. Fire or smoke in the Main Control Room (MCR), 2 An evacuation of the MCR due to some other (non-fire) unspecified reason, and 3. The design basis flood. During safe shutdown for a MCR evacuation event, design basis flood or fire related event, no fuel damage is postulated to occur, nor is the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary or containment barriers postulated to be lost. Sufficient redundancy exists with the operational instrumentation to ensure that decay heat removal functions are not adversely impacted by this change. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 14 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 14-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/ [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collecti ons/cfr/] . (Note: Public access to ADAMS has been temporarily suspended so that security reviews of publicly available documents may be performed and potentially sensitive information removed. Please check the NRC Web site for updates on the resumption of ADAMS access.) If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner/requestor is aware and on which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petitioner/requestor must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner/ requestor to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide [[Page 64598]] when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(a)(1)(i)-(viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV [HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV] ; or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415-3725 or by e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov [ OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov] . A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, ET 11A, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902, attorney for the licensee. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated October 29, 2004, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html] . Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of November 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. James J. Shea, Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-24806 Filed 11-5-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 14 UPI: Russia denies nuke plant accident rumor - (United Press International) November 05, 2004 Moscow, Russia, Nov. 5 (UPI) -- Moscow denied rumors Friday there had been an accident at the Balakovo nuclear power station in the Saratov region. The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry said all systems were running normally, Interfax reported. "Conditions for the safe operation of the Balakovo nuclear power station have not been breached in the past few years," ministry spokesman Viktor Beltsov said. On Thursday, an emergency safeguard switched on at Power Unit No. 2, which is now disconnected from the power network, he said. [UPI Perspectives] ***************************************************************** 15 Interfax: Emergencies ministry denies rumors of nuclear plant accident Interfax.com [http://www.interfax.com] Text version Nov 5 2004 10:58AM MOSCOW. Nov 5 (Interfax) - The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry has denied rumors of an accident at the Balakovo nuclear power station in Saratov region. "Conditions for the safe operation of the Balakovo nuclear power station have not been breached in the past few years," ministry spokesman Viktor Beltsov told Interfax on Friday. On Thursday, an emergency safeguard switched on at power unit two, which is now disconnected from the power network, he said. © 1991-2004 Interfax All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 16 Interfax: Repairs finalized at Balakovo NPP Interfax.com [http://www.interfax.com] Text version Nov 5 2004 4:30PM SARATOV. Nov 5 (Interfax-Volga) - A damaged section of the cord that links the second power generating unit of the Balakovo nuclear power plant to the power grid has been repaired, and an inquiry is now underway to establish why the power unit stopped on Thursday. "At 10:30 a.m., a backup unit was switched on. Radiation levels at the Balakovo nuclear power plant are normal, and the reactor is functioning as usual," says a report of Rinat Khalikov, chief federal inspector for the Saratov region, circulated on Friday. © 1991-2004 Interfax All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 17 Brattleboro Reformer: NRC calls off meetings, will reschedule to allow public [http://www.reformer.com/] November 05, 2004 Brattleboro, VT By CAROLYN LORIé Reformer Staff BRATTLEBORO — A pair of meetings scheduled next week on the missing fuel inspection and the engineering inspection report for Vermont Yankee have been cancelled, Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan said. The so-called “exit meetings” will be rescheduled at a later date and will be open to the public and press, Sheehan confirmed with the Reformer this morning. Scheduled for Tuesday, the meetings were initially slated to be public, but safety concerns voiced by Vernon town officials about a large turnout at the elementary school prompted NRC officials to switch to a closed meeting. That decision was made Thursday. However, this morning, the NRC reversed its decision to close the meetings to the public and press. Sheehan said the NRC would seek a larger venue to accommodate a heavy public turnout. The concern about an exceptionally large turnout was evidently triggered by a press release issued earlier this week by the nuclear power watchdog group, the New England Coalition, encouraging the public to attend the evening meeting. Sent out by e-mail, the release was forwarded to school or town officials, who then contacted the NRC. According to Vernon Fire Chief Terrance Parker, the elementary school gym cannot safely accommodate more than 500 people. “We didn’t want to turn people away,” said Parker. There was concern that as many as 1,000 people could show up, overwhelming the town’s ability to manage the crowd safely. Even before Thursday’s announcement, there was concern about the meeting as only the preliminary findings from the inspection report are going to be made public. According to Sheehan, that plan has not changed and the initial findings will be posted today on the NRC Web site. Copyright ©1999-2004 New England Newspapers, Inc., a member of MediaNews Group, Inc. ***************************************************************** 18 YDR: LICENSING: New reactor is possible - York Daily Record [ydr.com] New reactor is possible Friday, November 5, 2004 The Dominion energy company the go-ahead to test a new licensing process that could lead to one or more new reactors at the North Anna nuclear power station in Virginia. Dominion and NuStart Energy of Pennsylvania will be the first companies in the nuclear industry to work through an untested Nuclear Regulatory Commission process for licensing the construction and operation of new nuclear plants, DOE said. The project is part of federal Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's Nuclear Power 2010 Program. It could lead to a license to build and operate an Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. advanced reactor at North Anna. The Dominion consortia includes AECL and its U.S. subsidiary, AECL Technologies and Bechtel Power Corp. of Frederick, Md.; and Hitachi America Inc., in Tarrytown, N.Y. Copyright © York Daily Record 2004 122 S. George St., P.O. Box 15122 York, PA 17405, (717) 771-2000 ***************************************************************** 19 APP.COM: NRC reclassifies mistake by Oyster Creek workers as very minor Safety risk was 'low' [http://www.app.com/] ASBURY PARK PRESS Published in the Asbury Park Press 11/05/04 By NICHOLAS CLUNN MANAHAWKIN BUREAU LACEY -- A mistake by workers rebuilding a backup generator at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant has been classified by federal regulators as having a "very low safety significance." The Nuclear Regulatory Commission had first considered the mistake more egregious but changed course after considering, in part, testimony offered by plant management during a special meeting in September, according to a Nov. 2 letter the agency sent to plant owner AmerGen. "They did an assessment, and it was in line with what our assessment was," said plant spokeswoman Gina Scala. At the meeting, held at an agency office in Pennsylvania, plant management told the NRC why the mistake happened and why the agency should classify it as green -- the least serious grade on a 4-color scale the NRC uses to characterize the safety significance of mistakes. The scale ranges from green to white, yellow and red, the most serious. There was a "white" finding issued earlier this year pertaining to the same generator, and the NRC likely would have increased oversight at the reactor if it graded this violation as white. At issue were two bolts that a worker failed to sufficiently tighten. The bolts held a shaft that helped drive a 7-foot-wide cooling fan. Plant personnel working on the generator, including a supervisor, didn't go far enough to find information on how tightly the bolts should have been wrenched, AmerGen told the NRC. The shortcoming did not pose an immediate safety concern but raised the question of how long the generator could have operated if used. Plant management would use the generator to power safety equipment if the plant stopped producing power and lost connection to off-site electricity. Oyster Creek has two generators, both diesel-powered. The cooling fan was repaired and is ready for use. Nicholas Clunn: (609) 978-4597 or nclunn@app.com [nclunn@app.com] the Asbury Park Press ***************************************************************** 20 WCAX: NRC closes meetings on Vermont Yankee, citing safety concerns November 5, 2004 BRATTLEBORO, Vt. Nuclear Regulatory Commission meetings about missing fuel at the Vermont Yankee plant and an engineering inspection are going to be closed to the public. The meetings were supposed to be open but the commission decided to close them.That was after safety concerns were raised by Vernon town officials about a large turnout. Spokesman Neil Sheehan said NRC officials were looking for a larger space in which to hold a public meeting on the engineering inspection at a later date. The concern about an exceptionally large turnout was triggered by efforts of the New England Coalition to encourage the public to attend. Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights From WCAX-TV [http://www.worldnow.com] All content © Copyright 2001 - 2004 WorldNow and WCAX. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 21 NRC: NRC Postpones Two Meetings with Entergy Scheduled for Nov. 9 and Issues Preliminary Results for Engineering Inspection at VY News Release - Region I - 2004-05 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-04-052 November 5, 2004 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov] The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is working with local and state officials to reschedule two public exit meetings originally set for Nov. 9 in Vernon, VT. Yesterday, local officials told the NRC a larger-than-anticipated audience made them unable to support the two sessions between the NRC and Entergy to discuss preliminary findings from two inspections. Because another suitable location could not be located for Tuesdays meetings in time to adequately notify the public, the public meetings are postponed. The meetings were announced earlier this week. A meeting to present Entergy the preliminary results of NRCs Special Inspection regarding two spent fuel rod pieces that were misplaced in the Vermont Yankee spent fuel pool was to have been held at 3 p.m. Nov. 9 at the Governor Hunt House. A 6 p.m. meeting, at Vernon Elementary School, would have discussed the preliminary findings of the NRCs Engineering Team Inspection at Vermont Yankee. Both meetings would have been followed by sessions with the public. NRC was notified yesterday by local officials that they could not assure the safety of the public because there were indications that the anticipated crowds might exceed the safe capacity of the facilities. The NRC is working with local, state and federal officials to identify a suitable location and forum for a future meeting, and the public will be notified of the final arrangements. NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J. Collins said, We made the responsible decision here because our first priority is safety. We will schedule a meeting to discuss our findings publicly once we can be assured that it can be conducted in a safe and constructive manner. The NRC had committed to make the preliminary inspection results publicly available prior to the planned meetings. Those preliminary results will be posted at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/plant-specific-items/vermont-yankee-i ssues/vermont-yankee-application.html. Last revised Friday, November 05, 2004 ***************************************************************** 22 NRC: U.S. Inspection Services; Establishment of Atomic Safety and FR Doc 04-24705 [Federal Register: November 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 214)] [Notices] [Page 64598] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05no04-96] Licensing Board Pursuant to delegation by the Commission dated December 29, 1972, published in the Federal Register, 37 Fed. Reg. 28,710 (1972), and the Commission's regulations, see 10 CFR 2.104, 2.300, 2.303, 2.309, 2.311, 2.318, and 2.321, notice is hereby given that an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is being established to preside over the following proceeding: U.S. Inspection Services, Dayton, Ohio, (Civil Monetary Penalty). This proceeding concerns a request for hearing submitted on September 24, 2004, by U.S. Inspection Services (USIS) in response to a September 1, 2004 notice (69 FR 54,816 (Sept. 10, 2004)), regarding a Notice Of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty associated with an inspection of USIS activities on September 12, 2003, that indicated USIS had not been conducting its activities in full compliance with NRC requirements. The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges: Ann M. Young, Chair, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Alex S. Karlin, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Dr. Peter S. Lam, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed with the administrative judges in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302. Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of November 2004. G. Paul Bollwerk, III, Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. [FR Doc. 04-24705 Filed 11-4-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 23 [DU-WATCH] VA Funding of GWI Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 01:52:52 -0600 (CST) ----- Original Message ----- From: DSNurse@aol.com To: undisclosed-recipients: Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 4:12 AM Subject: [GWVM] Press Release concerning VA Funding of Gulf War Illness Press Release 28 October 04 Contact : Denise Nichols, Vice Chair, National Vietnam and Gulf War Veterans Coalition email: DSNurse @aol.com, phone 303-424-6235 Gulf War Research Not Hitting the Mark for Gulf War Veterans At the Recent VA-RAC GWI meeting held at VA headquaters in DC October 25-26, the following announcements were made concerning Gulf War Illness Research(see below), the National Vietnam and Gulf War Veterans Coalition finds this to be a failure to meet the hopes raised by the Department of VA that was made Oct 30, 2002 for up to 20 million dollars in research for Gulf War illnesses. (see Press Release below) The VA-RAC-GWI had done their job of targetting specific reccommendations for Urgently needed research. (http://www1.va.gov/rac-gwvi) The VA-RAC-GWI had even recruited a world renown Nobel Prize recipient Dr Greengard, Rockfeller University. He did respond to call for Research Proposals,even getting his full staff mobilized to meet the deadline for submission. This researcher's proposal was not approved. If his proposal had any merit at all but had technical issues to be worked on, then why didn't the Department of VA take steps to delay final judgement and immediately work out the specific areas of concern? A scientist of this quality should not be summarily denied but should be offered every facilitation needed. The VA is looking to improve its Research into GWI and this is seen as a negative on their scorecard in meeting that goal within the Gulf War Veteran's community. It has been 14 years since the Gulf War and ten years since Gulf War Illness hit the spotlight. This is an URGENT Medical problem that has been spearheaded since the beginning by Gulf War Veterans that have professional abilities to see the need for their fellow veterans. In the process of getting legislation and congressional interest, Mr Ross Perot has become involved. Dr Robert Hailey's recent research has led the way for higher scientific work that would benefit not only ill gulf war veterans, civilians, but also the public that might be exposed to WMD in some future terrorist event. Homeland Security should be equally concerned on getting answers for Gulf War Veterans to help this government's response to National Security in the future. The Gulf War Veterans community also calls for congressional oversight to address the quality of Research funded and the difference in what was promised concerning 20 million dollars vs 9 million now obligated. ----------------------------------30-------------------------------------------------- Office of Research and Development Gulf War Update FY 2004 RFA 69 LOis submitted 49 proposals submitted Merit Review conducted in September 14 studies approved Total funding $8,441,930 Brain and Nervous System 7 Greenwood,Beverly,PHD,FACC Oklahoma City, OK, Autonomic System Changes Causes Intestional Symptoms in Gulf War Veterans Yarowsky, Paul ,PHD, Baltimore MD,MRS tracking of Stem cells for replacement theraphy in ALS Weiner, Michael, MD, San Francisco CA Effects of Gulf War Illness on Brain Structure, Function, and Metabolism Blanchard, Melvin, MD, St Louis Mo Evaluation of STRESS RESPONSE System in Gulf War Veterans with CMI Yehuda, Rachel, PHD, Bronx, NY Glucoccorticicod Responsivity in Gulf War Veterans Beck, Kevin, PHD, East Orange, NJ, Interoceptive Stressor conditioning A Model Gulf War Illness ###### White, Roberta PHD Boston, MA Structural MRI and Cognitive correlates in Gulf War Veterans Symptoms and General Health 2 studies Kang Han, PHD Washington DC Estimates of Cancer Prevalence in Gulf Veterans Using State Registries and Post War Mortality from Neurologic Diseases in Gulf Veterans 1991-2004 Immune Function 2 Enelow, Richard MD West Haven Ct Aberrant T Cell Responses to Multiple Immunizations Klimas, Nancy MD Miami Fld Patterns of Gene Expression in Gulf War Illness Treatment 1 Ciccone Donald Phd East Orange NJ Telemedicine Intervention for Veterans with Gulf War Illness ##### Pyridostigmine Bromide - 1 Weaver, Shelley, PHD, East Orange, NJ Early Life Determinants of Vulnerability to PB Diagnosis -1 Murdoch, Maureen MD MPH Minneapolis MN Sexual Assault Prevalence Among Male PTSD Disabled Gulf War Veterans ###### FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 30, 2002 VA Doubles Gulf War Research Funding WASHINGTON - The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) plans to make available up to $20 million for research into Gulf War illnesses during fiscal year 2004, a figure twice the amount spent by VA in any previous year. The announcement, made by VA Deputy Secretary Dr. Leo S. Mackay Jr., highlighted a two-day meeting of VA's Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans Illnesses. The decision was, in part, a response to a committee report in June concerning areas of research that need further study. "We want the best researchers and the best ideas brought to bear on this long-standing problem," Mackay said. "Research into Gulf War illnesses is an area ripe for important discoveries." Studies by researchers from VA and the private sector have found evidence of a possible neurological basis for the complaints of some veterans. The committee, commissioned last January by VA Secretary Anthony Principi and chaired by James Binns, a Vietnam veteran, includes scientists, business people, Gulf War veterans and veterans advocates. Some members have been critical of previous government efforts to diagnose, treat and research the medical problems of some veterans. "This is a huge occasion for our work," said Binns. "This is tangible evidence that this administration is different and committed to finding answers." In addition to the increase in funding, VA plans to create a special center dedicated to medical imaging technologies. These technologies are important to understanding Gulf War illnesses as well as other conditions important to veterans. - More - Gulf Panel 2/2/2/2 To date, the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services and VA have spent $213 million on 224 research projects to answer the questions surrounding Gulf War illnesses. "Science is finally beginning to unravel the mysteries of Gulf War illnesses. And finally, there is reason for hope," Mackay said. # # # People wishing to receive e-mail from VA with the latest news releases and updated fact sheets can subscribe at the following Internet address: http://www.va.gov/opa/pressrel/opalist_listserv.cfm [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> $9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/Sj.0lB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 24 Guardian Unlimited: U.N.: Traces of Plutonium Found in Egypt From the Associated Press [UP] Friday November 5, 2004 7:31 PM By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The U.N atomic watchdog has discovered plutonium particles near an Egyptian nuclear facility and is trying to determine if they are evidence of a secret weapons program or simply the byproduct of peaceful research, diplomats said Friday. In comments to The Associated Press, the diplomats warned against assuming Egypt might have violated the Nonproliferation Treaty by trying to separate plutonium, a substance used to make nuclear weapons. The traces could be from a cracked research reactor fuel element or have other, nonmilitary origins, the diplomats said on condition of anonymity. ``From time to time these things pop up in places they should not be at,'' said a diplomat familiar with the investigations of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency. ``Most of the time, there is a reasonable answer.'' Still, he said agency experts trying to determine the origin of the particles were not ruling out any possibilities until seeing the test results from several European laboratories analyzing the Egyptian samples. The discovery of the particles was a reflection of more efficient controls by the IAEA of member nations' nuclear activities over the past decade as it attempts to prevent proliferation either by rogue nations or black-market profiteers. The controls include more pervasive environmental sampling, which is meant to trace particles of plutonium and enriched uranium - two alternate components of nuclear weapons. Such tests have revealed traces of highly enriched, weapons-grade uranium in Iran - evidence, says the United States, of a secret weapons program. Iran insists it is working only to generate nuclear power. A Vienna-based diplomat said Friday that the agency's information was still too sketchy to firmly establish how old the Egyptian plutonium traces were. But he suggested they appeared to have been released into the environment no later than the 1980s. Egypt appeared to turn away from the pursuit of a nuclear weapons program decades ago. The Soviet Union and China reportedly rebuffed its requests for nuclear arms in the 1960s, and by the 1970s, Egypt gave up the idea of building a plutonium production reactor and reprocessing plant. Egypt runs small-scale nuclear programs for medical and research purposes. Plans were floated as recently as 2002 to build the country's first nuclear power reactor. But no construction date has been announced, and the pro-government Al-Ahram Weekly recently reported that the plant site near the coastal town of Al-Dabaa might be sold to make way for tourism development. Although it signed the Nonproliferation Treaty, Egypt in recent years has become one of its vocal critics, mainly because of concerns over Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal and more recent fears about Iran's nuclear agenda. Attempts to reach diplomats for comment at Egyptian Embassy in Vienna after office hours Friday were unsuccessful. Cairo earlier this week denounced a French newspaper report linking Egypt to Libya's now-dismantled nuclear weapons program and suggesting the IAEA's Egyptian head, Mohamed ElBaradei, was protecting his country from scrutiny. But one of the diplomats suggested the IAEA's search and testing in Egypt reflected the impartiality of ElBaradei, and said that - if there are any suspicions about the origins of the plutonium - the agency head would be sure to report it to the IAEA's board of governors. On the Net: International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 25 The State: Nuclear laundry to be razed 11/05/2 New use for Rosewood site is up to city of Columbia By JOHN C. DRAKE Staff Writer The South Edisto Court neighborhood finally will be rid of a former nuclear laundry facility that area leaders say has stymied residential growth there. Demolition of the 30-year-old facility begins next week. City officials have $500,000 set aside from surplus funds from a previous budget year to buy the approximately two acres UniTech General Services Inc. owns, said Councilwoman Anne Sinclair. This means a lot to our community, said Bessie Watson, the neighborhood president of South Edisto Court in Rosewood, who grew up there. Watson said residents used to watch as trucks pulled up in front of neighboring homes and unloaded radioactive material for laundering at the site. It was not a safe environment for our children, the elderly, she said. UniTech left the site in May 2003 for a new facility in Barnwell County at the urging of neighborhood and city officials. A $5 million federal grant covered the expense of moving the company and will pay for cleaning up the Edisto site. Company officials say all radioactive materials have been removed from the above-ground portions of the facility. A barely measurable amount of radioactive materials may remain underground in pipes and pits at the site, said Michael Fuller, manager for health physics and engineering with UniTech General Services Inc. He said the material was not enough to be harmful and would be removed after the buildings walls are demolished. The state Department of Health and Environmental Control will oversee the demolition process, which should be completed in February. South Edisto Court is at the intersection of several revitalization efforts in the city. That means city officials are primed to move forward on redeveloping the area, but it also means the city must decide on a vision to pursue. The South Columbia Development Corp., the citys quasi-private development agency for the area, has proposed a complex of live-work units. That typically refers to a complex of small businesses and condominiums or apartments. The East Central City Consortium, an alliance of inner-city neighborhoods, has suggested building single-family homes on the site. The Columbia Housing Authority, which is developing a master-planned community on the adjacent former Hendley Homes site, has suggested creating a community park there. Watson said she would prefer having a community center and park there. Our children have to go all the way to the Boys &Girls Club on South Holly Street, she said. Ultimately the city, which will take over ownership of the property once the facility is demolished, will have to decide what to do there. Sinclair, who represents the area, said the city should choose the wisest use, not necessarily the highest use. The Rev. Russell Moore, pastor of Gilbert Memorial Baptist Church, which is behind the laundry site, said it kept people away from the community. The idea of having a nuclear laundry near a church, it just sort of frightened people off. The removal of the facility makes the neighborhood more inviting, he said. Not only have the drugs been removed out of Edisto Court, but now the chemicals are gone. Reach Drake at (803) 771-8692 or jdrake@thestate.com [jdrake@thestate.com] . TheStateOnline ***************************************************************** 26 Bellona: Putin ordered to find lost nuclear lighthouses in the Pacific The Russian Defence Ministry allocated money for the search and lifting operation of the two nuclear lighthouses only after personal interference of the Russian President Putin. 2004-11-04 18:34 In 1987, an IEU-1 type 2,5-tonne RTG was dumped in the sea while being lifted and towed by an Mi-8 helicopter of the Far Eastern Administration of Civil Aviation to Cape Nizky in the Okha region on the eastern coast of Sakhalin. The Defence Ministry military unit no.13148 put the order for the transportation . The pilots explained that the unusually windy weather was rocking the helicopter so violently that they had no other option but to dispatch the load and dump it into the sea to avoid a crash landing. In August 1997, another IEU-1 type RTG fell from a helicopter into the sea in the Cape of Maria area of the northern part of Sakhalin in the Smirnykh region. The generator sank at a distance of 200 to 400 metres off the coast in 25 to 30 metres of water. According to military officials, the cause of the accident was the disengagement of the lock of the sling load system due to human error. The local authorities struggled many years to get financing for the salvage operations from the Russian Parliament and the Government. On August 10 this year the Russian tycoon and Chukotka Governor Roman Abramovich sent a letter about the accident to president Putin. On August 11, the letter was passed to the defence minister with the president’s remark “Make the order. Report about the measures taken. Urgent. V.Putin.” Immediately the money from the Emergency Government fund was allocated to solve this problem, Rossiyskaya Gazeta reported. The special hydrographic survey vessel of the Pacific Fleet examined 2.7 square kilometres and went over 60 miles while searching for the lost generator. The expedition included the scientists from the Pacific Fleet Hydrographic Service, Krasnoarmeysk Scientific Research Institute of Mechanisation, Moscow Scientific Company Fort-21 as well as the group of the Sakhalin divers. The radioisotope thermoelectric generator was found at 34 meters depth one mile from the shore. The representative of the Krasnoarmeysk Scientific Research Institute Vyacheslav Fedorchenko said the most modern survey equipment had been used. The previous expeditions were unsuccessful due to the lack of such equipment. According to Fedorchenko, the second stage of the operation should be lifting of the generator, which weighs 2.5 tonnes, has size 1.5x1.5m, contains strontium-90. The producers guarantee that strontium can remain intact in the seawater for 10-15 years, RIA-Novosti reported. The second nuclear generator will be harder to find, as the search area is 25 square kilometres although the depth is only from 3 to 5 meters. The generator is likely covered with 1-2 meters sediment. The radioactivity of each generator is 1.5 million curies. This is 6 times higher than radioactivity of all the solid radioactive waste dumped by the USA, UK, Japan and the Netherlands from 1946 till 1972. It is expected that the generator found in October will be lifted next summer. Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] , President: Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no] Information: info@bellona.no [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 27 Bellona: Murmansk Governor discussed with Putin nuclear safety problems On October 13, the Murmansk Governor Yury Yevdokimov spoke with the Russian President Vladimir Putin in the Kremlin for one hour instead of 15 minutes, TV channel GTRK Murman reported. 2004-11-04 20:23 One of the issues raised at the meeting was international co-operation in the field of nuclear and radiation safety. Yury Yevdokimov told the president that the working group of the State Council Presidium prepared concrete suggestions on the problems, which earlier complicated the co-operation in this field: taxation of the donors, liability for the nuclear damage, access of the international experts to the restricted Russian nuclear sites. The Murmansk Governor believes there are no serious obstacles to solve these problems now and the next stage of the international co-operation development should be legalisation of these ideas inside the law. The issues of the nuclear and radiation safety should be examined at one of the next State Council meetings, Regions.ru reported. Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] , President: Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no] Information: info@bellona.no [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 28 Oregon State Daily Barometer: A new era of nuclear safety, thanks to OSU Friday November 05, 2004 Experts believe OSU's new design will herald the future of nuclear energy By Ben Greenwalt John Groome, facility operations manager for the OSU Radiation Center, is dwarfed by the 1/4 scale model of the APEX-1000. Alan Perry The Daily Barometer An upgraded test facility in the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation is helping map out the "next generation" of power generating nuclear reactors. During the fall, tests were done at Oregon State's Advanced Thermal Hydraulic Research Facility, in addition to large amounts of other work done at sites both domestic and international. OSU and The Industrial Company were given an award from the Associated Builders and Contractors for upgrading a testing facility that will change the way safety is ensured in nuclear plants. "One of the major accidents they worry about for a nuclear plant is a loss of coolant accident," said John Groome, facility operations manager for the Advanced Thermal Hydrolic Lab. The new design helps ensure safety with updated measures. The design, called the AP1000, comes from a company called Westinghouse, and will be available globally in the near future. The new reactor designs are less complex, more cost-effective, and much safer than in the past. The model is a revolutionary design in the field of nuclear power that is expected to greatly improve the manageability and safety of nuclear power production. They employ natural forces such as gravity, convection and evaporation to improve safety. Fewer pumps, piping, valves and cables mean less can go wrong or fail in comparison to reactors of the past. "The AP1000 has done away with all those active components (for safety)," Groome said. In the test laboratory at OSU, the design elements were built at one-quarter scale, and then tested extensively under a variety of conditions. The new facility upgrade involved new electrical, mechanical and piping components, new data acquisition and tracking devices and state of the art computer hardware and software implementation. "The thermal research facility is world class," said Steve Reese, RC Reactor Administrator at the Radiation Center. Many industry experts believe this new type of reactor should be safer and more economical than any other reactor in history, and could lead to a resurgence in the nuclear power industry both in the U.S. and worldwide. Groome said the new safety issues are a result of new government regulations for planning and building nuclear power plants. "Before you even start building a plant you have to have a fully designed and certified plan from the (Nuclear Regulatory Commission)," Groome said of the new standards. Westinghouse and other companies use facilities like the one at OSU to earn final design approval, perform tests and generate data. Besides the thermal facility, OSU also boasts a uranium/zirconium hydride- fueled TRIGA research reactor. There are about 25 or 26 other universities that have similar reactors, but only a handful are more powerful than OSU's. Licensed and regulated by the NRC, the reactor has been in operation for more than 30 years. Classes in nuclear engineering, radiation protection and chemistry are significant uses It is also an excellent source of neutron and gamma radiation for research purposes. Located on the corner of 35th and Jefferson, tours of the facility will be given for Dad's Weekend from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. on Saturday. For more information on the facilities and the Nuclear Engineering and Health Physics Department, visit ne.oregonstate .edu [http://www.ne.oregonstate .edu] . Ben Greenwalt, staff writer news@dailybarometer.com [news@dailybarometer.com] , 737-6376 A new era of nuclear safety, thanks to OSU Post your feedback on this topic here No feedback has been posted yet. Please post yours! © 2004 The Daily Barometer, Oregon State ***************************************************************** 29 Tri-City Herald: Health to be key issue in downwinder trial This story was published Friday, November 5th, 2004 By Annette Cary Herald staff writer People who believe their health was harmed by radioactive releases from Hanford will not have to prove early Hanford contractors were negligent to win their lawsuit, federal Judge William Fremming Nielsen ruled. That leaves whether their health was harmed by Hanford emissions as the only issue to be decided at trial, Nielsen wrote in a decision signed Wednesday in Spokane. Attorneys for about 1,800 people who lived downwind of Hanford when plutonium was being produced there argued that they did not have to prove that contractors had not exercised due care because Hanford operations legally qualify as "abnormally dangerous activities." Nielsen considered six factors that would make an activity abnormally dangerous and agreed with downwinder attorneys that Hanford emissions qualified on each count. That included whether the value of the work at Hanford to the community was so great that its danger cannot be regarded as abnormal. The fact that Hanford operations played a critical role in ending World War II in August 1945 is undisputed, the judge agreed. Japan surrendered within days of the United States dropping a nuclear bomb on Nagasaki that used plutonium produced at Hanford. The entire nation benefited while only the people surrounding Hanford bore the health risks, Nielsen agreed with downwinder attorneys. "If injury to some was the necessary price for a benefit to the many, the just course is to be glad of the benefit while compensating the injured," downwinder attorneys wrote in court documents. After uranium fuel was irradiated in Hanford reactors, the plutonium was chemically separated. During the process, radioactive iodine was released through 200-foot-high stacks intended to allow the material to dilute as it dispersed. The radioactive iodine was carried by the wind toward Spokane to fall on crops and pastures where milk cows grazed. When food or milk was consumed, it concentrated in the thyroids of downwinders. Many plaintiffs believe they developed thyroid cancers or diseases as a result. Attorneys for early contractors questioned whether during the 1940s and 1950s the danger of radioactive iodine was known. Nielsen decided it was. As early as 1925, scientists knew iodine in the diet of cows was transferred to their milk, he wrote. Scientists working with Hanford in 1943 noted that releases of iodine could cause damage by the concentration in the thyroid. Although Hanford scientists starting in 1945 concluded that people were not at risk from the levels of radioactive iodine being released from Hanford, they also said more study was needed, Nielsen pointed out. The judge also agreed with downwinder attorneys that Hanford emissions were unavoidable and thus qualified as abnormally dangerous. Scientists knew that because radioactive iodine decays so quickly that the longer fuel was held before the plutonium was separated, the less iodine would go up the stacks. "That outcome was impossible to achieve given the pressure to produce the plutonium for the war effort," Nielsen wrote. Other factors considered by Nielsen included whether unusual processes were used at Hanford, whether there was a potential for serious harm to people and whether the nuclear reservation was located in a place where people could be exposed. The downwinder lawsuit has dragged on in the courts for more than a dozen years. Nielsen has ordered a jury trial for this spring to try the cases of about a dozen bellwether downwinders. His hope is that will produce enough information to allow settlement of the remainder of the cases. © 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 30 Brattleboro Reformer: Parents hear details of school evacuation plan November 05, 2004 Brattleboro, VT By CAROLYN LORIé Reformer Staff BRATTLEBORO -- Approximately 50 people gathered at the Academy School to discuss the evacuation plan for Brattleboro schools, in the event of a Vermont Yankee emergency. The concerns voiced by parents were many: Would bus drivers actually show up to transport the children if there was a serious accident at the plant? Are parents allowed to come and pick up their children or are they expected to meet up with them at the reception center in Bellows Falls? Will potassium iodide pills be distributed by school personnel and who would decide when it should be taken? Town and school officials did their best to answer the questions but many remained unanswerable. "We're not here to tell you that this plan is a 100 percent plan. We're never going to get a 100 percent plan. It will always be a work in progress," said Town Manager Jerry Remillard. In addition to Remillard, WSESU superintendent Ron Stahley, Brattleboro Fire Chief Dave Emery and emergency management official Steve Goldsmith were also at Thursday's meeting. The meeting was prompted by a letter sent to Stahley last June by a group of concerned parents. According to Stahley, he had confidence that the plan was workable and that school personnel were prepared to implement it if necessary. Two teachers who attended the meeting, however, said that they were unsure about what was expected of them and that there had not been enough discussion among school personnel. "I feel in the dark about this," said Kevin O'Donnell, a math teacher at Brattleboro Union High School. Upon hearing that students and staff may be ordered to shelter in place under certain accident conditions, O'Donnell pointed out how problematic that would be given the amount of construction going on at the school. According to O'Donnell, for some time a large bookcase was used to cover a section of missing wall in his classroom. The gaps around the bookcase were large enough "for a raccoon to climb through," making the school unsafe if a radioactive plume were passing over it. After the meeting, Stahley said that drills would be done at the school, including an unplanned one where the bus drivers would be paged. During the school bus drill, children would be loaded on the buses but not transported. Stahley anticipated that the unplanned drill would happen some time early next year. Although the superintendent stated at the start of the meeting that he wanted to avoid the "politics of Vermont Yankee," parent Randy Knaggs said that the best way to deal with a risk is to eliminate it. He asked the officials to go on record saying that the best strategy would be to close the plant. The comment drew applause from others in the audience. Stahley and Emery pointed out that the plan is necessary for any emergency. Emery went on to state that Vermont Yankee will continue to pose a threat even after it shuts down, as the spent fuel may be there for many years to come. At the close of the meeting, which lasted almost three hours, Remillard said that it was clear that increased communication about the plan between the public and officials was necessary. "These meetings aren't necessarily easy but this was a good meeting," said Remillard afterwards. Carolyn Lorié can be reached at clorie@reformer.com. [clorie@reformer.com.] Copyright ©1999-2004 New England Newspapers, Inc., a ***************************************************************** 31 AOL: Breathing Uranium Oxides: Global Medical Crisis of Depleted Uranium AxisofLogic/ U.S. Military [http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish] U.S. Military By John Lewallen Nov 5, 2004, 16:04 I begin my report on the health effects of uranium munitions with a heartfelt personal appeal: stop using uranium munitions now! If you are the President of the United States, or under the President's command, you are commiting a war crime by using, or ordering the use, of uranium munitions. If you are a soldier about to use a uranium bullet, missile or bomb, don't do it. The uranium oxide vapors unleashed when you pull the trigger put both you and your target in a battlefield gas environment of tiny, deadly, mutagenic uranium oxide particles. These tiny uranium oxide particles made when up to seventy per cent of the uranium projectile you shoot burns on friction and impact will stay in the environment as long as the Earth exists, bringing death, a host of diseases, and mutation to many living creatures. Summary: Uranium is the leading deep-penetration metal used today in United States military munitions worldwide. Uranium combines superior density with the tendency to sharpen and burn on impact. The first wartime use of uranium munitions was in 1991, when United Nations forces used an estimated 320 tons of uranium munitions in Iraq, primarily in anti-tank munitions in desert warfare. These munitions contributed to the complete neutralization of the Iraqi tank forces, so much so that during the 2003 U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, many Iraqi tanks were abandoned unused. All commentary on uranium munitions is colored by the fact that U.S. armed forces worldwide are fully committed to the use of uranium munitions. The official U.S. military position is that uranium munitions pose no toxic or radioactive health danger to anyone. In fact, as has been known by the U.S. military since 1943, when the inventors of the atomic bomb described uranium vapor as an agent of chemical and radiological warfare, breathable uranium is a horrific weapon with both chemical and radiological toxicity. Extensive testing of uranium munitions show that from ten to seventy per cent of the uranium vaporizes on impact, in particle sizes ranging down to the microscopic. Today in 2004, thirteen years after the first massive use of uranium munitions, countless thousands or millions of its victims cry in vain for relief as the United States and other military forces continue to use uranium munitions. Anyone seeking to end this suicidal chemical and radiological gas warfare is confronting one of the biggest institutional lies in history, the lie that uranium munitions pose no long-term or widespread health hazard. This lie is so huge, and has so many tentacles and subtleties, that it has become institutional orthodoxy in the United States. The truth, as it is being pieced together by dedicated, disciplined, peer-reviewed scientists worldwide, is too horrifying for most people to contemplate. The vaporized, ceramic uranium oxides which billow as smoke from an impacting uranium munition have poisoned the human environment with minute, undetectable uranium oxide particles which will remain radioactive and toxic for the lifetime of Earth. Unlike natural uranium, which is soluble, breathed uranium oxide particles are insoluble, and become lodged in the human body if breathed, remaining there for many years, causing a host of diseases. Uranium oxides are mutagenic, attacking the genetic code which allows the human race to reproduce without crippling mutation. Today the United States military forces are fully committed to a munition metal which, based on U.S. Veterans Affairs disability statistics on veterans of the 1991 Gulf War, will, along with the effects of other toxins in Iraq, disable one out of three battlefield troops who use uranium munitions within a decade of their exposure. To repeat: ONE-THIRD OF THE VETERANS OF THE 1991 GULF WAR ARE DISABLED TEN YEARS AFTER THE WAR. THE AGES-OLD CLASH OF SPEAR AND SHIELD "Briefing on Depleted Uranium," Colonel James Naughton, U.S. Army Materiel Command, March 14, 2003: (Image of burned, blackened, and shattered Iraqi tank on screen) "Why do we use it (depleted uranium)? This is the result. What we want to be able to do is strike the target from farther away than we can be hit back, and we want the target to be destroyed when we shoot at it. We don't want to see rounds bouncing off. We don't want to put our soldiers in the position that you see, if you watch 'Kelly's Heroes,' where they load tank rounds with paint in order to blind the target. And I'm sure everybody in here has probably seen 'Kelly's Heroes' once, because in World War II we faced a problem of not having the overreach we have today. "We don't ever want to go back to that. And we don't want to fight even. Nobody goes into a war and wants to be even with the enemy. We want to be ahead, and depleted uranium gives us that advantage. We can hit, and they can't hit us." The story of how uranium munitions, and uranium armoring, became today's state-of-the-art metal of war worldwide begins with the ages-old desire of military forces to have superior spears and shields: spears that will fly farther than the enemy's and penetrate the opponent's best armor, and armor that will stop any spear the enemy can throw. In the 1960s tungsten carbide was the primary metal used by the U.S. armed forces for armor-piercing projectiles. Tungsten carbide could not reliably penetrate the double-and triple-plated armor developed in the 1960s, touching off a scramble to invent a better armor penetrator. That decade the military began experimenting with uranium as an armor-piercing metal. Tungsten carbide continued to be favored over uranium, for two reasons: problems in developing a consistent alloy, and penetration tests that failed to show clear superiority of uranium over tungsten carbide against older-model Soviet tanks. In the early seventies, it became clear that the latest-generation armors would be impenetrable by tungsten carbide. Also, tests by the Air Force and Navy using small-caliber uranium rounds (20-,25-, and 30mm) clearly showed the penetration superiority of uranium rounds. Extensive Army testing for a better tank round metal for the 105mm M68 tank gun led to the XM774 Cartride Program in 1973, which used an alloy of uranium and titanium in an improved design that allowed the uranium core to withstand high acceleration without breaking up. In the words of John Pike of : "Since the selection of depleted uranium for the XM774 cartridge, all major developments in tank ammunition have selected depleted uranium, including the 105mm M833 series and the 120mm M829 series (the latter being the primary anti-armor round used in the Gulf War). This pattern continues today, with the latest generation of the 105mm M900 series and the 25mm M919 for the Bradley Fighting Vehicle." When a uranium round is fired, friction and impact vaporize from ten to seventy per cent of the uranium, depending on what the round hits. Uranium is pyrophoric, meaning it burns on friction and impact. Also, unlike tungsten which dulls when it penetrates, uranium rounds shatter and burn as they penetrate armor, sharpening the round as it goes. In 1991, uranium munitions turned Iraqi tanks into hellish crematoria thick with breathable, burning particles of uranium. Today very few people know the full extent of the use of uranium, depleted or fully radioactive uranium, as a metal of penetration by the world's armed forces. A cloak of secrecy and web of deception make it impossible for an ordinary soul to know when, where, and how much uranium has been used on bullets, artillery rounds, bombs and missiles worldwide. The Groves Memo: Gas Warfare With Uranium Vapor In 1943, the Manhattan Project scientists, racing to beat Hitler in inventing the atomic bomb, realized the Germans might use vaporized uranium as a gas warfare agent, or that U.S. forces might want to use it. Here is a quote from the "Groves Memo" written by Drs. James B. Conant, A.H. Compton, and H.C. Urey to General L.R. Groves on October 30, 1943 (the "material" referred to is uranium): "As a gas warfare instrument the material would be ground into particles of microscopic size to form dust and smoke and distributed by a ground-fired projectile, land vehicles, or aerial bombs. In this form it would be inhaled by personnel. The amount necessary to cause death to a person inhaling the material is extremely small. It is estimated that one millionth of a gram accumulating in a person's body would be fatal. There are no known methods of treatment for such a casualty. "Two factors appear to increase the effectiveness of radioactive dust or smoke as a weapon. These are: 1) It cannot be detected by the senses; 2) It can be distributed in a dust or smoke form so finely powdered that it will permeate a standard gas mask filter in quantities large enough to be extremely damaging. An off-setting factor in its effectiveness as a weapon is that in a dust or smoke form the material is so finely pulverized that it takes on the characteristic of a quickly dissipating gas and is therefore subject to all the factors (such as wind) working against maintenance of high concentrations for more than a few minutes over a given area.... "Areas so contaminated by radioactive dusts and smokes, would be dangerous as long as a high enough concentration of material could be maintained...they can be stirred up as a fine dust from the terrain by winds, movement of vehicles or troops, etc., and would remain a potential hazard for a long time.... "Particles larger than 1 micron in size are likely to be deposited in nose, trachea or bronchi and then be brought up with mucus on the walls at the rate of 1/2-1 cm/min. Particles smaller than 1 micron are more likely to be deposited in the alveoli where they will either remain indefinitely or be absorbed into the lympatics or blood." . The Clouds of Hell: Baghdad, October 1, 2003 The Uranium Medical Research Centre, a nonprofit research group, sent a bold team of sample-collectors into Baghdad in the fall of 2003 to collect soil, water and urine samples for uranium contamination testing. Here is part of their report on the U.S. battlefield cleanup effort in Baghdad, October, 2003: "The most disturbing circumstance was observed in the U.S. occupied base in south-western Baghdad in the Auweirj district. It is close to the International Airport and hosts one of the largest Coalition bases around Baghdad....The area was subject to considerable aerial bombing and rocket fire prior to the Coalition ground forces' arrival followed by several ground skirmishes along the main routes to the International Airport and western entrances to the city. "Leaving the downtown core for Auweirj requires crossing one of the elevated bridges over the Tigris Rover. The raised bridge provides a long view towards the south/southwest. On October 1, the team's third day in Baghdad, this view was interrupted by an enormous dust cloud hovering over a several hectare area, rising upwards of 300 meters (1000 ft.). The cloud slowly traversed Auweirj...Auweirj contains a wealthy residential neighbourhood...Some of the highest overall ambient air and ground surface radioactivity readings were measured in Auweirj... "As the team's vehicle approached Auweirj, the cloud was blanketing the Coalition-occupied base, depositing a layer of fresh dust on people, houses, automobiles, and the highway. We had to turn on the windshield wipers. Departing the Coalition-occupied base was a long, steady stream of tandem-axle dump trucks carrying full loads of sand, heading south away from the city. Returning from the south was a second stream of fully loaded dump trucks waiting to enter the base....The soil removal was lofting tonnes of fine, light dust into the local environment, which was then falling back to inundate square kilometores of residential neighbourhoods and Coalition occupied facilities." A Deadly Pack of Pentagon Lies: Michael Kilpatrick, M.D. Representing the U.S. Department of Defense Iraq Deployment Health Support Directorate, Dr. Michael Kilpatrick made the following statements on March 14, 2003: "Depleted uranium is 40 percent less radioactive than natural uranium around us. And so when it's outside the body it's just not an issue. It's only when it's internalized--either by inhaling the dust, the oxide, as Colonel Naughton said when there is penetration of armor, it does self-sharpen and it does create an oxide dust. And there are people who were in or on the vehicles that were struck in friendly fire, who did inhale that oxide, and we have not seen any medical consequence from that.... "When DU does strike armor and that oxide is created, it falls to the ground very quickly--usually within about a 50-meter range. As Colonel Naughton said, it's heavy. It's 1.7 times as heavy as lead. So even if it's a small dust particle, it's still very heavy. And it stays on the ground.... "Our studies in the United States over 15 years have not shown depleted uranium going from the soil into the groundwater. It just does not move from the round that is in the soil. And the bottom line is there is going to be no impact on the health of the people in the environment, or people who were there at the time it was shot." The Vanishing Urine Samples In 1991 the victorious Gulf War veterans returned outwardly unscathed from the Iraqi battlefields, having taken only small numbers of visible casualties. However, they had been exposed to a staggering array of toxins, including rushed vaccinations and breathable vapors from uranium munitions. That same year Dr. Asaf Durakovic, who at the time was also a Colonel in the U.S. Army, became aware that Major Doug Rokke, who had been doing cleanup work to remove U.S. military vehicles destroyed by "friendly fire" in Kuwait and Iraq, was seeking medical treatment for several U.S. and British soldiers who were showing a wide array of symptoms which suggested the possibility of poisoning by inhaled uranium oxides. Both Maj. (also Dr.) Rokke and Col. Durakovic were under specific orders to protect U.S. troops from the health hazards of uranium munitions. Dr. Durakovic, Director of Nuclear Medicine at a VA hospital, immediately agreed to treat the sick troops. An expert in the toxicology of uranium and other radioactive materials, Dr. Durakovic took urine samples from the sick soldiers, and sent them by registered mail to a lab in Aberdeen, Maryland for analysis of uranium content, broken down into the different uranium isopopes, which could indicate the source of the contamination. "The urine samples never arrived in Aberdeen," Dr.Durkovic recalled in a 2003 interview. "All my inquiries were futile. Patients had renal surgeries, they were very sick, and some died." Dr. Durkovic then had to endure constant verbal attack from many quarters to continue his work of protecting U.S. troops from battlefield uranium vapor contamination. The same thing happened to Major Rokke. Then began an internal struggle of the soul within the United States military establishment, as the impulse to find out the truth and protect human health gave way first to the deeper military instinct to cling to the superior metal of penetration at all costs, and now also to the chilling knowledge that everyone in a responsible position who has claimed that uranium munitions pose no significant chemical or radiologcal hazard to human or environmental health is potentially liable for damages and guilty of crimes under U.S. and international law. Today, Dr. Asaf Durakovic and Major Doug Rokke, are two leaders of an international movement to stop the use of uranium munitions. As Director of the Uranium Medical Research Center, Dr. Durakovic brings his lifelong expertise in the medical effects of radiation to the field study of the leavings of uranium munitions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. Every serious student of the health and environmental effects of uranium munitions is well-advised to read Dr. Durakovic's two key articles, "Medical Effects of Internal Contamination With Radiation," and "Undiagnosed Illnesses and Radioactive Warfare." These two scientific, peer-reviewed articles thick with references to actual research studies offer an ordinary person the best basis for sorting out the truth about the health effects of uranium munitions from the multitude of misunderstandings, lies and distortions. Doug Rokke has become "The Flying Squirrel," his nickname as a B52 pilot in Vietnam, a short and very energetic speaker hopping, shouting and gesticulating in an Oct. 2,2003 speech before the Humboldt County, California, Veterans for Peace. Major Rokke believes a lot of his superior officers are lying war criminals who should be brought to prosecution, and he read written, signed orders and statements to lie and cover-up the horrible toxicity of uranium munitions. The Disappearing Medical Records In 1995, Congressman Christopher Shays (R-CT), contacted his friend Robert Newman, a retired journalist, to help him investigate a strange new disease, or diseases, sweeing through Gulf War veterans. "The Congressman was receiving a disturbing number of letters and e-mails from sick veterans in his district complaining that, when trying to get treatment at veterans hospitals, they were told, 'It's all in your head.' They weren't getting any help," Mr. Newman recalled in a 2001 interview. 16. Congressman Shays held fifteen hearings on what came to be called "Gulf War Syndrome" for the committe he chaired, the Subcommittee on Security, Veterans Issues, and International Relations, beginning March, 1996. After interviewing veterans and experts in various fields, the subcommittee concluded that Gulf War Syndrome was caused by radiation and/or chemical substances they encountered during their military service in Iraq, such as PB and untested vaccines they were forced to take. "We learned that the medical records of nearly all the veterans had disappeared," Newman said. "For the five years or so it took Congress to launch this investigation, the Defense Department and Veterans Administration took their time responding to veterans who sought treatment or compensation. In the end, the requests were refused. At best, they took folks in but insisted the symptoms were just due to stress.." . Disability Compensation Without Investigating Cause In October, 1998, Congress passed two laws based on the findings of the 14 bipartisan members of Congressman Shay's subcommittee. "The gist of those laws," Robert Newman explained, "is this. One stipulates that even without medical records, the illneses of Gulf War veterans must be recognized as due to their service in the Middle East, and the Defense Department and the Veterans Administration are required to offer prompt and appropriate treatment and compensation. The other one...prohibits the administration of any experimental drugs to soldiers without their consent." This law opened the way for the Veterans Administration to award full disability to 221,000 Gulf War veterans with a host of symptoms by September, 2002, with thousands of cases still pending. It also diverted attention away from any scientific inquiry into the causes of Gulf War Syndrome. When Hiroshima newsman Akira Tashiro interviewed Robert Newman in 2001, he was still devoted to monitoring the Veterans Administration for just treatment and compensation for Gulf War Syndrome victims. "The laws are absolutely inadequate," Robert Newman said, because full treatment and compensation would cost an impossibly large sum of money. Based on what he had learned about the probable long-term medical effects of breathing battlefield uranium vapors, Newman expressed worries that, for the next ten years, cancer and neurological disorder will increase among Gulf War veterans. Mutant Science: The 1998 Rand Report A prime example of what one might call "Mutant Science" --truth chopped up and spliced with lie to make the Big Institutional Lie--is the 1999 Rand Report which concluded, and I quote, "Although any increase in radiation to the human body can be calculated to be harmful from extrapolation from higher levels, there are no peer reviewed published reports of detectable increases of cancer or other negative health effects from radiation exposure to inhaled or ingested natural uranium at levels far exceeding those likely in the Gulf. This is mainly because the body is very effective at eliminating ingested and inhaled natural uranium and because the low radioactivity per unit mass of natural uranium and DU means that the mass of uranium needed for significant internal exposure is virtually impossible to obtain....Large variations in exposure to radioactivity from natural uranium in the normal environment have not been associated with negative health effects." The 1999 Rand Report on Depleted Uranium, prepared by a research think-tank on contract with the U.S. Department of Defense, provides the "scientific basis" for the Pentagon's claim that uranium munitions pose no hazard to human health or the environment. It is a review of the literature, brushing aside such evidence as Major Rokke has gained by doing actual clean-up and testing of uranium munitions as not being "peer-reviewed published reports." It says first, "any increase in radiation to the human body can be calculated to be harmful from extrapolation from higher levels." In reality, since 1991, worldwide evidence of horrific casualties with multiple symptoms has been found wherever uranium munitions have been used. The lack of "peer-reviewed published reports" linking negative health effects to inhaled battlefield uranium vapors is a flat-out lie; see Dr. Durkavoic's two key studies referred to above. "...the mass of uranium needed for significant internal exposure is virtually impossible to obtain." This is blatantly untrue, both because battlefield concentrations of uranium vapor are massive, and because even one minute particle of uranium oxide lodged inside a person's body can cause the destruction of dna in adjoining cells. Toxic Forever, Radioactive for The Expected Lifetime of Earth As the armies of the United States range across the Earth showering bullets, artillery rounds, bombs and missiles, it is known only to insiders what type of uranium is being used, how much, or where. Quoting the Rand report, "The material generally used by the U.S. Department of Defense is 40 percent less radioactive than natural uranium." However, Uranium Medical Research Center field investigations found that natural uranium bombs and munitions had been used by the United States in Afghanistan during 2002, heavily contaminating the population and environment. Even the March, 2003 Pentagon briefing on uranium munitions noted that some reactor-generated "transuranics" are used in uranium munitions, indicating that nuclear reactor waste is used in uranium munitions. Whether the munition is natural or so-called "depleted uranium", the tons of breathable, alpha-emitting uranium oxides being generated as I write will penetrate throughout the entire environment and remain, virtually undetectable, chemically and radioactively toxic for the lifetime of Earth. The Big Lie is Institutional Truth, The Truth is Heresy: Dan Fahey and Dr. Robert Gould Anyone seeking to rescue the human race from this ongoing suicide mission to permeate the biosphere with breathable uranium oxide particles is confronting one of the most elaborately constructed institutional lies in history. Consider the work of Dan Fahey, "an independent policy analyst on the uses and effects of depleted uranium munitions." Dan Fahey's credentials are similar to mine: I am also an independent policy analyst studying the health and environmental effects of using uranium munitions. I have a record of military analysis writing going back to my book "Ecology of Devastation: Indochina" (Penguin Books, 1972), an ecological analysis of the U.S. war in Indochina, including early information on the effects of the herbicide Agent Orange. Today I finance my research and writing with my cottage industry, the Mendocino Sea Vegetable Company. Dr. Robert Gould, President of Physicians for Social Responsibility, recommended Dan Fahey as an authoritative expert on uranium munitions to me. In a phone conversation with me, Dr. Gould rejected the idea that uranium munitions pose a major danger to the human race. "It's not Hiroshima," he said. (In fact, the 320 tons or more of uranium munitions used in Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War constituted the greatest environmental release of vaporized radioactivity in human history until the recent hostilities in Afghanistan and Iraq, much greater than Hiroshima. At an October, 2003, meeting of activists which I facilitated in Philo, California, Dr. Gould heard information brought by Humboldt County Veterans for Peace, who had just heard a speech and received information about uranium munitions from Dr. Doug Rokke. Dr. Gould sent me this email message on November 19, 2003: "As I mentioned at the teach-in, I believe that DU is a toxic material because of its heavy-metal and radioactive qualities, and I think it should be banned as a weapon, that there should be good studies of civilians and soldiers and that clean-up should proceed without waiting for the results of these studies. But I don't believe that DU is the most toxic material around (compared with highly radioactive waste, for example), and I think that much of the material presented at the teach-in is overstated based on available evidence and knowledge of the chemistry, and when so presented, obscures other significant potential contributors to observed health effects (oil fires and leaks, release of CW agents from warfare, the legacy of dirty Iraqi industrialization, immunization of troops, nutritional effects of sanctions, etc.) Particularly since most of 'us' will agree on 'what needs to be done,' I remain puzzled by the apparent need for many in the progressive movement to put out such limited monocausal 'science' to convince people, since there are abundant credible arguments (as in the Dan Fahey material I sent you prior to the meeting) that better make the points." Reading Dan Fahey's initial assessment on uranium munitions used in Iraq during 2003, this researcher has concluded that I am witnessing the Big Institutional Lie being used to delude, and to keep the uranium munitions reform movement from making any serious efforts to stop the use of uranium munitions. Dan Fahey's assessment begins by noting that although "there is little known about the actual quantities of DU released or the locations of contamination, it appears approximately 100 to 200 netric tons was shot at tanks, trucks, buildings and people in largely densely populated areas." As Tedd Weyman noted in the "Iraq Gulf War II Field Investigation Report," "there is a significant discrepancy between the independent reports that rely on official government and defence department numbers (i.e. 100-200 metric tonnes) and the 1000 to 2000 metric tonnes of DU attributed to estimates by unnamed United Nations Environment Program and Pentagon sources." Mr. Fahey denounced the "pre-war propaganda" of lies used by the White House and Pentagon early in 2003 "to justify the use of DU munitions as a military necessity, and to dismiss concerns about the health and environmental effects of the use of DU munitions." Quoting a January 2003 White House report which stated that "scientists working for the World Health Organization, the UN Environmental Program, and the European Union could find no health effects linked to exposure to depleted uranium," Dan Fahey noted that "scientists from these organizations never looked for health effects linked to exposure in DU in any post-combat environment." Fahey went on to document several of the lies used by Dr. Michael Kilpatrick at the March 14, 2003 press conference on uranium munitions, which, he wrote, "perhaps reflected an urgency to deflect criticism and concern about DU on the eve of war." Mr. Fahey's vigorous critique of the Big Pentagon Lie that uranium munitions pose no major hazard to human or environmental health is followed by an equally vigorous assertion of that lie. Mr. Fahey does not want to see uranium munitions banned, or use of uranium munitions stopped. Dan Fahey's policy recommendations are limited to better informing U.S. troops about uranium munitions, bioassays of U.S. troops with extreme battlefield exposure, revelation of when and where uranium munitions have been used, cleanup of "DU sites," and more studies of the problem. Mr.Fahey urges a health assessment of all the troops who, in his estimate, were extremely exposed to uranium munitions in 1991, who, he wrote, are just 900 in number. Then Dan Fahey's report attacks "anti-DU activists and people using the DU issue to further other political agendas or raise money." First, Mr. Fahey quotes an unnamed source from the "UK Green Party" making various unfounded claims about uranium munitions. Then he tars Drs. Doug Rokke and Asaf Durakovic with the same brush, to discredit and dismiss their devoted life's work to discover and reveal the true health effects of uranium munitions. Dan Fahey accuses Doug Rokke of making "exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims." Then comes this blood-chilling paragraph by Dan Fahey, independent researcher on depleted uranium munitions: "The old myth that large quantities of DU are used in missiles and bombs has taken a new twist with the claim that 'non-depleted uranium' is being secretly used in hard target, deep penetration, and DBHT (deeply buried hard target) weapons that combine uranium with high explosives. Citing unspecified 'government reports and independent research,' the Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC) claims these new warheads contain '100s to1000s of kilograms' of uranium that is 'extracted from the nuclear fuels and nuclear weapons production cycles prior to the uranium enrichment phase.' UMRC claims that secret use of uranium is responsible for illnesses in Afghanistan, but this assertion is undermined by the lack of any evidence that any missiles or bombs used in Afghanistan contain any natural or depleted uranium." Is The United States Military Using Uranium in Bombs and Missiles? The full scope of U.S. military use of uranium munitions is secret. So how the hell does Dan Fahey, an independent researcher like me, know that it is an unsubstantiated "myth" that uranium is used by the U.S. in bombs and missiles? The Uranium Medical Research Centre discovery that non-depleted uranium was used in bullets and bombs in Afghanistan is based on field work and sophisticated urine analysis for the different isotopes of uranium. First the UMRC found that the isotope content indicated natural uranium contamination in Afghanistan, not depleted uranium. Testing further, the UMRC found ceramic uranium in the urine of Afghans, indicating that the extreme heat of burning munitions had produced the uranium. This, according to Dr. Durakovic, has made some Afghan valleys permanently uninhabitable. Dr. Doug Rokke also is sure there is uranium in many of the bombs and missiles used by US armed forces today. His evidence and proof? Here's a verbatim email Dr. Rokke sent me on April 2, 2004: "Primary on-site radiological measurements, photo, video, direct observations, and discussions with military personnel verify DU is in all of these weapons--from 50 cal through bunker busters. And heck, we did a lot of work too." Major Rokke has been taken part in U.S. military uranium munitions testing, clean-up, and remediation efforts since 1991. Here is his current list of uranium munitions used in weapons, part of his May 4, 2004 article titled "Immediate Action Required on Depleted Uranium": "DU is used to manufacture kinetic energy penetrators- giant pencils or rods. Each kinetic penetrator consists of almost entirely uranium 238. The United States munitions industry produces the following DU munitions with the corresponding mass of uranium 238: 7.62 mm with unspecified mass 50 caliber with unspecified mass 20 mm with a mass of approximately 180 grams. 25 mm with a mass of approximately 200 grams. 30 mm with a mass of approximately 280 grams. 105 mm with a mass of approximately 3500 grams. 120 mm with a mass of approximately 4500 grams. Sub-munitions / land mines such as the PDM and ADAM whose structural bodies contain a small proportion of DU. Cruise missiles with unknown quantity of DU Bunker buster bombs with unknown quantity of DU. A Call to Action: Stop Using Uranium Munitions Now! In today's competition for attention to issues, the issue of uranium munitions is easily buried and forgotten. Dr. Robert Gould, President of the Physicians for Social Responsibility, advised me to worry about something more dangerous like "high-level radioactive waste" in the email quoted above. In order to cause effective change, groups such as Veterans for Peace and Physicians for Social Responsibility will need to focus on uranium munitions, and organize long-term, relentless campaigns to end the use of uranium munitions. Is this going to happen? The only Congressional bill dealing with the hazards of uranium munitions--the "Depleted Uranium Munitions Study Act of 2003" (HR 1483, sponsored by Rep. McDermott)--is, in my view, not worthy of support. In calling only for studies of the problem and cleaup of US uranium munitions test sites, it deludes and defuses the worldwide effort to halt the ongoing catastrophe of uranium munition use. How likely is it that the U.S. military, fully committed to uranium munitions and uranium armor as state-of-the-art, involved in shooting wars in several nations worldwide now--how likely is it that they are going to drop their radioactive munitions and be like "Kelly's Heroes" again, with the second-best metal of war in the world? I actually dropped the topic in despair last fall, until I heard that my future son-in-law was about to be deployed to Iraq with his private company. Now we're talking about the genetic integrity of my bloodline! So I tossed off a brief piece, "Do Not Force Our Children to Breathe Uranium!" My daughter's fiance quit that job and stayed out of Iraq. It is time for everyone on Earth to stop using uranium munitions now! A campaign of nonviolent noncooperation, informed by group effort, seems the most effective strategy. The Big Institutional Lie is going to keep uranium munitions poisoning people and environments for some time, but we can, in small and big ways, refuse to pull the trigger on uranium munitions. Notes 1.John Lewallen is a writer and peace activist focused in 2004 on uranium munitions and their health and environmental consequences. His published books include "Ecology of Devastation: Indochina" (Penguin Books, 1972), and "High-Altitude Nuclear War" (NuclearPress.com, 2002), an analysis of today's great-power nuclear weapons confrontation available from Amazon.com Books. He supports himself with income from his cottage industry, the Mendocino Sea Vegetable Company, and maintains the website . 2. "Briefing on Depleted Uranium," Colonel James Naughton, March 14, 2003 . The use of 320 tons of uranium munitions in Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War is a U.S. Department of Defense estimate. An authoritative Iraqi estimate is that 800 tons of uranium munitions were used by the U.S. and allied forces during the 1991 war, with more than 300 tons used in western Basra, Iraq (Dr. Jawad Al-Ali, Director of the Oncology Center, Basra, Iraq, "Effects of wars and the use of depleted uranium on Iraq," Japan Peace Conference, Naha, Okinawa, Jan.29-Feb.1, 2004 . 3."Briefing on Depleted Uranium," March 2003. 4. "Memorandum to:Brigadier General L.R. Groves, from Drs. Conant, Compton, and Urey," Oct. 30, 1943, declassified June 5, 1974, supplied by Major Doug Rokke , hereinafter referred to as the "Groves Memo." 5."RAND Report on Depleted Uranium," RAND, 1999, p.4, hereinafter referred to as the "RAND Report" . 6. Durakovic, Asaf, "Undiagnosed Illnesses and Radioactive Warfare," Croatian Medical Journal, Vol.44, No.5, 2003, pps. 520-532. 7. See the National Gulf War Resource Center website for the latest Veterans Affairs disability statistics . 8. "Briefing on Depleted Uranium, 2003." 9. John Pike, , page on "Depleted Uranium," is my source for this thumbnail history of uranium munitions as a super-metal. 10. Groves Memo. 11. Weyman, Tedd, Iraq Field Team Lead, "Abu Khasib to Ah'qua: Iraq Gulf War II Field Investigation Report" , p. 14. 12. "Briefing on Depleted Uranium, 2003." 13. Dr. Asaf Durakovic, audio interview, 2003 . 14. Durakovic, Asaf, "Medical Effects of Internal Contamination With Uranium," Croatian Medical Journal, Vol. 40, No. 1, March, 1999; and "Undiagnosed Illnesses and Radioactive Warfare," Croatian Medical Journal, Vol.44, No.5, 2003, pps. 520-532. 15. Major Doug Rokke, Oct. 2,2003 speech for Veterans for Peace, Humboldt County, California, on video. 16. Tashiro, Akira, "Discounted Casualties: The Human Cost of Depleted Uranium," published 2001 in Hiroshima, Japan, by The Chugoku Shimbun, p. 34. 17. Ibid., p. 35. 18. Ibid. 19. Rand Report, Chapter 3, p. 1. 20. Rand Report, p. 2. 21. Durakovic, Asaf, "Undiagnosed Illnesses and Radioactive Warfare," section on "Afghanistan Uranium Studies." 22. "Briefing on Depleted Uranium," March, 2003. 23. Fahey, Dan, "The Use of Depleted Uranium in the 2003 Iraq War: An Initial Assessment of Information and Policies," June 24, 2003, available at . 24. Durakovic, Asaf, "Undiagnosed Illnesses and Radioactive Warfare." 25. Fahey, Dan, op. cit., p.1. 26. Weyman, Tedd, op. cit., p.11. 27. Fahey, Dan, op. cit., p.2. 28. Ibid., pp.8-10. 29. Ibid., p.11. 30. Ibid., p.12. 31. Dr.Asaf Durakovic, audio interview, 2003, available at . 32. Major Doug Rokke,"Immediate Action Required on Depleted Uranium," May 4, 2004. [http://www.nuclearpress.com/view.lasso?id=0032&-token.f=3] ***************************************************************** 32 EurekAlert!: Tumbleweeds good for uranium clean-up ]] Public release date: 5-Nov-2004 Contact: Ann Cairns acairns@geosociety.org [acairns@geosociety.org] 303-357-1056 Geological Society of America [http://www.geosociety.org] Tumbleweeds good for uranium clean-up The lowly, ill-regarded tumbleweed might be good for something after all. A preliminary study reveals that tumbleweeds, a.k.a. Russian thistle, and some other weeds common to dry Western lands have a knack for soaking up depleted uranium from contaminated soils at weapons testing grounds and battlefields. "There is some use to what we consider noxious weeds," said geologist Dana Ulmer-Scholle of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology in Socorro. Depleted uranium (DU) is used in armor-piercing munitions. Although it produces only a low level of radiation, the metal poses a hazard in soils because it – like some other heavy metals – is toxic if ingested. Other plants have been known to draw out DU from soils in wetter climes "but no one wanted to try doing it in arid regions," said Ulmer-Scholle. Ulmer-Scholle's work is underwritten by the US Department of Defense, which is looking for innovative, cost-effective, and efficient ways of cleaning up soils at weapons testing areas and battlefields where DU has been used. Ulmer-Scholle will be presenting the promising results of tumbleweeds and other weeds in arid lands on 10 November at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America in Denver. In her study, Ulmer-Scholle and her colleagues Bonnie Frey, Terry Thomas, and Michael Blaylock first sought out DU contaminated soils at an inactive munitions testing ground in New Mexico. Then they planted selected native and non-native plants in a test garden and in pots to see how much DU the plants absorbed from the soil. Among the plants that sucked up lots of DU was Indian mustard (Brassica juncea), she reports. But that plant it is not well suited to deserts and needed irrigation. Better adapted to the dry environs, she said, were Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), the grain crop quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) and purple amaranth (Amaranthus blitum). "Our goal is to use plants with the least amount of water and the minimum amount of care," said Ulmer-Scholle. They also found that sprinkling the ground with citric acid enhanced the plants' ability to absorb DU. Russian thistle is a non-native plant to North America and is considered a nuisance in most parts of the western US. It springs up almost anywhere soils have been disturbed and each plant scatters its hundreds of seeds by detaching from its roots and tumbling along the ground in the wind. Using tumbleweeds and other unpopular plants for DU clean-up needn't spread noxious weeds either, Ulmer-Scholle explained. It turns out that the plants tested do their best DU absorbing before they flower and long before they set seeds. So part of the trick to using weeds to clean up DU is to harvest the plants before they flower, she said. The fact that plants absorb uranium is not news, since old uranium prospectors used to use Geiger counters on junipers to find buried uranium lodes. But finding a plant that grows fast on little water and can be easily harvested to carry away the depleted uranium – that's another story. "We tried it here (in Southern New Mexico) and also in a natural uranium mine site in northern New Mexico," she said. The weeds picked up even more uranium in more contaminated soils. "So we got more where there was more in the soils." As for why some plants absorb uranium, that's still a mystery, says Ulmer-Scholle. It could be that the plants use the metal to create pigments. One way she hopes to test that possibility is to grow native plants used for dyes, she said. Phytoremediation of Depleted Uranium in an Arid Environment Environmental Geosciences, Poster Session II Wednesday, 10 November, 1:30 -5:30 p.m., CCC Exhibit Hall Abstract may be viewed at: http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2004AM/finalprogram/abstract_80807.htm [http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2004AM/finalprogram/abstract_80807.htm ] . ### CONTACT INFORMATION During the GSA Annual Meeting, 7-10 November, contact Ann Cairns at the GSA Newsroom, Colorado Convention Center, Denver, for assistance and to arrange for interviews: 303-228-8570. Geological Society of America 116th Annual Meeting 7-10 November 2004 Colorado Convention Center Denver, CO, USA Geological Society of America http://www.geosociety.org [http://www.geosociety.org] ***************************************************************** 33 ITAR-TASS: Iodine poisoning cases registered in Saratov region [ITAR-TASS News Agency of Russia] 05.11.2004, 15.40 SARATOV, November 5 (Itar-Tass) -- Iodine poisoning cases have been registered in the Saratov Region, the deputy chief of the regional emergencies department, Valery Sarayev said. “There have been two cases of iodine overdozing,” he said. Sarayev believes that “panic and mass abuse of iodine-containing formulas were triggered by reports of an emergency shut-down of the second reactor of the Balakovo nuclear power plant.” The nuclear power industry concern Rosenergoatom has told Tass in Moscow the “shutdown of the second reactor occurred late Wednesday night due to equipment malfunctioning in the turbine hall. The Rosenergoatom official said the radiation situation remained normal and the safety parameters had not been abused. The nuclear power concern said this event is “insignificant to the safety of the population in the territories around the power plant and is rated as a zero level incident on the international scale of events at nuclear facilities.” By now problems in the turbine room of the second unit have been eliminated and the reactor will be restored to capacity operation late Friday night, Rosenergoatom said. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 34 Idaho Press-Tribune: Crowds are expected to discuss radiation effects Health: Idaho could join other states in getting compensation from federal government for illnesses By Adam Rush Idaho Press-Tribune TREASURE VALLEY -- Thousands of people are expected to attend a meeting Saturday exploring the health effects of nuclear weapons testing on Idahoans. Science experts investigating whether Idaho residents were affected by fallout from Nevada tests is taking testimony from cancer patients and the families of patients. U.S. Sen. Larry Craig's office said thousands are expected to attend the daylong meeting at the Taco Bell Arena. It runs from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Testimony is being taken at the meeting, but preregistration was required to formally speak. Scientists suspect that iodine-131 from nuclear weapons testing in Nevada during the 1950s drifted into Idaho on winds, and concentrated in cow milk after settling on grass the cows ate. Gem County and three others in Idaho had among the highest concentrations of radioactive contamination in the nation. Several Idaho residents from counties in the Treasure Valley were raised on farms and drank raw milk. Among them is Bobbi Cross, of Caldwell. Cross, her sister and her father had cancer. Her mother had her thyroid removed after it became precancerous. The family farmed in New Plymouth and Cross, now 61, said they drank raw milk. She said she is concerned about her cancer returning and how much it would cost to treat it. "I helped take care of a gal about my age who was dying this last summer of cancer," Cross said. "Toward the end, she could not afford to have the care that she needed." Janet Hankins, of Nampa, will testify on Saturday. Hankins was born and raised in Seattle. Her husband, however, was raised on the Glendaray Dairy outside Emmett off the Black Canyon Highway. Janet Hankins said her husband, Lloyd Hankins, drank at least three glasses of raw milk each day. He died on May 12, 2002, at the age of 60, after being diagnosed with colon cancer seven months earlier. "He died about three weeks after his birthday," Janet Hankins said. The National Academy of Sciences is looking into whether Idaho should be included in a federal compensation program for those affected by the fallout, often called "downwinders." Saturday's hearing is designed to help the investigation. Although the state wasn't initially included in the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, Idaho's congressional delegation has moved to make Idahoans eligible. If that happens, victims or their families could receive financial compensation. Cross said that money could help terminal cancer patients who are in the last stages manage pain and die with dignity. "For so many people, health insurance is so high," she said. "For cancer patients, it's extremely high." Info on nuclear testing and cancer During the Cold War in the 1950s and early 1960s, the U.S. government conducted about 100 nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere at a test site in Nevada. The radioactive substances released by these tests are known as fallout. Particles were carried thousands of miles away from the test site by winds. As a result, people living in the United States at the time of the testing were exposed to varying levels of radiation. Among the numerous radioactive substances released in fallout, scientists have been particularly concerned about one radioactive form of iodine--called iodine-131, or I-131. I-131 collects in the thyroid gland. People exposed to I-131, especially during childhood, may have an increased risk of thyroid disease, including thyroid cancer. Experts say thyroid cancer is uncommon and is usually curable. Typically, it is a slow-growing cancer that is highly treatable. - Source: National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health Copyright © 2004 Idaho Press- Tribune All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 35 [du-list] BOEING, HONEYWELL Uranium plant deals - York Daily Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:40:11 -0800 BOEING, HONEYWELL: Uranium plant deals - York Daily Record Uranium plant deals Thursday, October 28, 2004 OAK RIDGE, Tenn. - Boeing Co. and Honeywell International have signed agreements to support manufacture of centrifuge machines in Oak Ridge for USEC's planned $1.5 billion uranium enrichment plant in Piketon, Ohio. "This is huge," said Jim Campbell, president of the East Tennessee Economic Council, noting the Piketon plant is expected to require about 12,000 centrifuge machines - work that could support hundreds of jobs. Campbell said the project immediately may add about 50 jobs to the 150 workers Boeing already employs in Oak Ridge. USEC, formerly U.S. Enrichment Corp., is a publicly traded company based in Bethesda, Md. The company assumed uranium enrichment operations from the U.S. Department of Energy in 1998. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission agreed in February to let USEC build a test plant in Piketon to demonstrate its centrifuge technology, which is common in Europe but never tried in the United States on a large scale. The prototype plant will require about 240 centrifuges and is slated to open in 2005. That would be followed by a commercial plant - also at the Ohio site - that would employ about 500 and be operating by the end of the decade. Copyright © York Daily Record 2004 122 S. George St., P.O. Box 15122 York, PA 17405, (717) 771-2000 ***************************************************************** 36 UPI: Report: Terrorists prowling Yucca site? - (United Press International) November 05, 2004 Las Vegas, NV, Nov. 5 (UPI) -- Terrorists may have been nosing around the Web site for the Yucca Mountain project, possibly planning for a raid on radioactive waste shipments. KLAS-TV, Las Vegas, said some experts suspect al-Qaida or some other terrorist group has been exploring the possibility of someday intercepting such a shipment and either destroying it or stealing the material for use in a radioactive dirty bomb. KLAS said a volunteer group that monitors radical Islamic Internet activity noticed a Hamas Web site included a link to the State of Nevada's site, which in turn led to a report on Yucca Mountain, the location of a planned national repository for nuclear waste. One of the volunteers said it was concluded the site's description of the elaborate safety measures that would surround shipments of waste was being perused. KLAS said federal Homeland Security officials asked the state to remove the Yucca report; however, state officials denied such a request had been made. [UPI Perspectives] ***************************************************************** 37 Las Vegas RJ: Yucca project polls differ Friday, November 05, 2004 Newest survey shows repository opposition up to 77 percent By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL Opposition among Nevadans to the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository increased slightly over the past year to 77 percent, while nearly as many people believe the state should continue to fight the project, an annual poll by the Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency has shown. "I think it means that despite some other polls to the contrary, that Nevadans are still opposed to Yucca Mountain and they want the state to do everything it can to defeat it," said Bob Loux, the agency's executive director. The poll released Thursday asked: "Would you vote for or against creating a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain?" Roughly 77 percent of those surveyed said they would vote against it, compared with about 75 percent who last year said they would vote against the project. Respondents also were asked if the state should continue to do all it can to oppose the repository even if that means turning down benefits that might be offered by the federal government? About 73 percent said the state should continue its opposition. A similar question in last year's poll found a lesser number, 65 percent, favored the state's continued opposition to the project. Northwest Survey and Data Services, a Eugene, Ore., firm affiliated with the University of Oregon, conducted the survey of 402 randomly selected Nevadans from Oct. 7 to Oct. 18. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.8 percent. The new poll results differ from those in a September poll conducted for the Review-Journal by Mason-Dixon Polling &Research Inc. of Washington, D.C. That poll of 625 registered voters found a growing number of Nevadans believe the state should accept the repository and try to deal for benefits in return. About 50 percent said in September that Nevada should fight the project, while 46 percent said the state should deal. Those results compared to 54 percent who preferred to fight and 39 percent who favored a deal in a similar poll in July. Loux said the difference in the results between the state's poll and the Review-Journal poll is "we don't start our survey saying the Yucca Mountain repository is a done deal. When you preface the question by telling them it's a done deal, that skews their responses," he said. This year's poll for the Nuclear Projects Agency tried to gauge how much respondents know about the Yucca Mountain issue by asking if they were aware an appeals court this summer had rejected radiation protection standards for the planned repository. Only 36 percent said they were aware of the court decision while 60 percent were not. A poll in June conducted for the Nuclear Energy Institute, the lobbying arm of the nuclear power industry and a staunch supporter of the planned repository, found that Nevadans since last year have warmed up slightly to the project and a large majority still feel a repository will be built. Robert List, a consultant for the institute and a former Nevada governor, criticized the Nuclear Projects Agency poll, saying it is designed to get the answer the state wants. "What most feel is that we should have a strategy to continue to resist the project but start planning for the probability it will occur and capture benefits from it if the government goes forward with their plan," List said. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 38 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN PROJECT: Nuclear industry to forge ahead Friday, November 05, 2004 Bush's re-election seen as green light for project by some; others vow to battle on By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Emboldened by election results, the nuclear industry and supportive lawmakers are planning a new charge to increase spending and fix financial problems plaguing the Yucca Mountain Project, executives and legislators said. They will try to revitalize the nuclear waste program in Congress over the protests of Nevada leaders who said they will continue to fight despite an apparent setback this week. "From my perspective the battle continues," said Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev. "I don't think there would be anything different now than from the past 20 years." John Kane, a senior vice president of the Nuclear Energy Institute, said Thursday that Nevada leaders should re-examine their opposition to Yucca Mountain in light of President Bush winning the state on Election Day even after Democrats made the proposed nuclear waste repository a major issue. "It shows back here that the people of Nevada are in a different place from where their elected leaders are," said Kane, the institute's head of government affairs. "I think the right thing for Nevadans now is not to keep spending money fighting this thing," Kane said. "State budgets are tight out there and money can be better applied to making sure (Yucca) is done correctly" and to seek compensation for hosting the project. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said nuclear industry officials "are getting some radiation poisoning, it's addling their minds a little bit. We are not giving up and they ought not interpret that vote for Bush as a mandate to go forward with Yucca Mountain." The Yucca Mountain political landscape is shifting to account for Bush's re-election and Republican net additions to the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives. Most of the new lawmakers are expected to favor nuclear power expansion and waste disposal in Nevada, officials said in interviews this week. The new equation also takes into account the expected promotion for Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the Yucca project's most powerful critic, to become Senate minority leader. Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio, said this week that congressional leaders who want to keep the repository program on track are exploring possible ways to restore a deep budget during the upcoming post-election lame-duck session. "Whether that is achievable or not, I don't know," said Hobson, who heads a House energy subcommittee. The Bush administration requested $880 million for the repository this year. Congress so far has allocated only $131 million and is deadlocked over a spending bill for Yucca Mountain and other energy programs. "In the lame duck session, a lot of the difficulties we are seeing are going to be straightened out," Kane predicted. Hobson also said he expects the Bush administration next year will try again to pass a bill to revamp Yucca Mountain accounting rules to allow the Energy Department easier access to money sitting in an industry fund. With the Senate now counting 55 Republicans, "I would almost bet they will take a run at that," Hobson said. Less certain, Kane said, is whether Congress will seek to overturn the damaging court ruling from this summer that voided a radiation safety requirement for the repository. More Republicans in Congress doesn't necessarily mean more support for Yucca Mountain, according to Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. Ensign said new GOP senators such as Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma are fiscal conservatives who probably will oppose big spending increases and changes to accounting rules that will allow more money to flow to the nuclear waste program. Environmental groups will continue to count on Reid to block Yucca Mountain bills, said Michele Boyd, legislative director for energy programs at the Public Citizen watchdog organization. The nuclear industry "most likely believes they have the upper hand in the Congress and the Senate now, but I still believe there will be a fight," Boyd said. But with Reid likely to become a Senate leader, some are questioning whether he will have the time and energy to keep bird-dogging the Yucca issue. His new demanding job also will carry broad responsibilities. "Before, he was kind of able to do his own thing," Hobson said. "Now when he is the leader, does he have the responsibility to look at his entire caucus more as to what is the best interest of them totally?" Reid was in Searchlight on Thursday and was not available. His spokeswoman Tessa Hafen said Reid "still thinks Yucca is as bad an idea as it ever was. But the outcome of the election obviously makes his job much harder. Reid will work just as hard to cut the budget." Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 39 Las Vegas SUN: Survey: Majority of Nevadans still support Yucca fight Today: November 05, 2004 at 11:18:25 PST By Benjamin Grove SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nearly 73 percent of Nevadans believe the state should continue fighting Yucca Mountain, according to a new state-sponsored survey. Almost three-quarters of those surveyed said the state should continue its long battle against Yucca rather than negotiate for benefits. In the latest phase of the fight, a federal court dealt the Energy Department project a setback when it ruled that a radiation protection standard did not match a National Academy of Sciences recommendation. "With a federal court decision that can kill the project, Nevadans understand that the dump is far from a done deal," Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval said. The survey also asked respondents if the Energy Department "can be trusted to live up to any benefits agreement the federal government would make with Nevada." Twenty-seven percent agreed and 69 percent disagreed. "They are saying, 'We don't want this and we won't be fooled into cutting any deals,' " Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency executive director Bob Loux said. The survey, conducted by Oregon-based Northwest Survey and Data Services, polled 402 randomly selected state residents between Oct. 7 and 18. The margin of error is 4.8 percent. The same survey was conducted last year and this year's results show a slight increase in opposition to Yucca. This year nearly 77 percent of respondents said they would vote against Yucca Mountain if given a chance to vote, with 19 percent responding that they would vote for it. In 2003, 76 percent said they would vote for it, 22 percent against. The annual survey is more credible and consistent than others because the same core questions and sample size have been used for 15 years, Sandoval said. A September Las Vegas Sun/Channel 8 Eyewitness News/KNPR Nevada Public Radio poll of 600 likely voters done by Belden Russonello &Stewart of Washington, D.C. showed 66 percent of Nevadans opposed to Yucca Mountain. But 57 percent of those polled said the candidates' positions on Yucca Mountain were not important to the way they would vote. A September poll of 625 people, conducted by Washington-based Mason-Dixon Polling &Research Inc., for the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported that 50 percent of Nevadans said the state should fight Yucca, and 46 percent said Nevada officials should negotiate for benefits. In a poll conducted in May by the Nuclear Energy Institute, the leading pro-Yucca lobby group, 47 percent of 1,000 Nevada voters said they "strongly disapprove" of Yucca, down from 59 percent in 2002 and 54 percent in 2003 who strongly disapproved. Former Gov. Bob List, now a paid consultant for NEI who has argued that the state should negotiate for benefits, questioned the scientific sample and the questions on the latest survey. "The questions are a little bit cooked to get the results they want to see," List said. Most Nevadans don't want Yucca if given a choice, but they are also increasingly coming to want to negotiate for benefits, List said. List pointed to surveys that indicate voters do not rank Yucca Mountain among the most important election issues. "It has fallen down to the level of, 'By the way, I really don't want it here, but I think it's coming and it's time to negotiate for the upside,' " List said. "There is a sense of inevitability." Election Day reflected that, List said. Yucca Mountain was an issue in the presidential election as the campaigns sparred over the issue in Nevada. President Bush approved Yucca Mountain. Sen. John Kerry said he would kill the project. Nevada voters gave Bush a 50-48 percent win in the state. So the latest poll also doesn't appear to mesh with Election Day results. By a margin of 22,000 votes, Nevadans voted to return Bush to the White House just two years after he approved the project. Several Nevada Democrats said this week that Nevada's vote for Bush makes it harder to argue on a national stage that the state opposes Yucca. Observers said Nevadans don't base their votes solely on Yucca -- even though they don't want the nation's first underground repository for highly radioactive waste constructed 90 miles from Las Vegas. Nevadans voted more based on economic and security issues than on Yucca, Gov. Kenny Guinn, co-chairman of the Bush campaign in Nevada, said this week. "We went the entire election without a terrorist attack," Guinn said. "People want security No. 1." The Yucca issue has little to do with who is president, Sandoval spokesman Tom Sargent said, although Kerry had outlined several steps he would have taken to effectively kill the project. The matter will be settled by the courts, Sargent said. "We feel very confident we will prevail in the courts," he said. The survey results were compiled before the election, but Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency officials did not want the results lost in the din of the pre-election media frenzy, Loux said. The timing of the report's release was not politically motivated, said Loux, whose office answers to Guinn. The survey is typically released around the first of November, he said, although last year it was released Oct. 30. "The election didn't have anything to do with it, per se," Loux said. "We wanted it to have some visibility." ***************************************************************** 40 WYMT Mountain News: Nuclear advisory boards raise concerns with waste disposal plans WKYT 27 November 5, 2004 PORTLAND, Ore. -- The chairmen of the advisory boards for nine nuclear sites operated by the U.S. Department of Energy have drafted a joint letter calling for a national forum on nuclear waste disposal, concerned that the federal government's plans have stalled. The letter comes as the Energy Department faces challenges to its plans for disposing of waste from production of the country's Cold War-era nuclear weapons arsenal. The latest blow to the department's plans was passage of Initiative 297 in Washington state Tuesday, which bars the agency from shipping any nuclear waste to south-central Washington's Hanford site until all the existing waste there is cleaned up. The Energy Department also faces legal challenges to its proposed high-level nuclear waste repository in Nevada, known as Yucca Mountain. The letter calls for a national forum to produce "technically sound, fiscally responsible, politically acceptable, sustainable and comprehensive solutions to DOE's systemwide waste and material disposition challenges." The letter asks the agency to sponsor a national forum by the end of 2005 that includes broad participation by the National Governors Association, legal regulators of the sites, tribes, advisory boards, public interest groups and members of the public. The letter to Paul Golan, the Energy Department's acting assistant secretary for environmental management, was drafted in October. Todd Martin, chairman of the Hanford Advisory Board, told board members Thursday he had signed it on the board's behalf. Advisory boards for nuclear sites in Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Colorado and South Carolina also are expected to sign. The 586-square-mile Hanford reservation in south-central Washington was created in World War II as part of the top-secret Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb. It remains the most contaminated site in the nation, with cleanup costs expected to total $50 billion to $60 billion. The Energy Department chose Hanford to dispose of some mildly radioactive waste and mixed low-level waste, which is laced with chemicals. The site also would serve as a packaging center for some transuranic waste _ plutonium-contaminated rags, tools and other discarded items _ before it is shipped elsewhere for long-term disposal. Transuranic waste is highly radioactive and can take thousands of years or more to decay to safe levels. In turn, the Energy Department has planned to send Hanford's most radioactive waste elsewhere. Spent fuel and highly radioactive and chemical waste now in huge underground tanks would be sent to Nevada's Yucca Mountain. Plutonium-contaminated waste is already being sent to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico. Initiative 297 takes effect in 30 days, but it is expected to face legal challenges. The measure passed in every county except Benton County, where the Hanford site is located. Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This [http://www.worldnow.com] All content © Copyright 2001 - 2004 WorldNow, WKYT, and WYMT. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 41 Pahrump Valley Times: What repository? November 5, 2004 I think the media's infatuation with Yucca Mountain and elections is interesting and baffling. According to polls, Yucca Mountain is a low priority with only 3-5 percent considering it a very important issue. Myself and apparently a lot of others are sick and tired of a few people attempting to use the issue for political gain. Whoever is writing the political ads opposing the project must be from out of state as the ads are clearly out of touch with the issues that are truly important to the state. The ads and comments concerning Yucca Mountain are factually incorrect; they provide misleading information concerning the number of shipments that will take place because there will only be a handful each week. Most importantly, the ads fail to communicate that the shipments won't come anywhere near Las Vegas and that Yucca Mountain is 90 miles away. I'll be glad when Nov. 2 comes and goes and the media buyers at the local ad agencies can place ads that aren't political and misleading. Sincerely, REBECCA WAMSLEY LAS VEGAS webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com [webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com] Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2004 ***************************************************************** 42 Pahrump Valley Times: Yucca is OK November 5, 2004 This past month I took the Yucca Mountain tour. I was amazed by the data after touring the site, listening to explanations and answers to questions, and later reading the available materials. In the U.S. over the past 30 years more than 2,700 shipments covering 1.6 million miles have been made safely without radioactive releases, and worldwide more than 70,000 metric tons have been shipped safely. France, with over 70 percent of its electricity produced from nuclear fuel, ships all waste out of the country by truck (or) train. I was surprised to learn that all of our wastes are converted to solid form and can never leak, cannot explode, are not flammable, and it is physically impossible to make them explode in a chain reaction. The packaging is expensive but effective. On the tour I also learned that the access tunnels will not be permanently sealed but merely blocked with the rock taken out when constructing them. The extremely durable packages of spent fuel assemblies will be stored inside tunnels, which can be accessed if required. This can be important as I learned elsewhere that ongoing research could, in maybe several hundred years, use the waste to economically produce electricity. Accelerated research could step this up. What would be our benefits? With no negotiations, possibly none. Otherwise we could push for nearby federal road construction and maintenance, sidings on the railroad where cattle cars can be added on the return trip from Yucca and possibly more. Looking out from Yucca there is beautiful, pristine land to the northeast. How about a federal park with protected and improved flora and fauna, with paved roads to viewing points that have rest facilities and camp sites? What I learned made me feel better, since I am disturbed when an American president is continually called a liar for proceeding with Yucca upon the advice of conventional scientists rather than "our" scientists, who did not even inform us about the nuclear waste shipping record. Also, I actually believed the waste would be dumped in the ground and forgotten about. ANTHONY A. WIRTZ BOULDER CITY For comment or questions, please e-mail webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com [webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com] Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2004 ***************************************************************** 43 ITAR-TASS: Russia welcomes UN approval of disarmament resolution [ITAR-TASS News Agency of Russia] 05.11.2004, 01.12 MOSCOW, November 5 (Itar-Tass) -- The Russian Foreign ministry welcomed the approval by the First Committee of the UN General Assembly on November 3 of the joint Russian-US resolution on bilateral reductions of strategic nuclear armaments and a new framework for strategic relations. The document expands the provisions of a similar resolution of November 22, 2002. “This decision displays the confirmation by the world community of the specific importance of Russian-US relations of partnership for ensuring international security and strategic stability, for the solution of such global problems of modern time, as nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and means of their delivery”, the ministry said in a press release Thursday. “We view this resolution as an important step in informing the world community about the practical efforts in the reduction of nuclear arsenals, as well as in building new Russian-US relations”, the press release said. The Russian side confirms adherence to the provisions of the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty and its readiness to work for a further reduction of nuclear weapons. However the ministry said “a further practical progress along the path of nuclear disarmament should go by stages, without unjustified haste and on the basis of a complex approach and respect of the principle of equal security for all”. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 44 EPA: SRS Transuranic waste characterization FR Doc 04-24820 [Federal Register: November 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 214)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 64558-64560] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05no04-32] ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 194 [FRL-7835-6] Central Characterization Project Waste Characterization Program Documents Applicable to Transuranic Radioactive Waste From the Savannah River Site Proposed for Disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice of availability; opening of public comment period. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, or ``we'') is announcing the availability of, and soliciting public comments for 30 days on, Department of Energy (DOE) documents on waste characterization programs applicable to certain transuranic (TRU) radioactive waste at the Savannah River Site (SRS) proposed for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The documents are procedures and other materials related to the Central Characterization Project (CCP), established by DOE to augment the ability of TRU waste sites to characterize and certify the waste in accordance with EPA's WIPP Compliance Criteria. The documents are available for review in the public dockets listed in ADDRESSES. We will use these documents to evaluate the CCP activities at SRS to characterize SRS-generated contact-handled (CH) retrievably-stored TRU debris waste during an inspection conducted the week of October 25, 2004. The purpose of the inspection is to verify that the CCP can properly characterize SRS- generated contact-handled (CH) TRU debris waste, consistent with the WIPP Compliance Criteria and Condition 3 of EPA's final certification decision for the WIPP. The EPA will not make a determination of compliance prior to the inspection or before the 30-day comment period has closed. DATES: The EPA is requesting public comment on these documents. Comments must be received by EPA's official Air Docket on or before December 6, 2004. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by mail to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Air and Radiation Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West, Mail Code 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0430. Comments may also be submitted electronically, by facsimile, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I.B of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ed Feltcorn, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, (202) 343-9422. You can also call EPA's toll-free WIPP Information Line, 1-800-331-WIPP or visit our Web site at http://www.epa/gov/radiation/wipp [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.epa/gov/radiation/wipp] . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0430. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742. These documents are also available for review in paper form at the official EPA Air Docket in Washington, DC, Docket No. A-98-49, Category II-A2, and at the following three EPA WIPP informational docket locations in New Mexico: in Carlsbad at the Municipal Library, hours: Monday-Thursday, 10 a.m.-9 p.m., Friday-Saturday, 10 a.m.-6 p.m., and Sunday, 1 p.m.-5 p.m.; in Albuquerque at the Government Publications Department, Zimmerman Library, University of New Mexico, hours: vary by semester; and in Santa Fe at the New Mexico State Library, hours: Monday-Friday, 9 a.m.- 5 p.m. As provided in EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 2, and in accordance with normal EPA docket procedures, if copies of any docket materials are requested, a reasonable fee may be charged for photocopying. 2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register'' listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/ [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/] . An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.epa.gov/edocket/] to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the appropriate docket identification number. Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public docket, [[Page 64559]] will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I.B. EPA intends to work towards providing electronic access to all of the publicly available docket materials through EPA's electronic public docket. For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief description written by the docket staff. For additional information about EPA's electronic public docket visit EPA Dockets online or see 67 FR 38102, May 31, 2002. B. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments? You may submit comments electronically, by mail, by facsimile, or through hand delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket identification number in the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late comments. However, late comments may be considered if time permits. 1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.epa.gov/edocket] , and follow the online instructions for submitting comments. To access EPA's electronic public docket from the EPA Internet Home Page, select ``Information Sources,'' ``Dockets,'' and ``EPA Dockets.'' Once in the system, select ``search,'' and then key in Docket ID No. OAR- 2004-0430. The system is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to a-and-r-docket@epa.gov [ a-and-r-docket@epa.gov] , Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0430. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an e-mail comment directly to the Docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 2. By Mail. Send your comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Air and Radiation Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West, Mail Code 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0430. 3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Air and Radiation Docket, EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. OAR- 2004-0430. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation as identified in Unit I.A.1. 4. By Facsimile. Fax your comments to: (202) 566-1741, Attention Docket ID. No. OAR-2004-0430. C. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at your estimate. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternatives. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket identification number in the subject line on the first page of your response. It would also be helpful if you provided the name, date, and Federal Register citation related to your comments. II. Background DOE is operating the WIPP near Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico as a deep geologic repository for disposal of TRU radioactive waste. As defined by the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (LWA) of 1992 (Pub. L. 102- 579), as amended (Pub. L. 104-201), transuranic (TRU) waste consists of materials containing elements having atomic numbers greater than 92 (with half-lives greater than twenty years), in concentrations greater than 100 nanocuries of alpha-emitting TRU isotopes per gram of waste. Much of the existing TRU waste consists of items contaminated during the [[Page 64560]] production of nuclear weapons, such as rags, equipment, tools, and sludges. On May 13, 1998, EPA announced its final compliance certification decision to the Secretary of Energy (published May 18, 1998, 63 FR 27354). This decision stated that the WIPP will comply with EPA's radioactive waste disposal regulations at 40 CFR part 191, subparts B and C. The final WIPP certification decision includes conditions that (1) prohibit shipment of TRU waste for disposal at WIPP from any site other than the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) until the EPA determines that the site has established and executed a quality assurance program, in accordance with Sec. Sec. 194.22(a)(2)(i), 194.24(c)(3), and 194.24(c)(5) for waste characterization activities and assumptions (Condition 2 of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 194); and (2) prohibit shipment of TRU waste for disposal at WIPP from any site other than LANL until the EPA has approved the procedures developed to comply with the waste characterization requirements of Sec. 194.22(c)(4) (Condition 3 of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 194). The EPA's approval process for waste generator sites is described in Sec. 194.8. As part of EPA's decision-making process, the DOE is required to submit to EPA appropriate documentation of quality assurance and waste characterization programs at each DOE waste generator site seeking approval for shipment of TRU radioactive waste to WIPP. In accordance with Sec. 194.8, EPA will place such documentation in the official Air Docket in Washington, DC, and informational dockets in the State of New Mexico for public review and comment. EPA will perform an inspection of the TRU waste characterization activities performed by the DOE's Central Characterization Project (CCP) staff at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in accordance with Condition 3 of the WIPP certification. We will evaluate the adequacy, implementation, and effectiveness of the CCP technical activities contracted by SRS for characterization of the disposal of retrievably- stored TRU debris waste at the WIPP. The overall program adequacy and effectiveness of CCP documents will be based on the following DOE documents: (1) CCP-PO-001--Revision 8, 3/15/04--CCP Transuranic Waste Characterization Quality Assurance Project Plan and (2) CCP-PO-002-- Revision 9, 3/15/04--CCP Transuranic Waste Certification Plan. EPA has placed these documents pertinent to the SRS inspection in the public docket described in ADDRESSES. In accordance with 40 CFR 194.8, EPA is providing the public 30 days to comment on these documents. The inspection is scheduled to take place the week of October 25, 2004. The EPA inspectors at SRS will evaluate the quality of the waste characterization program via testing, interviews of waste characterization (WC) personnel, review of WC procedures, and inspection of WC equipment used to characterize retrievably-stored debris waste. The inspection will focus on real-time radiography (RTR) equipment as well as visual examination (VE) techniques as implemented by the CCP at SRS. This is EPA's first Federal Register notice announcing an inspection following the Agency's revisions to the WIPP Compliance Criteria (40 CFR part 194). The final rule for these provisions was published on July 16, 2004 (69 FR 42571), and had an effective date of October 14, 2004. The CCP at SRS has already been previously approved under our previous inspections regime. Therefore, the SRS-CCP inspection outlined in this notice will be held in accordance with the requirements for previously approved waste generator sites, as described in Section Sec. 194.8(c) of our final revisions. If EPA determines as a result of the inspection that the proposed CCP waste characterization processes and programs used at SRS adequately control the characterization of transuranic waste, we will notify DOE by letter and place the letter in the official Air Docket in Washington, DC, as well as in the informational docket locations in New Mexico. A letter of approval will allow DOE to dispose of transuranic waste from SRS/CCP to the WIPP. The EPA will not make a determination of compliance prior to the inspection or before the 30-day comment period has closed. Information on the certification decision is filed in the official EPA Air Docket, Docket No. A-93-02 and is available for review in Washington, DC, and at three EPA WIPP informational docket locations in New Mexico. The dockets in New Mexico contain only major items from the official Air Docket in Washington, DC, plus those documents added to the official Air Docket since the October 1992 enactment of the WIPP LWA. Dated: November 1, 2004. Robert Brenner, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. [FR Doc. 04-24820 Filed 11-5-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ***************************************************************** 45 Fredericksburg.com: DOE OKs North Anna demo [http://www.fredericksburg.com] Friday, Nov. 5, 2004 The Free Lance-Star Virginia utility gets federal agency's go-ahead to use new policy By RUSTY DENNEN The Dominion energy company has received the go-ahead from the U.S. Department of Energy to test a new licensing process that could lead to one or more new nuclear reactors at North Anna Power Station. DOE announced yesterday that two industry-led consortia, headed by Dominion and NuStart Energy of Pennsylvania, will be the first to work through an untested Nuclear Regulatory Commission process for licensing the construction and operation of new nuclear plants. It's part of the Nuclear Power 2010 Program, set forth in February 2002 by Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham. The Dominion project could lead to a license to build and operate an Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. advanced reactor at North Anna. The Dominion consortia includes AECL, its U.S. subsidiary AECL Technologies, and Bechtel Power Corp. of Frederick, Md.; and Hitachi America Inc., in Tarrytown, N.Y. Dominion is the parent company of Dominion Virginia Power. The demonstration project will take approximately six years. If at the end, Dominion were to apply to the NRC for a combined construction and operating license, it could have a new reactor in operation as early as 2014, DOE said. "This is all about testing the process. It does not commit us to building a nuclear plant, we don't have any [current] plan to build a plant, and we don't have to apply to the NRC," Richard Zuercher, spokesman for Dominion's nuclear operations, said yesterday. Cooperative agreements for each of the two projects will be completed by December and detailed planning will be done by the end of next year, DOE said. Last September, Dominion applied to the NRC for an early site permit that would allow it to, within 20 years, build one or more new reactors at North Anna on the Louisa County shore of Lake Anna. DOE is picking up about half the $11 million cost of the early site permit application, and Dominion stands to get $366 million in DOE funds to develop and build any new reactors. Dominion has said a new reactor at North Anna could cost about $1.4 billion and take four years to build. Nuclear power generates about 20 percent of the nation's electricity and the industry maintains that it needs more reactors to maintain a diversified energy supply. Dominion's early site permit application, which is still wending its way through the regulatory system, has drawn fire from environmental groups. They argue that more reactors are not needed to meet future demand, would present new potential targets for terrorists and harm aquatic life in the lake. Dominion has said that any new reactor would be safe and environmentally sound. The company argues that even though it has no plans for any now, it wants to have the option should market conditions make it desirable. The company has said, if that happens, North Anna would be the best possible site. The plant was designed for four reactors, but only two were built. To reach RUSTY DENNEN: 540/374-5431 rdennen@freelancestar.com Date published: 11/5/2004 Fredericksburg.com, 605 William Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 Comments? Send us Feedback, Phone: 540-368-5055 To contact all other newspaper departments, please call 540-374-5000. Copyright 2004, The Free Lance-Star Publishing Co. of Fredericksburg, Va. ***************************************************************** 46 Tri-City Herald: Nuclear waste gridlock looms, officials warn This story was published Friday, November 5th, 2004 By Annette Cary Herald staff writer PORTLAND -- Concerned that national plans will not move forward to dispose of nuclear weapons waste, the chairmen of the advisory boards for nine Department of Energy nuclear sites have drafted a joint letter calling for a national forum. "We're staring gridlock in the face," Todd Martin, chairman of the Hanford Advisory Board, said Thursday as the board met in Portland. DOE's plan for cleaning up Hanford and other sites with radioactive waste left from the Cold War buildup of the nation's arsenal of nuclear weapons is to ship waste to various sites around the nation for treatment or permanent disposal. But DOE is facing legal issues, including attempts by Washington voters to block waste from being imported to Hanford, and attempts by Nevada to prevent Yucca Mountain from becoming the nation's high-level waste repository. In addition, the chairmen have questions about waste that is orphaned and pre-1970s waste for which DOE does not have a plan, they wrote in a letter to be sent to Paul Golan, DOE's acting assistant secretary for environmental management. "These and other disposition challenges raise concerns of potential gridlock resulting in skyrocketing costs and completion delays throughout the DOE system," the chairmen wrote. The letter calls for a national forum to produce "technically sound, fiscally responsible, politically acceptable, sustainable and comprehensive solutions to DOE's system-wide waste and material disposition challenges." The latest blow to DOE's national plan was Tuesday's passage of Initiative 297, which would block DOE from sending low-level waste, some mixed with chemicals, to Hanford until waste generated there during the past production of plutonium is cleaned up. The initiative, which passed in every county except Benton, takes effect in 30 days, but is expected to face legal challenges. Most of the other sites have been watching the initiative, concerned about what will become of their waste that is planned to go to Hanford, Martin said. DOE has plans to ship about 5,800 truckloads of waste from other sites to Hanford. Heart of America Northwest, a Hanford watchdog group, believes that number is low. Much of the waste would be permanently buried in Hanford landfills, under DOE's plan. Other waste would be treated at Hanford and sent elsewhere. That includes some transuranic waste, usually debris contaminated with plutonium, that would be treated and packaged at Hanford, then sent on to the federal repository for transuranic waste in the New Mexico desert, according to the DOE plan. Other sites are concerned not only that their waste will not be sent to Hanford for burial, but that they will be left with no treatment capabilities if the waste cannot be treated at Hanford, Martin said. In turn, DOE has planned to send Hanford's most radioactive waste elsewhere. Spent fuel and high-level radioactive and chemical waste now in huge underground tanks would be sent to Yucca Mountain. Plutonium-contaminated waste is already being sent to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) for transuranic waste in New Mexico. If no waste is sent to Hanford, that could mean far more waste would be sent to the Nevada Test Site. Like Hanford, it is designated by DOE to accept low-level radioactive waste and low-level waste mixed with chemicals. The Nevada Test Site is already threatening to sue if waste from Fernald, Ohio, which had a uranium plant, is sent there, Martin said. That site is supposed to close in two years. Nevada also is fighting Yucca Mountain's designation as the nation's high-level waste repository. Advisory board chairmen are concerned it may never open. A survey to be released today by the Nevada Office of the Governor found 77 percent of Nevadans opposed to using Yucca Mountain for disposing of nuclear waste. That's up from 65 percent in 2003. In September the state sued to challenge DOE's transportation plan that it believes would allow many of the waste shipments to Yucca Mountain to travel through Las Vegas. In addition, in July it won a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that a standard that considered whether waste would be safe at Yucca Mountain for 10,000 years was inadequate. Also troubling to the chairmen of the advisory boards is the large amount of transuranic waste at many sites that was generated before the 1970s. In the 1970s, the Atomic Energy Commission ruled that waste contaminated with certain levels of plutonium, or transuranic waste, must be buried in a deep geological repository. WIPP was later made the repository. But transuranic waste produced before the '70s does not have a clear path for disposal. At Hanford, which produced two-thirds of its plutonium before the '70s, the waste was buried. DOE is working on a plan for that waste that's legally required to be submitted to the Washington state Department of Ecology before the end of the year. But advisory board chairmen were concerned enough about "the lack of a disposition path for pre-1970 transuranic waste" to name it in their letter. DOE and nuclear watchdogs disagree about whether WIPP is large enough, even if it were expanded, to take all of the nation's pre-1970s transuranic waste in addition to the newer transuranic waste that's being sent there now. Martin told the Hanford Advisory Board on Thursday that he had signed the letter, which was drafted in October, on the board's behalf. There was no objection. A few of the boards for other sites have not signed the letter because they have not met since the letter was drafted, but all are expected to sign, Martin said. They include the Fernald, Idaho, Nevada, Northern New Mexico, Oak Ridge, Paducah, Rocky Flats and Savannah River sites. The letter asks for DOE to sponsor a national forum organized by an independent group by the end of 2005. The forum should include broad participation by DOE, the National Governors Association, legal regulators of the sites such as the Environmental Protection Agency, tribes, site advisory boards and public interest groups and other members of the public, the letter said. "Ultimately, the forum should result in principles, priority-setting criteria and recommendations to guide commonsense solutions to current and future waste disposition challenges," the letter said. © 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 47 Carlsbad Current-Argus: DOE's acting manager is leaving [http://www.currentargus.com/] Updated: November 5, 2004 - 10:01:54 By Victoria Parker-Stevens/Current-Argus Staff Writer Nov 5, 2004, 04:16 am Local leaders criticize official’s performance CARLSBAD — The head of Carlsbad’s federal Energy Department field office is leaving, and local leaders say they want a voice in choosing his successor. The DOE announced Thursday that it was R. Paul Detwiler’s last day as acting manager. Lloyd Piper, deputy manager, will take the reins, as he did prior to Detwiler’s arrival in January. Detwiler plans to resume his former position at DOE headquarters in Washington, D.C., as special assistant to the general counsel. It was the lawyer’s first position at a DOE site. On his last day as acting manager, Detwiler fielded questions from state legislators about recent incidents in which waste was inappropriately shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. The state levied a $2.4 million fine for waste from Idaho that was not tested, and the Environmental Protection Agency is investigating shipments from Hanford, Wash., it did not approve. No one has contended that any prohibited waste was shipped. A contractor in Idaho was responsible for the incident there, but the Carlsbad Field Office was responsible for the Hanford shipments, Detwiler said Thursday. “I think a number of the regulatory issues we’ve been facing — in particular Idaho and Hanford in Washington — are difficult issues,” said state Rep. John Heaton, D-Carlsbad, “and we need a manager that will be able to deal with all of the complexities of auditing and the permitting requirements.” Heaton chairs the Legislature’s Radioactive and Hazardous Materials Committee that is meeting at the Carlsbad Environmental Monitoring and Research Center this week. “We’re looking forward to getting somebody that has the management skills and the capability of working with the whole complex and assuming the responsibility for the whole National TRU (waste) Program here in Carlsbad,” he said. “The last thing we need is to shut (WIPP) down,” said Mayor Bob Forrest. “We already got crossways with the (state). The last thing we need is the same to happen with the EPA.” A recent editorial in the Albuquerque Journal called for a stop to all WIPP shipments. Detwiler said the recent incidents were not responsible for his exit. “It didn’t have anything to do with that. That’s not what I’ve been told,” he said. “I think I did a good job dealing with the regulatory challenges.” Detwiler noted that there had been several similar incidents before his arrival. Over the last several years, four of the five major DOE sites have had problems, affecting “a significant proportion of the current emplaced waste,” the EPA says in an internal memo. After-the-fact approvals were needed four times, it says, with shipments suspended from two sites, including Los Alamos National Laboratory. Detwiler said from what he heard, the opposition of local leaders — rather than anything that occurred at the site — appears to have led to his departure. “I think that I’ve done a very good job,” he said. “I think I am fully capable of dealing with these regulatory challenges. I’ve enjoyed working there.” As a lawyer in Washington, Detwiler had worked on WIPP regulatory issues before his arrival. The recent incidents were not the reason that local leaders wanted to see him leave, he said, noting they had been opposed to his candidacy for quite some time. Detwiler said the mayor wanted a manager who would live in Carlsbad. Detwiler’s wife still lives in Washington. “I would do that if I got the job permanently,” he said. Detwiler said he didn’t know why the DOE had not given him the permanent position. The last permanent manager was Ines Triay, who left in January to take a position as deputy chief operating officer for environmental management at DOE headquarters. “They need to live here, or no one’s watching the shop,” Forrest said. Forrest said local leaders were not given any input before Detwiler’s arrival, unlike with previous managers. He was optimistic that would change. Heaton agreed that the city should be involved in the process. “We are a community that supports DOE in a strong way, and we have a lot of faith in them including the city in the decisionmaking process as to who the new manager will be,” he said. “How the project goes is how the city supports it,” Heaton said. “We need a manager that’s going to be extremely collaborative with the city and the employees with the project.” “We used to have a lot of input,” Forrest said. “We don’t want to micromanage it, but (WIPP’s) biggest asset is the community. When they stop using us, you can almost see the problems coming.” Forrest said officials in Washington forget about the community support that got WIPP open. “P.R. is not DOE’s strong suit,” he said. Forrest said he and other city leaders had talked with officials at DOE headquarters this fall about their concerns with local DOE leadership — as well as about the end of the management contract at the site. A few weeks later, DOE Deputy Secretary Kyle McSlarrow came to Carlsbad to announce negotiations would begin for an extension of the contract held by Washington TRU Solutions. In Washington and Carlsbad, local leaders were told the DOE was looking into a change at the Carlsbad Field Office, Forrest said. In their conversations, they had also spoken with Paul Golan, acting assistant secretary of the Office of Environmental Management, which oversees WIPP. “McSlarrow and Golan got the message good and clear,” Forrest said. Copyright © 2004 Carlsbad Current-Argus, a Gannett Co., Inc. newspaper. ***************************************************************** 48 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Nevada FR Doc 04-24739 [Federal Register: November 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 214)] [Notices] [Page 64568] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05no04-47] AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Nevada Test Site. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register. DATES: Thursday, December 2, 2004, 7 p.m.-9 p.m. ADDRESSES: Beatty Community Center, 100 ``A'' Avenue, Beatty, NV. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay Planamento, Navarro Research and Engineering, Inc., 2721 Losee Road, North Las Vegas, Nevada 89130, phone: 702-657-9088, fax: 702-295-5300, e-mail: NTSCAB@aol.com [NTSCAB@aol.com] . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Advisory Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities. Tentative Agenda: Members of the Board's Underground Test Area Committee will provide a briefing to update stakeholders on their work related to groundwater issues at the Nevada Test Site. Board members will discuss technical committee work plans developed for FY 2005 and will provide and update related to national Environmental Management Site Specific Advisory Board activities. Copies of the final agenda will be available at the meeting. Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Committee either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Kelly Kozeliski, at the telephone number listed above. Requests must be received 5 days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Each individual wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying at the Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will also be available by writing to Kay Planamento at the address listed above. Issued in Washington, DC, on November 1, 2004. Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 04-24739 Filed 11-4-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 49 DOE: Berwanger, Inc. FR Doc 04-24740 [Federal Register: November 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 214)] [Notices] [Page 64568-64569] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr05no04-48] AGENCY: Office of the General Counsel, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of intent to grant exclusive license. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given to an intent to grant to Berwanger, Inc., of Houston, TX, an exclusive or partially exclusive license to software entitled ``Thermal Safety Software'' (TSS), developed under ISTC project 1498. The United States Government, as the exclusive licensee to distribute the software for commercial purposes in the United States, has the right to sublicense the software. A Notice to the effect that the computer software was available for license appeared in the Federal Register, October 5, 2004 (69 FR 59585). [[Page 64569]] DATES: Written comments or nonexclusive license applications are to be received at the address listed below no later than December 6, 2004. ADDRESSES: Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John T. Lucas, Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property, U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 6F-067, 1000 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585; Telephone (202) 586-2939. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 35 U.S.C. 209 provides federal agencies with authority to grant exclusive licenses in federally-owned inventions which are or may be patentable, if, among other things, the agency finds that the public will be served by the granting of the license. The statute requires that no exclusive license may be granted unless public notice of the intent to grant the license has been provided, and the agency has considered all comments received in response to that public notice, before the end of the comment period. Berwanger, Inc., of Houston, TX has applied for an exclusive license to TSS and has plans for its commercialization. The exclusive license will be subject to a license and other rights retained by the U.S. Government, and other terms and conditions to be negotiated. DOE intends to negotiate to grant the license, unless, within 30 days of this notice, the Assistant General Counsel for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property, Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585, receives in writing any of the following, together with supporting documents: (i) A statement from any person setting forth reasons why it would not be in the best interests of the United States to grant the proposed license; or (ii) An application for a nonexclusive license to the software in which applicant states that if already has brought the invention to practical application or is likely to bring the software to practical application expeditiously. The Department will review all timely written responses to this notice, and will proceed with negotiating the license if, after consideration of written responses to this notice, a finding is made that the license is in the public interest. Issued in Washington, DC, on November 1, 2004. Paul A. Gottlieb, Assistant General Counsel for Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property. [FR Doc. 04-24740 Filed 11-4-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 50 [DU-WATCH] DU: Newspaper Notes Pentagon Inconsistency Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 01:52:16 -0600 (CST) "The Defense Department's contention that depleted uranium ... doesn't need to be cleaned up is contrary to its own rules for handling it." Hi I have been sawing away on this point for at least a year and a half. If you're OD'd on DU, just let me know and I'll remove you from my list. Cheers, Robert = = = = = = = = = = http://www.ctnow.com/news/health/hc-ducleanup1101.artnov01,1,7556418.story?coll=hc-headlines-health (registration necessary) Weapons Dust Worries Iraqis Provisional Government Seeks Cleanup; U.S. Downplays Risks November 1, 2004 By THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, Courant Staff Writer Despite assurances from the U.S. military that depleted uranium from exploded munitions does not pose a significant health threat, Iraq's provisional government is asking the United Nations for help cleaning up the low-level radioactive, metal dust spread across local battlefields by U.S. and British forces during the Persian Gulf wars. The request comes as the United States continues to defend depleted uranium weaponry - prized for its tank-piercing and bunker- or cave-smashing ability - against strong opposition by other countries, scientists and veterans organizations. Great Britain, a major partner in the coalition now fighting in Iraq, has provided the U.N. with the coordinates where its forces used depleted uranium, also known as DU, in southern Iraq, but the United States has not. Britain and Germany are supplying money to train Iraqis in environmental science. The United Nations plans to survey for DU hot spots from both wars in Iraq and says it needs the coordinates for an effective survey. Neither British nor U.S. authorities have offered to augment the $4.7 million donated mainly by Japan to the United Nations to evaluate sites of wartime contamination that health experts say threaten the well-being of Iraqi civilians. In late October, Army Lt. Col. Mark Melanson said a five-year, $6 million Defense Department study of a simulated DU tank explosion shows "the chemical risks of breathing in uranium dust are so low that it won't cause any long-term health risks," even for the tank crew. Health Concerns Remain Concern about the health effects of depleted uranium is not limited to overseas countries. The Defense Department's contention that depleted uranium has not been shown to affect health adversely and therefore doesn't need to be cleaned up is contrary to its own rules for handling it. Those rules mirror the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's treatment of depleted uranium as an environmental hazard and danger to public health. Federal regulators have shut down some U.S. nuclear weapons and uranium processing and munitions plants, found to be contaminated by depleted uranium. Billions of dollars are being spent on its cleanup in the United States. Depleted uranium, or U-238, is a toxic, heavy metal byproduct of uranium enrichment that gives the world uranium suitable for use in nuclear weapons and reactor fuel. It is also used in munitions, ballast for airplanes, tank armor and other products. It has a half-life of 4.5 billion years. In 2002 at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Bethesda, Md., researchers found that even though the alpha radiation from depleted uranium is relatively low, internalized DU as a metal can induce DNA damage and carcinogenic lesions in the cells that make up bones in the human body. Depleted uranium was first used widely in combat in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The material in armor-piercing munitions ignites and burns on impact at temperatures of several thousand degrees Celsius. While burning, tiny particles, or dust, of uranium oxide aerosol are created. Wind can carry these considerable distances. Since 1991, the cancer rates in Iraq have risen sharply in areas where depleted uranium was used, according to Iraqi medical studies reviewed by scientists from other countries. In addition, more than 230,000 of the 697,000 U.S. soldiers who served in that war have filed disability claims for various maladies, the majority of which fall under the broad category of gulf war syndrome. With many of the causes of these illnesses still eluding researchers, several lawmakers, at the urging of veterans groups, pushed for legislation to study depleted uranium further, to see if there is a connection with gulf war and other wartime illnesses. It called also for cleaning up depleted uranium munitions firings. In the Republican-controlled Congress, the measures quietly died this fall inside the House Health Subcommittee. Congress and three presidential administrations have either remained silent on the dispute or have dismissed the environmental and health concerns raised. Council Urges Ban U.N.-related organizations, citing studies showing more cancers and birth defects among civilians and soldiers in countries where depleted uranium munitions have been used, have pressed for more studies and a ban on their use until the effects are better understood. The Council of Europe, Europe's oldest inter-governmental organization of 46 nations, has called for a ban on the production, use, testing and sale of munitions containing depleted uranium or plutonium. But U.S. political leaders in Congress and at the White House have refused to acknowledge that depleted uranium might seriously harm soldiers and civilians. At home, the United States has spent billions of dollars cleaning up depleted uranium - at former munitions factories, military firing ranges and nuclear fuel production sites. A General Accounting Office report in 2000 put the cost of cleanup at the uranium enrichment plant in Paducah, Ky., where DU is processed for use in weapons and nuclear reactors, at $1.3 billion. By December 2003, the cost of cleaning up and closing the plant, estimated to take until 2070, was up to $13 billion Cleaning up DU contamination in Iraq, experts say, would come with a multibillion-dollar price tag. Any money spent on cleaning up depleted uranium in Iraq would be in addition to the estimated $225 billion that the United States will be spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan if Congress approves the Bush administration's estimated $70 billion in emergency funding request early next year. Frederick Jones, a spokesman for the National Security Agency, said the United Nations has not asked the Department of Defense or State Department for assistance in cleaning up depleted uranium in Iraq. The U.N. Environmental Programme's chairman, Pekka Haavisto, however, said his organization has kept the State Department informed of those needs. Since 1991, the United States and Britain have fired hundreds of tons of DU munitions during four wars - in the Balkans, Afghanistan and twice in Iraq. U.N. environmental spokesman Michael Williams said the United States has not supplied coordinates on the sites where DU munitions were fired in Iraq or offered to clean it up. Haavisto added: "U.S. government has the information that if field assessments will be done, exact DU coordinates are needed." Bill Dies Quietly Last year, Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Washington, a U.S. Navy psychiatrist during the Vietnam War, sponsored a bill to pay for a definitive study of the health effect of DU munitions and to clean up dust and fragments after their use. The bill was referred to the House Armed Services and Energy and Commerce committees and then to the committee's Health Subcommittee, where it died. McDermott's spokesman, Mike DeCesare, said the Republican leadership blocked the bill's passage. But a spokesman for the Health Subcommittee said the committee counsel could find no "aggressive action" by McDermott to get a hearing for it. DeCesare insisted, however, that if McDermott is re-elected, he intends to reintroduce the bill, which was supported by Connecticut Rep. Chris Shays, R-4th District. "Depleted uranium is a potential health hazard for the Iraqi people and we need to do all we can to make sure that as Iraq is rebuilt, we help the new Iraqi government mitigate any public health threats," Shays said. The debate over DU has not made much of an impact on the presidential race. President Bush sides with the Pentagon. The Democratic nominee, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts does not have a position on the use of depleted uranium munitions, his communications director, Andy Davis, said recently. Independent candidate Ralph Nader, a Connecticut native, said DU munitions are environmentally dangerous and should never have been used in the first place. "The denial and cruel coverup has gone on too long," Nader said. "These soldiers and civilians who suffered [adverse health from exposure to DU] deserve the truth and respectful assistance. The first step is to admit the problem. The second step is to measure the size of the problem and then clean up the environmental toxins. The next step is to stop using depleted uranium munitions." But the Bush administration, which insists DU poses little environmental risk so cleanup is not needed, takes the Pentagon's advice on such matters. "If the [Defense Department] indicated to us that the DU rounds or explosions were a cause of concern, and they have not done so, a study or inquiry of their use would be warranted," said Bush's National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones. "Then we would be faced with that decision. The [Defense Department] has not contacted us, nor to the best of my knowledge has any international body contacted us." Jones said. Kuwait Cleanup There have been many instances when the military directed depleted uranium cleanups overseas. For example, a private contractor working for the Department of Defense was paid $3.5 million to cleanup DU-contaminated military equipment and a practice firing range in Kuwait. MKM Engineers Inc. based in Stafford, Texas, performed a limited cleanup in Kuwait from February 2003 to June 2004. The company recovered 22 tons of DU fragments and 75 pieces of non-DU ordnance scrap. The unexploded DU ordnance was destroyed with Kuwaiti assistance. MKM also cleaned military hardware, including tanks, and wrapped them to contain surface contamination before sending them back to the United States. The U.S. Army Material Command, responsible for the Kuwaiti project, described the work as retrieval of equipment and munitions, not a clean up. The Department of Defense "does not clean up DU once it leaves a U.S. weapons system such as a Bradley Fighting Vehicle and hits an enemy building, or vehicle," said Melissa Bohan, an Army public affairs official. Army regulations require the clean-up and proper handling of U.S. equipment hit by depleted uranium munitions. MKM referred to some of its work in Kuwait as a cleanup. And, the Defense Department has a low-level radioactive waste cleanup program, whose goal is "the safe and compliant disposal of low-level radioactive waste," including depleted uranium. It includes the Army Contaminated Equipment Retrograde Team, which supervises cleanup of low-level radioactive contamination of Army equipment worldwide. Military regulations require immediate medical tests and treatment for any soldiers exposed to dust and fragments from depleted uranium shell explosions. Some nuclear scientists studying the health effects of those inhaling DU believe even a speck of the dust in the lungs or bloodstream can eventually cause cancer or kidney disease in adults or cancers or deformities in babies if even one parent has been exposed. Marion Fulk, 83, a former nuclear chemical physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory who was involved with the Manhattan Project's development of the atomic bomb, said that even nano-size particles of DU in the blood and lungs are a serious destructive force. Others who support the Defense Department position say only inhalation of large quantities creates serious health problems. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/Sj.0lB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 51 [du-list] DU in the News - 6th Nov. 04 Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:40:18 -0800 Friday, November 5, 2004 11:26 AM PST EurekAlert!, Fri, 05 Nov 2004 6:58 AM PST Tumbleweeds good for uranium clean-up http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-11/gsoa-tgf110504.php The lowly, ill-regarded tumbleweed might be good for something after all. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Fri, 05 Nov 2004 0:41 AM PST More Current Affairs: http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2004/s1235637.htm Eleanor Hall hosts The World Today's lunch hour of current affairs, with background and debate from Australia and the world. Monday to Friday, 12:10pm, ABC Local Radio and Radio National. ABC News via Yahoo! Australia & NZ News, Thu, 04 Nov 2004 8:37 PM PST Defence says no deal signed on weapons testing http://au.news.yahoo.com/041105/21/rlhr.html The Defence Department says nothing has been finalised in regard to allowing the US to test new-generation weapons in Australia. ABC News via Yahoo! Australia & NZ News, Thu, 04 Nov 2004 4:05 PM PST US may trial smart bombs in Aust exercises http://au.news.yahoo.com/041105/21/rlcq.html The United States looks set to test new generation weapons, including smart bombs, in Australia within three years. Telegraph.co.uk, Thu, 04 Nov 2004 5:42 PM PST MoD dismisses reports on 'Gulf War Syndrome' http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/05/ngulf05.xml The Ministry of Defence has dismissed evidence suggesting that troops who fought in the 1991 Gulf war were suffering from illnesses caused by their service. San Francisco Bay View, Thu, 04 Nov 2004 4:59 PM PST Five admirals, Carlyle Group and Rand take over http://www.sfbayview.com/110304/ucregents110304.shtml Research on population control, preventing future births, is now being carried out secretly by biotech companies. See more news stories that match your keyword at: http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?c=&p=depleted+uranium [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************