*****************************************************************
01/12/05 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 13.8
*****************************************************************
   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 [NYTr] WMD Hunters Still in Iraq, Now Hunting Resistance
2 Guardian Unlimited White House: Iraq Weapons Search Has Ended
3 Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Ends Fruitless Iraq Weapons Hunt
4 Guardian Unlimited: EU revives negotiations with Iran after WMD 
5 The Australian: UN nuclear inspectors in Iran 
6 PRAVDA.Ru: Russia and Iran join efforts to struggle against invasion
7 Xinhua: Iran to resume uranium enrichment in near future   
8 [NYTr] Risk of Nuclear War Growing, N.Korea Warns
9 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Congressmen Meet N. Korean Officials
10 Korea Herald: U.S. ambassador Hill may become main nuclear negotiato
11 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: North Korea rejects so-called Libya model
12 US: Las Vegas SUN: Chemical Weapons Program to Face Cuts
13 US: Deseret news: A bevy of environmental issues on agenda
14 US: New Scientist:  'Make or break' year for nuclear non-proliferati
15 US: NRC: Donald A. Barbour, Philotechnics; Denial of Petition 
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
16 [DU-WATCH] monitoring Chernobyl
17 US: Guardian Unlimited: NRC Drops Fine Against Tennessee Valley
18 US: Portsmouth Herald: Bush looks to promote nuclear power
19 ITAR-TASS: Chernobyl accident veterans to resume hunger strike in St
20 US: Newsday: New York official threatens lawsuit over Millstone impa
21 US: NRC: Carolina Power & Light Company; Brunswick Steam Electric Pl
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
22 US: DEMOCRACY BETRAYED
23 US: [DU-WATCH] WAMC Roundtable Segment on Depleted Uranium 1/6/05
24 US: [du-list] Never mind the Depleted Uranium, taste the
25 kitsapsun.com: Admiral's e-mail says nuclear submarine impact was "i
26 US: Bradenton Herald: Chao vows to hasten injury compensation
27 US: Las Vegas SUN: Sick Test Site workers may get paid more quickly
28 US: NRC: NRC Hearing Process on Pa. Irradiator Concludes
29 US: Tri-City Herald: 100 sick worker cases being paid 
30 US: SF Chronicle: U.S. to speed payouts on lab worker claims 
31 MSNBC: Russian study links rocket fuel, health woes
32 US: NRC: NRC Extends Opportunity to Request Use of New Standard for 
33 US: NA: Report assesses health implications of perchlorate exposure 
34 US: Paducah Sun: Paducah sick worker
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
35 [NukeNet] Laser Enrichment
36 US: [us-water-network] Panel contends perchlorate safer than EPA
37 US: Hearings on rad waste; Exelon Nuclear face lift
38 US: PCNH: Brush Wellman reaches $276,289 settlement with Ohio EPA -
39 UPI: Russian nuclear fuel worries Japan - 
40 US: Las Vegas RJ: EDITORIAL: An encouraging report
41 US: Las Vegas SUN: Administration asked opinion on nuke waste case
42 Las Vegas SUN: State amends Yucca silica suit
43 US: dBusinessNews: Parsons Awarded Army Environmental Cleanup Contra
44 US: Jackson Hole Zone: Back DOE to reveal nuke waste numbers  
45 DOE: Yucca Mountain in Nevada. meeting 2/9/5
 
                         NUCLEAR WEAPONS
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
46 Rocky Mountain News: Quick action promised to nuke workers
47 DenverPost.com: Flats families await U.S. aid
48 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Hanford arguments heard
49 ABQjournal: LANL Shutdown Cost Review Sought
50 Albuquerque Journal: LANL Shutdown Cost Review Sought 
51 Cascadia Scorecard Weblog: The Hanford Files
52 EPA: Hanford waste charactorization headed to WIPP
 
                          OTHER NUCLEAR
 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 [NYTr] WMD Hunters Still in Iraq, Now Hunting Resistance
 
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:06:37 -0600 (CST)

 
Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
[BBC reports that the "Iraq Survey Group" set up to find WMDs is still 
hard at work in Iraq, but now they're hunting the Resistance which, 
unlike the mythical WMDs, definitely does exist!]

sent by Simon McGuinness

BBC News Online - Jan 12, 2005
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4169107.stm

US gives up search for Iraq WMD [without finding any]

Intelligence officials have confirmed the US has stopped searching for
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. 

They say the chief US investigator, Charles Duelfer, is not planning to
return to the country. 

Mr Duelfer reported last year that Iraq had no stockpiles of chemical or
biological weapons at the time of the US-led invasion nearly two years
ago. 

The existence of WMD had been the stated reason in Washington and London
for going to war with Iraq. 

Mr Duelfer said when he released his interim report in October that
former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had still had the desire to restart
WMD programmes. 

He will make a few adjustments to his report but he will close the book
on the hunt when the final version is published in a few weeks, says the
BBC's Nick Childs in Washington. 

Officials are still sifting through a mountain of documents and say they
will follow any leads they find but there is no expectation that the
hunt will be revived. 

The Iraq Survey Group (ISG), which was responsible for the search,
continues its work but with the focus now on trying to help counter the
Iraqi insurgency. 

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Wednesday's announcement was
nothing new and that Mr Bush had referred to the end of the search last
year when Mr Duelfer's interim report came out. 

But a report earlier on Wednesday in the Washington Post newspaper
stating the search was over led to what appeared to be a confirmation by
the spokesman. 

Asked if the ISG had stopped actively searching for WMD, Mr McClellan
said: "That's my understanding... A lot of their mission is focused
elsewhere now." 

'Expected' 

Former US inspector David Kay told the BBC's Radio 4 PM programme this
was the expected outcome: 

"You cannot believe how hard it is to motivate people in the field who
know that all they are doing is going through busy work motions because
they themselves know there are no weapons there. 

"I faced that over a year ago with a team that essentially knew that we
were right when we said they were no weapons." 

He said the ISG's document search would now focus on the continued
insurgency in Iraq and the money flow issue surrounding the oil-for-food
programme. 

Former head of UN weapons inspections Hans Blix also said there was no
surprise in the announcement. 

"We have believed that there weren't any weapons since around May or
June 2003. First came David Kay in September 2003 [who said] that he
hadn't found any weapons and that was a big sensation - but he thought
that there were programmes still," he told the BBC. 

"But then came Duelfer last November [who] said that he hadn't seen any
programmes, but maybe Saddam would have intended to restart the
programme, and there is no evidence of that. 

Mr Blix said he assumed it would be natural for the United States to now
report their finding to the UN Security Council "because the US took the
inspections out of the hands of the UN to undertake it themselves". 

********
IRAQ SURVEY GROUP 

Set up in May 2003 

First leader, David Kay, quit in Jan 2004 stating WMD 
would not be found in Iraq 

New head, Charles Duelfer appointed by CIA 

1,200 experts from the US, Britain and Australia 

HQ in Washington; offices in Baghdad and Qatar

) BBC MMV
       
                                *
Search the NYTr Archives at:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/

To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr

=================================================================
  NY Transfer News Collective   *   A Service of Blythe Systems
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
              339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012
  http://www.blythe.org                  e-mail: nyt@blythe.org
================================================================= 
*****************************************************************
 2 Guardian Unlimited White House: Iraq Weapons Search Has Ended
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday January 13, 2005 12:46 AM
 	
AP Photo DCSA105 
By KATHERINE PFLEGER SHRADER 
Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House acknowledged Wednesday that
its hunt for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction - a two-year
search costing millions of dollars - has closed down without
finding the stockpiles that President Bush cited as a
justification for overthrowing Saddam Hussein. Bush's spokesman
said the president had no regrets about invading Iraq. 

``Based on what we know today, the president would have taken
the same action because this is about protecting the American
people,'' said Press Secretary Scott McClellan. 

The Iraq Survey Group - made up of as many as 1,500 military and
intelligence specialists and support staff - is ending its
search of military installations, factories and laboratories
where it was thought that equipment and products might be
converted to making weapons. 

McClellan said the active search had virtually ended. ``There
may be a couple, a few people that are focused on that,'' he
said, adding that they would handle any future reports that
might come in. 

At a meeting last month, McClellan said Bush thanked the chief
U.S. weapons inspector, Charles Duelfer, for his work. A special
adviser to the CIA director, Duelfer will deliver a final
edition of a report on Iraq's weapons next month. McClellan said
it is not expected to fundamentally differ from the findings of
a report last fall. 

Duelfer said then that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction
and had not made any since 1991. However, he said the government
harbored intentions of recreating its weapons programs and had
gone to great lengths to manipulate the U.N. oil-for-food
program. 

In an interview Wednesday with Barbara Walters of ABC News, Bush
defended his decision to invade Iraq. 

``I felt like we'd find weapons of mass destruction - like many
here in the United States, many around the world,'' Bush said in
the interview, to be broadcast Friday night. ``We need to find
out what went wrong in the intelligence gathering. ... Saddam
was dangerous and the world is safer without him in power.'' 

In a statement, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of
California said Bush ``needs to explain to the American people
why he was so wrong, for so long, about the reasons for war.'' 

The end of the weapons hunt comes as the Bush administration
struggles with a dangerous security situation in Iraq leading up
to Jan. 30 elections. 

Meanwhile, other countries - notably Iran and North Korea - are
suspected of developing covert nuclear weapons programs. 

When asked whether the failure to find weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq would damage U.S. credibility in handling
future threats, McClellan said the president would continue to
work with the international community, particularly on
diplomatic solutions. He said pre-emptive military action was
``the last option'' to pursue. 

``We are acting to make sure we have the best possible
intelligence,'' McClellan said, adding that a number of changes
have been made since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. 

Almost one year ago, Bush formed a presidential commission to
investigate U.S. intelligence capabilities on weapons of mass
destruction, focusing not only on Iraq but on how well the
intelligence community understands the threat from other
countries and terror networks. Its report is due March 31. 

The closing down of the weapons search was first reported in the
Washington Post on Wednesday. 

David Kay, who headed the Iraq Survey Group until stepping down
last January, said he was not surprised the group was concluding
its efforts without finding any major weapons stockpiles. 

``It is like dropping a shoe a little late. Quite frankly, I
don't think anyone who follows it very closely has suspected
anything else over the last year. It was a matter of when the
obvious would be done,'' Kay said. 

He said that intelligence analysts working in Iraq had found
themselves in a dangerous security situation and that many had
reached conclusions about the lack of weapons as much as 18
months ago. ``How do you keep them motivated?'' he asked. 

At the State Department, spokesman Richard Boucher said the U.S.
government was paying stipends to about 120 Iraqi scientists who
once had been working in weapons programs. They now are working
on scientific research outside weapons development. 

Greg Thielmann, the former manager of the State Department
office that tracked chemical, biological and nuclear weapons
issues, said the United States should devote energy to
employment of these scientists, who now appear to have been
involved in non-weapons work under Saddam in recent years. 

``Who knows what they are going to do?'' asked Thielmann, who
left his position in September 2002. ``One can question whether
we improved the security situation through the invasion.'' 
  
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 3 Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Ends Fruitless Iraq Weapons Hunt

Today: January 12, 2005 at 14:26:37 PST 
 
ASSOCIATED PRESS 

WASHINGTON (AP) - 

0112iraqattack The search for weapons of mass destruction in
Iraq has quietly concluded without any evidence of the banned
weapons that President Bush cited as justification for going to
war, the White House said Wednesday. 

Democrats said Bush owes the country an explanation of why he
was so wrong. 

The Iraq Survey Group, made up of some 1,200 military and
intelligence specialists and support staff, spent nearly two
years searching military installations, factories and
laboratories whose equipment and products might be converted
quickly to making weapons. 

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said there no longer
is an active search for weapons and the administration does not
hold out hopes that any weapons will be found. "There may be a
couple, a few people, that are focused on that" but that it has
largely concluded, he said. 

"If they have any reports of (weapons of mass destruction)
obviously they'll continue to follow up on those reports,"
McClellan said. "A lot of their mission is focused elsewhere
now." 

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said Bush
should explain what happened. 

"Now that the search is finished, President Bush needs to
explain to the American people why he was so wrong, for so long,
about the reasons for war," she said. 

"After a war that has consumed nearly two years and millions of
dollars, and a war that has cost thousands of lives, no weapons
of mass destruction have been found, nor has any evidence been
uncovered that such weapons were moved to another country,"
Pelosi said in a written statement. "Not only was there not an
imminent threat to the United States, the threat described in
such alarmist tones by President Bush and the most senior
members of his administration did not exist at all." 

Chief U.S. weapons hunter Charles Duelfer is to deliver his
final report on the search next month. "It's not going to
fundamentally alter the findings of his earlier report,"
McClellan said, referring to preliminary findings from last
September. Duelfer reported then that Saddam Hussein not only
had no weapons of mass destruction and had not made any since
1991, but that he had no capability of making any either. Bush
unapologetically defended his decision to invade Iraq. 

"Nothing's changed in terms of his views when it comes to Iraq,
what he has previously stated and what you have previously
heard," McClellan said. "The president knows that by advancing
freedom in a dangerous region we are making the world a safer
place." 

Bush has appointed a panel to investigate why the intelligence
about Iraq's weapons was wrong. 

McClellan said the Iraq experience would not make Bush hesitant
to raise alarms when he deems it necessary. 

"But we're also going to continue taking steps to make sure that
that intelligence is the best possible," he said. 

"Our friends and allies had the same intelligence that we had
when it came to Saddam Hussein," McClellan said. "And now we
need to continue to move forward to find out what went wrong and
to correct those flaws." 

At the State Department, spokesman Richard Boucher said
Wednesday about 120 Iraqi scientists who had been working in
weapons programs were being paid by the U.S. government to work
in other fields. 
-- 

         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 4 Guardian Unlimited: EU revives negotiations with Iran after WMD 
commitment
 
David Gow in Brussels
Wednesday January 12, 2005
The Guardian 		
 		
The EU will today defy the US and resume trade talks with
Iran in the hope of opening up one of the world's
fastest-growing countries to greater foreign investment. 

The talks, broken off 19 months ago, are being revived after the
agreement between Iran and Britain, France and Germany that the
Islamic republic would suspend its uranium enrichment and
reprocessing activities for military purposes. 

Iran, whose growth averaged 5.8% over the past three years and
reached 7.4% in 2003, has seen its trade with the EU decline
over the 25 years since the mullahs ousted the shah in 1979 but
it still amounts to 10bn (£7bn), or 30%, of Iran's total trade. 

Senior European commission officials said in seeking to win a
trade and co-operation agreement with Iran the EU was backing
its case to join the World Trade Organisation and was offering
it a WTO-style bilateral agreement, including lower tariffs. 

Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the external affairs commissioner, said
the resumed talks were "a clear signal of our wish to work with
Iran" and the country could look forward to a richer
relationship "as long as the international community can be
confident that Iran's nuclear programme is not being developed
for military purposes". 

Her aides said it would help end the country's pariah status by
showing its commitment to greater transparency and non-
discrimination, including in areas such as drugs trafficking and
illegal immigration. 

Via tariffs as low as 3% the EU would be encouraging Iran to
export more of its goods, especially oil, which accounts for 84%
of trade with Europe. It would also be keen for the country to
open its market to EU companies active in chemicals, transport,
machinery and financial services. US companies are legally
banned from trading with Iran. 

The senior officials said Iran had 700,000 new job- seekers each
year and the government had a desperate need for foreign direct
investment. 

Any trade agreement would have to be matched by parallel
co-operation in four areas: human rights, regional security in
the Middle East; the fight against terrorism and
non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. 

Iran's civilian nuclear programme, mistrusted by the US, is
being monitored by the international atomic energy agency and
the EU made plain that, if the Vienna-based body found breaches
of the Paris agreement with Britain, France and Germany then
trade talks could again be suspended. 

The clear aim is, however, to reach a deal later this year.
 	
[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 5 The Australian: UN nuclear inspectors in Iran 

[January 12, 2005]
 	 	
From correspondents in Tehran

INSSPECTORS from the UN atomic watchdog arrived in Tehran today 
to visit a military site the United States claims may be involved 
in covert nuclear weapons activities, student news agency ISNA 
reported.

"The group of inspectors are to stay in Iran for a week and they 
will start taking environmental samples from Parchin on 
tomorrow," ISNA said.

 Iran said on Sunday it had given the International Atomic Energy 
Agency (IAEA) permission to take so-called environmental samples 
from the Parchin site southeast of Tehran in order to disprove US 
allegations of secret weapons-related activities.

 Environmental sampling involves taking swabs or soil samples to 
detect the presence of nuclear activity.

 "The question is not of a visit to the military installations of 
Parchin. The agency had asked to take samples from the green 
areas of Parchin because the Americans and others have made 
accusations," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told 
reporters on Sunday. 

"To demonstrate that we have nothing to hide and that the
Iranian nuclear program is peaceful, we have authorised the
agency to take these samples," he added.

 Parchin is an example of a so-called "transparency visit" where
the IAEA is going beyond its mandate under the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to check if nuclear materials
have been diverted away from peaceful use.

 Last week, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei announced that Iran had
finally given the green light for his inspectors to probe
Parchin. The IAEA has been seeking access to the site since July.

 Tehran has strongly denied carrying out any nuclear-related
work at the site, and insists its nuclear drive is merely aimed
at generating electricity.

 The US has alleged the Iranians may be working on testing
high-explosive charges with an inert core of depleted uranium at
Parchin as a sort of dry test for how a bomb with fissile
material would work. 

  privacy       terms      © The Australian   
*****************************************************************
 6 PRAVDA.Ru: Russia and Iran join efforts to struggle against invasion of UFOs - 

  01/12/2005 18:44   
  
If a UFO appears in the sky above Iran, anti-aircraft systems 
will most likely down it
 
Unidentified flying objects continue terrorizing the Eastern 
hemisphere of planet Earth. No one knows what to do with them, 
although it is obvious that something has to be done with the 
problem. Russia and Iran agreed to join efforts to study the 
mysterious phenomenon. The news may seem to be ridiculous at 
first sight, but it is actually a rather serious matter: UFOs 
pose a big threat to Iran in connection with its growing nuclear 
potential.

The UFO mania has gripped Iran. The Air Force command of Teheran 
has recently been given an order to down any unknown or 
suspicious object seen in the air space of Iran. If a UFO appears 
in the sky above Iran, anti-aircraft systems will most likely 
down it. 

Iranian mass media, meanwhile, are distributing more and more 
information about extraterrestrial threats to the nation's 
nuclear objects. The flights of unknown objects in the air space 
of the country have become much more frequent lately, the Resalat 
Daily wrote. According to the newspaper, unusual luminous objects 
were spotted above Busher and Natanza, where nuclear facilities 
are located. One of the objects exploded in the sky, eyewitnesses 
said. The Iranian defense department is trying to pacify the 
anxious population. "We have developed plans to protect nuclear 
objects from any danger. The Iranian Air Force is on alert and 
ready to fulfill the duty," General Qarim Gavani stated. 

The interest in UFOs started growing very fast in Iran more than
a year ago. News agencies reported dozens of incidents, when
people could see strange objects flying above their heads. The
state television of Iran aired the footage of a shimmering white
disk above Teheran. People ran out of their houses in eight
cities to see the bright extraterrestrial light in the clouds.
IRNA reported about multicolored objects with green, red, blue
and violet rays seen above the towns of Tabriz and Ardebil and
above Golestan Province in the area of the Caspian Sea. 

Russia promised to help Iran in the struggle with UFOs. Russia
put an end to the anomalous problem in the beginning of the
1990s, when the entire population of the Soviet Union was
panicking over strange flying objects. Both Russian and Iranian
officials emphasize the fact of expanding the bilateral
cooperation, particularly in the field of space exploration and
the development of satellites. In addition to UFO-related
contracts Russia and Iran are working on the details of the
agreement to launch the Zohreh satellite. 
  
Pravda.Ru   
    
  L1999-2002 "PRAVDA.Ru".
*****************************************************************
 7 Xinhua: Iran to resume uranium enrichment in near future   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-01-12 21:46:16   

   TEHRAN, Jan. 12 (Xinhuanet) -- A top Iranian security
official said here Wednesday that Iran would resume its highly
sensitive uranium enrichment in the near future, the official
IRNA news agency reported. 

   "Iran was determined to resume its enrichment activities
under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) in the near future," Hassan Rowhani, Secretary of the
Supreme National Security Council and chief nuclear negotiator,
was quoted as saying. 

   "Embarking on uranium enrichment activities to produce the
fuel needed by nuclear power plants was the absolute right of
the countries which are signatory to the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty," Rowhani said. 

   Rowhani, in a meeting with visiting Japanese Deputy Foreign
Minister Ichiro Isawa, also voiced Tehran's readiness to offer
all kinds of commitments to prevent any diversion in its
activities towards production of nuclear arms. 

   "Over 800 person/day of inspections have been carried out in
Iran's nuclear installations by the IAEA last year. Such a
degree of cooperation proved Tehran's good intentions as well as
the peaceful nature of its nuclear activities," Rowhani added. 

   Uranium enrichment is the crux of the Iranian nuclear issue.
The US accused Tehran of developing nuclear weapons secretly, a
charge categorically denied by Iran who termed the allegation as
politically motivated. 

   After repeated retreats and bargains, Iran suspended the
activities related to the enrichment on Nov. 22. However, it
insisted that it would never give up its legal rights and the
suspension was only a voluntary and temporary measure to build
confidence. 

   Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Chairman of the powerful Expediency
Council of Iran, said on Dec. 3 that the maximum duration of
Iran's suspension was six months.  Enditem   

  Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 8 [NYTr] Risk of Nuclear War Growing, N.Korea Warns
 
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:19:10 -0600 (CST)

 
Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Chosun Digital (S. Korea) - Jan 11, 2004
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200501/200501110017.html

North Says Threat of Nuclear War Growing

Russia's Interfax news agency said Monday that North Korea reported a 
growing threat of nuclear war because of the presence of U.S. troops in 
South Korea and the U.S.'s aggressive policy toward Pyongyang.

In a statement, the North Korean Embassy in Moscow said that U.S. policy 
seeking to "strangle" North Korea had exacerbated the threat of a 
nuclear war. "Should a war break out, only our Northern and Southern 
brothers and our country will feel the pain of the huge disaster," the 
statement said.

"The Korean people must drive the U.S. military out of South Korea and 
eliminate an environment where a nuclear war could erupt, while securing 
the peace and security of the Korean Peninsula," it added.

                            ***

Reuters - Jan 10, 2005
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L10646557.htm

N.Korea says nuclear war risk on rise-report

MOSCOW, Jan 10 (Reuters) - North Korea believes the threat of nuclear 
war is growing because the United States has troops in South Korea and 
an aggressive policy towards the North, the Communist state told 
Russia's Interfax news agency on Monday.

"From one day to the next the danger of nuclear war on the Korean 
peninsula is getting stronger because of a U.S. policy that aims to 
strangle the Democratic People's Republic of Korea," the North Korean 
embassy said in a statement released to Interfax.

Pyongyang has vowed to stay out of six-party talks on its nuclear 
programme until U.S. President George W. Bush changes his policy towards 
the North, which his administration has said is part of "an axis of 
evil", along with Iran and pre-war Iraq.

U.S. officials say North Korea may have more than eight nuclear weapons 
and warn that nuclear proliferation is one of the gravest threats to the 
United States.

But the North Korean statement said all Koreans would lose if peace was 
not secured, and urged those on both sides of the border to jointly work 
to remove the threat of war.

"If war breaks out in the region, it will only be our fellow-countrymen 
in the north and the south and our land that will suffer from the 
catastrophe.

"The whole Korean nation, working to strengthen the anti-war struggle 
for peace, should remove American troops from South Korea and eliminate 
the breeding ground for nuclear war and safeguard peace and security on 
the Korean peninsula," it said.

The talks -- attended by both Koreas, the United States, Russia, China 
and Japan -- have been on hold since June. They began in 2003 after 
North Korea agreed to discuss how to end its nuclear programme in return 
for economic aid and security assurances.

                                   ***

The Washington Post - Jan 12, 2005
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1962-2005Jan11.html

N. Korea Hesitant To Resume Talks

by Philip P. Pan

BEIJING, Jan. 11 -- A U.S. congressman who traveled to North Korea for 
talks with senior leaders said Tuesday that the discussions were 
"serious and substantive" but that he was told the North was not ready 
to resume negotiations about dismantling its nuclear weapons program.

Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), briefing reporters after three days of 
meetings in Pyongyang, said the officials indicated they were "waiting 
to see the shape of the second Bush administration" before resuming 
six-nation talks that began in 2003.

Lantos said he told them that Bush's new foreign policy team was in 
place, that its approach to North Korea would not change and that 
Congress supported the approach. The North Koreans did not specify what 
would persuade them to resume the talks, he said.

) 2005 The Washington Post Company
       
                                *
Search the NYTr Archives at:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/

To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr

=================================================================
  NY Transfer News Collective   *   A Service of Blythe Systems
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
              339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012
  http://www.blythe.org                  e-mail: nyt@blythe.org
================================================================= 
*****************************************************************
 9 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Congressmen Meet N. Korean Officials
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday January 12, 2005 11:01 AM
 	
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - A group of U.S. congressmen met with
North Korea's foreign minister in Pyongyang on Wednesday, the
communist state's official news agency said, in an effort to
persuade the North to rejoin talks on its nuclear weapons
ambitions. 

A bipartisan delegation led by Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., arrived
in Pyongyang on Tuesday for a four-day visit as part of efforts
to keep dialogue open between the United States and North Korea,
especially over the North's nuclear weapons program. 

The delegation met Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun on Wednesday,
said the North's official Korean Central News Agency. The brief
dispatch did not give further details. 

From Pyongyang, the six U.S. lawmakers will travel to Russia,
South Korea, China and Japan - the four other countries involved
in six-nation negotiations aimed at ending North Korea's nuclear
weapons program. 

The six nations are struggling to arrange a new round of talks
after the North refused to attend talks scheduled for last
September. The three previous rounds produced no breakthroughs. 
Weldon led a group of lawmakers to North Korea in May 2003,
after Washington accused the North of running a clandestine
nuclear program in 2002. 

The latest visit followed an effort by Rep. Tom Lantos,
D-Calif., the top Democrat on the U.S. House International
Relations Committee, who led a delegation into North Korea last
week.	 
  
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 10 Korea Herald: U.S. ambassador Hill may become main nuclear negotiator   

The Nation's No.1 English Newspaper
             
Seoul officials see move as 'highly probable'
 
By Choi Soung-ah 

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Hill may be Washington's next top
nuclear negotiator, according to reports circulating here, and
South Korean officials signaled it as "highly probable." 

The latest information out of Washington indicates Hill is
likely to succeed Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian
and Pacific Affairs James Kelly, who currently heads
Washington's delegation to the six-nation disarmament talks on
North Korea's nuclear standoff. 

The Foreign Ministry took a cautious line. It made no
presumptions about the veracity of the reports, although it
noted Hill is a "Korea expert." 

At his weekly news conference yesterday, Foreign Minister Ban
Ki-moon welcomed the possibility of Hill being designated as the
chief nuclear negotiator for the second Bush administration -- a
comment interpreted by many as implying the reports may be true. 

"Since coming to Seoul last August, Ambassador Hill maintains a
very good reputation in this country for his passionate efforts
in uplifting Korea-U.S. relations, and he is also one of the
diplomats highly regarded in Washington," Ban said. 

"We have not received any confirmation on it yet, but in any
case, I feel it is a positive move and will work toward progress
in the bilateral Korea-U.S. relations." 

The U.S. Embassy in Seoul said it has no word from the State
Department on any new appointment. 

Stating that any formal word will come from Washington first, an
embassy official declined to comment further regarding the media
reports. 

Diplomatic sources believed that if Hill moves to the nuclear
negotiator job, his successor in Seoul is likely to be the
current U.S. ambassador to Australia, John Thomas Schieffer. 

Although Washington rarely makes midway changes in recent
appointments, Hill met Secretary of State-designate Condoleeza
Rice when he was in the United States last month, sources said. 

Since last November's U.S. presidential election and Rice's
nomination to succeed Colin Powell, Seoul has been keenly
awaiting her confirmation hearings to see who she selects for
the East Asian and Pacific Affairs slot -- the chief of the U.S.
delegation at the six-party talks. 

Whether or not the reports about Hill prove to be true, the
Washington line-up on the North Korean nuclear front -- one of
the heavyweight foreign policy issues for Bush's second term --
is a key position. 

"But it is too soon to confirm anything yet since Condoleezza
Rice has yet to be sworn in and make official announcements on
her staff appointments," the source said. 

The "old boys" of the first Bush administration now moving off
the scene include Powell and Kelly, who has dealt with the North
Korean nuclear issue since 27 months ago, as well as hard-line
Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton. 

The six-party talks -- consisting of the two Koreas, the United
States, China, Japan and Russia -- has been at a dead end since
last year since North Korea refused to return to the discussion
table in September as promised for a fourth round of
discussions. 

Pyongyang is continuing to boycott the talks, saying it faces
continued hostility from the U.S. government. 

The meetings in the Chinese capital began in 2003 after North
Korea agreed to discuss ending its weapons program in return for
economic aid and security assurances. 

Many Korea watchers believe North Korea is waiting for signs of
how U.S. policy might change in Bush's second term, and the
envisaged departure of former "hawkish officials" such as Bolton
and Rice's appointments will be watched closely. 

"As opposed to his first term, which focused more on Iraq, Bush
will now lean more on working out the North Korean issue," an
official at the Foreign Ministry said. 

"And because of that, Washington will definitely place more
weight on the role of the Assistant Secretary of State for East
Asian and Pacific Affairs." 

(bluelle@heraldm.com) 

2005.01.13
 
*****************************************************************
 11 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: North Korea rejects so-called Libya model
   
  January 13, 2005 ¤Ñ North Korean officials told a U.S.
congressman visiting Pyeongyang that the case of Libya could not
be considered a model for solving the nuclear crisis on the
Korean Peninsula. Last year, Libya gave up developing weapons of
mass destruction and opened its country to weapons inspectors,
leading to better international ties. 

A spokesman for Representative Tom Lantos, Democrat of
California, said in an interview given to Radio Free Asia that
North Korean officials expressed a negative view of the "Libya
model." 

They indicated they would likely decide on whether to renew
negotiations after the second Bush administration is inaugurated
and foreign policymakers have been appointed. 

The U.S. congressman met with high-ranking North Korean
officials, including North Korea's foreign minister, Paek
Nam-sun.   

Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
 12 Las Vegas SUN: Chemical Weapons Program to Face Cuts

Today: January 12, 2005 at 14:01:44 PST 
 By NANCY ZUCKERBROD ASSOCIATED PRESS 

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Pentagon is planning to spend far less
than advocates want on disposal of chemical weapons at Army
depots in Kentucky and Colorado. 

The Pentagon would propose spending about $31 million annually
on the disposal of chemical weapons at the Colorado and Kentucky
sites over the next five years, according to government
documents obtained by a nonprofit group. Presumably, the sites
in Kentucky and Colorado would split that amount. 

That's a cut for the Richmond, Ky., facility, which received
$105 million this year, according to Craig Williams, director of
the Chemical Weapons Working group, a citizens' watchdog
organization based in Berea, Ky. The Blue Grass Army Depot
houses 523 tons of the weapons. 

Williams said the Pueblo, Colo., facility got $5 million this
year, also less than what advocates there had hoped for. 
He said each depot needs at least $140 million annually over the
next five years. That amount of money wouldn't be made available
for the sites until the 2011 fiscal year, according to budget
documents obtained by the group. 

A Dec. 21 Pentagon memo mentions possible delays at the Kentucky
and Colorado sites, "while the operational viability and
stability of the neutralization process is ascertained," wrote
Michael W. Wynne, undersecretary of defense. 

"You're talking about communities in Kentucky and Colorado
having to baby-sit weapons of mass destruction," Williams said. 
Wynne also mentions the possibility of moving the weapons from
the Kentucky and Colorado sites. 

"The Army should also address safeguarding the chemical weapons
stockpile, as needed, to minimize any additional risk incurred,
including relocation if necessary among sites," Wynne wrote in
the memo. 

The Army is supposed to be destroying chemical weapons at its
eight depots to comply with an international agreement. That
work is supposed to be completed by 2012. 

Sen. Mitch McConnell, who has pushed for the weapons destruction
program, said Wednesday he is "concerned about reports of cuts"
to the program. 

"The Department of Defense has an obligation to the citizens of
Kentucky to dispose of chemical agents at the Blue Grass Army
Depot in a safe and expeditious manner, and I will continue to
devote my energy to ensuring that it lives up to that
obligation," McConnell, the Senate Republican whip, said in a
statement. "The president's budget request is the first step in
a long process." 

The six other chemical weapons depots have disposals facilities
already constructed or in operation. Those sites are in Alabama,
Arkansas, Indiana, Maryland, Oregon and Utah. 

Maj. Desiree Wineland, an Army spokeswoman, declined to comment
Tuesday on the Army's proposed budget for chemical weapons
disposal. She said the Defense Department would not discuss the
administration budget until it is released publicly next month. 
--- 
On the Net: 
http://www.cwwg.org/
-- 

         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 13 Deseret news: A bevy of environmental issues on agenda
 
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
 	   	 
By Joe Bauman 

Deseret Morning News 

nuclear waste, federal rules that some fear could block road 
access, keeping an eye on Dugway Proving Ground, a resolution 
against atomic bomb testing in Nevada — all are among 
environmental issues the Legislature faces when the session 
begins Monday. 

By far the most contentious involves the long-running debate over 
importing low-level B and C radioactive waste. Currently only one 
facility in the state, Envirocare of Utah, disposes of nuclear 
waste and it handles Class A material, which is less toxic. 
Activists have campaigned for an outright ban on B and C waste. 

Recently, a legislative task force concluded that a ban might 
have unwanted legal repercussions. Instead, the group supported 
present regulations that require separate authorization from 
Utah's Department of Environmental Quality, the Legislature and 
the governor before such waste can be imported.

      Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. has made it plain he is opposed to B
and C waste and will not approve it.

       But Sen. Patrice Arent, D-Salt Lake, is pushing a bill
that would do away with the three-level process by declaring
Utah will not accept B and C material. The measure, titled
"Prohibition Against Class B and C Low-level Radioactive Waste,"
is not yet assigned a number.

       It would specify that Utah has "a clear policy opposed to
accepting B and C waste and would not even begin that licensure
process," she said. Bringing such a license proposal before
regulators is time-consuming, she said.

       Even though Envirocare has been through the regulatory
process, she said, other companies could seek such a license too.

       In December, Charles Judd, president of Cedar Mountain
Environmental Inc. — which has interest in property near the
Envirocare site in Tooele County — said his company might seek
to dispose of B and C waste.

       "This bill would say there will not be any B and C
waste," Arent said. "The public strongly supports this bill. . .
. I think most legislators don't support B and C waste."

       Any potential resumption of nuclear testing at the Nevada
Test Site is the target of a resolution sponsored by Rep.
Michael E. Noel, R-Kanab.

       "The concern I have is they may, in fact, think about
doing some underground testing," he said. The resolution would
inform Utah's congressional delegation that people of this state
do not want nuclear testing carried out to the west.

       "We're still seeing the effects of nuclear testing.
People are still seeing the cancers that occur as a direct
result of those tests, so we want to make sure that that doesn't
happen anymore."

       Noel decided to sponsor the resolution after hearings in
Kanab, in which 75 or 100 residents were pretty adamant against
testing, he said. "I haven't run into anybody that wants to see
any nuclear testing at the Nevada Test Site."

       In a different arena of the environmental jousts, Noel is
sponsoring a bill, not yet assigned a number, that would require
federal land managers to consider state plans, laws and
regulations when promulgating their own land management plans.

       Respecting road rights of way and allowing access to
water diversion points, communication towers and mineral
resources are issues that the Bureau of Land Management, Forest
Service and other federal agencies should have to comply with,
he said.

       "There's some tremendous finds in Uintah County for
methane gas, also in Sevier County for oil. They think they've
found a brand new supply there," said Noel.

       Federal land management plans are key to whether Utahns
have access to such things, he said. The problem, as he sees it,
is that the federal government has been greatly increasing its
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, where certain
activities may be hampered or banned.

       Years ago, he said, ACECs were relative small. "Now we're
finding in some areas there's more than a million acres of
proposed ACECs." His bill would require the government to
respect the state's legal interest in such cases.

       Noel added, "I think Gov. Huntsman has indicated he is
going to be very proactive in protecting state rights.

       An oversight committee that no longer exists, the Federal
Research Committee, would be revived under a bill sponsored by
Sen. Gene Davis, D-Salt Lake City. SB85 would set up a 13-member
team to keep tabs on actions of federal installations and
programs in Utah.

       Davis said the original Federal Research Committee began
during the administration of former Gov. Scott Matheson but
languished and died when former Gov. Mike Leavitt was in office.

       The committee would make sure state agencies know what is
going on in federal installations and serve as a liaison with
the national government agencies. A particular aim, said Davis,
is the expansion proposed for Dugway Proving Ground.

       Not only are operations to be beefed up at the western
Utah base, he said, but Dugway has been seeking to expand
physically. Although proposals are circulating, "I found out the
state didn't even know" about many of these matters first-hand.

       Pathogens are tested at Dugway and the huge base may seek
to acquire new property, he said. "I became concerned that there
are new laboratories being built, that we helped pay for the
expansion of a runway at Dugway," he said.

       When details are sought through the Freedom of
Information Act, he said, "it's not forthcoming."

       If the secrecy is because of some national security
concerns, he said, the state still should know what is going on.
Most department heads, governors and legislators should be able
to get a security clearance if that's what it takes, he added.

       The measure lost last year, "so I decided I'd try it
again this year," Davis said. "Hopefully, we'll be able to talk
with the new governor about it."

       Sen. Curtis S. Bramble, R-Provo, is the sponsor of SB24,
currently titled simply "Waste Amendments," which would modify
the law concerning disposal of radioactive waste. It embodies
the task force recommendations.

       "The task force spent two years of rather intense study
of that issue," he said.

       He and the task force oppose an outright ban on B and C
wastes because they are already kept out and a ban might trigger
a lawsuit. A suit could turn the decision over to the court
rather than lawmakers, Bramble said.

       The bill would require the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste
Control Board to report to the Legislature every five years,
starting in 2006, on adequacy of funding to care perpetually for
the waste disposed here.

       It would increase the daily penalty for violating the
Solid and Hazardous Waste Act and it would provide that the
operator of a disposal facility, not its clients, is responsible
for payment of certain fees. Also, it would adjust fees and
clarify rules concerning PCBs, a hazardous chemical.
 
E-mail: bau@desnews.com
	 
 © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company 
*****************************************************************
 14 New Scientist:  'Make or break' year for nuclear non-proliferation
               
[NewScientist.com]                              

13 January 2005                         

THIS year will be "make or break" for the international treaty 
designed to limit the spread of nuclear weapons, as the gulf 
between the "haves" and the "have-nots" grows ever wider.        

So says a report by the British American Security Information 
Council (BASIC) based in London and Washington and the UK-based 
Oxford Research Group. They warn that without a breakthrough in 
May, when the 188 signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation 
Treaty are due to meet "the NPT may be declared bust".   

Non-nuclear states argue that the weapons states, particularly 
the US, have failed to live up to their commitment to disarm. 
Last year's preparatory meeting ended in disarray without even 
agreeing an agenda for reviewing the treaty (New Scientist, 15 
May 2004, p 5).          “The UN hasn't even managed to arrange 
the chairs at the table to discuss disarmament”      

For the last eight years the UN "hasn't even managed to arrange 
the chairs around the conference table" to discuss disarmament, 
the report says.         

There are even signs that the Bush administration is preparing
to abandon disarmament promises it made at the last NPT review
five years ago on the grounds that the security situation has
changed in the light of 9/11. This is "disturbing to say the
least", says BASIC's Nigel Chamberlain.                 

From issue 2482 of New Scientist magazine, 15 January 2005, page 
5 

*****************************************************************
 15 NRC: Donald A. Barbour, Philotechnics; Denial of Petition 

[Docket No. PRM-40-28]
 
                         FR Doc 05-589 
[Federal Register: January 12, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 8)] 
[Proposed Rules] [Page 2053-2057] From the Federal Register 
Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12ja05-16]                         
 
Rulemaking AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.
 
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is denying a 
petition for rulemaking (PRM-40-28) submitted by Mr. Donald A. 
Barbour, Philotechnics. The petitioner requested that the NRC 
amend its regulations governing the domestic licensing of source 
material to provide clarity regarding the effective control of 
depleted uranium aircraft counterweights held under the exemption 
in 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5). The petitioner believes that this 
amendment should address a number of issues concerning the 
exemption, storage, and disposal of these devices.
z 
 
ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition for rulemaking, the public 
comments received, and NRC's letter to the petitioner may be 
examined at the NRC Public Document Room, Public File Area Room 
O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. These documents also 
may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the rulemaking 
Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Address questions about 
our rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher; (301) 415-5905; 
e-mail cag@nrc.gov.. The NRC maintains an Agencywide Document 
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and 
image files of NRC's public documents. These documents may be 
accessed through the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the 
Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. If you do 
not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing 
the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document 
Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415- 4737, or 
by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary 
C. Comfort, Jr., Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-8106, e-mail gcc1@nrc.gov.
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petition On January 21, 2000 (65 
FR 3394), the NRC published a notice of receipt of a petition for 
rulemaking filed by Donald A. Barbour, Philotechnics. The 
petitioner requested that the NRC amend its regulations to 
provide additional rules for the effective control of depleted 
uranium aircraft
 
[[Page 2054]] counterweights. The petitioner believes that this 
regulatory clarification should address a number of issues 
concerning the exemption, storage, and disposal of these devices.
 
The petitioner believes that the amendment should clarify at what 
point and under what circumstances, the licensing exemption in 10 
CFR 40.13(c)(5) is no longer applicable to these devices; the 
length of time counterweights for which there is no demand or use 
may be stored as exempt material; the regulations that apply to 
aircraft that have been removed from service which have depleted 
uranium counterweights that can be transferred to unlicensed 
parts dealers and salvage operators; and, the need for 
radiological surveillance of long-term aircraft storage parks and 
facilities where aircraft with depleted uranium counterweights 
are regularly stored for protracted periods under unmonitored 
conditions. Additionally, the petitioner believes that an 
immediate notification is necessary to advise those organizations 
that currently possess depleted uranium aircraft counterweights 
of their responsibilities to the public. The petitioner asserts 
that the aviation community is tightly regulated and law abiding 
and that there are extremely effective channels of communication 
between the industry and its primary regulator, the Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA). The petitioner suggests that the 
NRC take advantage of this situation by encouraging the FAA to 
issue an appropriate advisory bulletin that informs the aviation 
community of its responsibilities for managing depleted uranium 
counterweights. The petitioner provided a summary of key points 
which he believes should be considered for incorporation in such 
a notification.
 
Public Comments on the Petition The notice of receipt of the 
petition for rulemaking invited interested persons to submit 
comments. The comment period closed on April 5, 2000. The NRC 
received two comment letters from individuals (one of which was 
from the petitioner himself). Both comment letters supported the 
petition. The petitioner provided supplementary information in 
support of the petition including his interpretation of the 
regulatory background and more detailed descriptions of how 
counterweights are used in industry. Additionally, the 
petitioner's comments referenced data related to the potential 
mishandling of the counterweights. The other commenter provided 
an example of the potential costs associated with mishandling the 
counterweights and suggested that distribution requirements 
should be added to the regulation. By letter dated February 14, 
2001, Mr. Barbour provided another supplement to his petition. In 
this supplement, the petitioner suggested additional rulemaking 
to (1) specify that only counterweights manufactured from 
depleted uranium, and not natural uranium, should be covered 
under the exemption; and (2) clarify the scope of activities 
allowed to repair or restore counterweight platings or coverings 
under 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5)(iv). Reasons for Denial The NRC is 
denying the petition because it has determined that current NRC 
regulations provide adequate clarity and effectively address the 
petitioner's concerns. The NRC believes that clarification of the 
regulations for aircraft counterweights, as originally requested 
by the petitioner, can be most efficiently accomplished through 
the issuance of guidance rather than through rulemaking.
 
The NRC issued a regulatory information summary, RIS-01-013, ``10 
CFR Part 40 Exemptions For Uranium Contained in Aircraft 
Counterweights,'' dated July 20, 2001, in response to the 
petitioner's request for an immediate notification to advise 
those organizations that currently possess depleted uranium 
aircraft counterweights of their regulatory responsibilities. 
This RIS reminds persons holding depleted uranium counterweights 
that the counterweights may not be modified under the exemption 
in 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5). The RIS also provides four alternatives to 
transfer the counterweights from the possessor's inventory: (1) 
Return the counterweights to the manufacturer or other facility 
licensed to process source material; (2) transfer the 
counterweights to another organization that will also use devices 
as aircraft counterweights; (3) transfer the counterweights for 
disposal at a facility licensed for disposal of radioactive 
material; or (4) transfer the counterweights to an unlicensed 
disposal facility that accepts exempt radioactive material.
 
The petitioner's primary concern in the original petition is that 
some persons holding the depleted counterweights may 
inappropriately accumulate and store the counterweights for 
lengthy periods of time. The petitioner is concerned that this 
activity will result in unnecessary exposures and that corrosion 
of the counterweights could occur resulting in additional 
pathways of exposure and unnecessary contamination. During 
resolution of the petition, the NRC evaluated (1) the regulatory 
history of the exemption, including the safety basis; (2) the 
current use of depleted uranium aircraft counterweights; and (3) 
the current language in the exemption.
 
As part of the evaluation of the petition, the NRC reviewed the 
regulatory history of the exemption for uranium counterweights.
 
In 1960, the original exemption was implemented to only apply to 
the counterweight while installed in the aircraft and the 
counterweight impressed with the label reading 
``Caution--Radioactive Material-- Uranium.'' This 1960 exemption 
specifically prohibited the chemical, physical, metallurgical or 
other treatment or processing of the counterweight and the 
installation or removal of the counterweight. In 1961, the 
exemption was expanded to include ``stored or handled in 
connection with installation or removal of such counterweights 
from aircraft.'' The 1961 amendment also replaced the prohibition 
against modification of counterweights with the requirement that 
there be ``no removal or penetration of the plating'' on the 
counterweight. In 1969, the exemption was further amended, 
primarily to change the labeling requirement from 
``Caution--Radioactive Material--Uranium'' to ``Depleted 
Uranium.'' Also, as part of the 1969 amendment, the specific 
requirement that there be ``no removal or penetration of the 
plating'' on the counterweight was returned to the prohibition 
against the chemical, physical, or metallurgical treatment or 
processing of any such counterweights. Under the 1969 amendment, 
however, repair or restoration of the plating or other covering 
was allowed.
 
Finally, a new requirement was added that each counterweight was 
to be ``durably and legibly labeled or marked'' with the 
identification of the manufacturer and the statement 
``Unauthorized Alterations Prohibited.'' As part of the 
evaluation of the regulatory history, the NRC also reviewed the 
health and safety basis used during the initial implementation of 
the existing regulation. The original implementation was based 
upon calculations that indicated that exposures from installation 
and storage would be less than 10 percent of the limits in 10 CFR 
Part 20, with most of the exposure impacting the hands of the 
workers. This conclusion was based on a radiation dose rate at 
the surface of the counterweight of 1.3 millisievert per hour 
(mSv/hr) (130 millirems per hour [mrem/hr]) of beta and gamma 
radiation, of which the gamma component contribute only 0.03 
mSv/hr (2.7 mrem/hr). Film badge studies from wrist bands
 
[[Page 2055]] of assembly line personnel verified that the 
exposures were low, with readings not exceeding 2 mSv (200 mrem) 
for a 2-month period.
 
Based upon reviews of reported incidents in the Nuclear Material 
Events Database (NMED), the NRC has no reason to believe that 
individuals are being significantly impacted by the use of 
aircraft counterweights under the exemption. In NUREG-1717, 
``Systematic Radiological Assessment of Exemptions for Source and 
Byproduct Material,'' June 2001, a more recent analyses of the 
exemption was made. This document evaluated the use of 
counterweights under expected routine uses (including 
maintenance, flight operations, and storage) and accidents and 
misuse (including fires and loss of counterweights). The 
calculated range of exposures for routine operations ranged from 
a maximum of 0.9 millisievert per year (mSv/yr) (90 millirem per 
year [mrem/yr]) for maintenance workers to 0.01 mSv/yr (1 
mrem/yr) or less for flight crew and warehouse workers (resulting 
from storage of the counterweights). Potential accident scenarios 
were calculated to result in exposures of 0.8 mSv/yr (80 mrem/yr) 
or less to individuals. Because these calculated exposures are 
within the limits of 10 CFR Part 20 and are expected to impact a 
minimal number of individuals, NRC does not believe that the use 
of uranium counterweights under the current exemption have, or 
will, result in a significant impact to public health and safety 
or the environment.
 
NRC's review has also indicated that depleted uranium 
counterweights are no longer being introduced into new aircraft. 
Furthermore, existing depleted uranium counterweights are 
generally being replaced, when replacement is needed, with 
counterweights made from tungsten. As a result, the number of 
depleted uranium counterweights in aircraft is diminishing, thus 
further reducing the need to revise the regulation because the 
number of individuals potentially being impacted should also 
decrease as time passes.
 
The current language for the exemption in 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5) 
includes ``uranium contained in counterweights installed in 
aircraft, rockets, projectiles, and missiles, or stored or 
handled in connection with installation or removal of such 
counterweights. * * *'' Based upon a review of the actual 
language and the regulatory history, it is clear that the 
exemption applies to storage only to the extent that the storage 
is in connection with the planned installation or recent removal 
from the aircraft. As such, the exemption does not include 
long-term storage unless it can be clearly shown that such 
storage is related to an intent to reuse the counterweight and 
that the counterweight continues to be maintained (i.e., the 
plating and labeling remain intact).
 
Similarly, if an aircraft containing depleted uranium 
counterweights is permanently removed from service, the 
counterweights should be removed from the former aircraft within 
a reasonable time period. The definition of an aircraft according 
to FAA regulations found in 14 CFR 1.1 is ``a device that is used 
or intended to be used for flight in the air.'' Therefore, if 
there is no clear intention to continue to use the aircraft for 
flight, the counterweights would no longer be considered 
``installed in the aircraft'' under the exemption in 10 CFR 
40.13(c)(5). Instead, the counterweight would be considered 
``stored'' on the former aircraft. A counterweight stored on a 
former aircraft would be held with conditions similar to those 
conditions that apply to counterweights stored in connection with 
installation or removal (i.e., long-term storage is not permitted 
in the former aircraft under the exemption). Should an aircraft 
be held for possible future use, but not operated for a lengthy 
period of time, the holder should maintain the aircraft per its 
FAA maintenance plan, including a periodic inspection of the 
counterweights to ensure the counterweights remain in proper 
condition (i.e., the plating and labeling remain intact).
 
In cases where the counterweights are no longer planned to be 
used or specifically licensed, the counterweights may still be 
covered under the exemption during a reasonable period while 
arrangements are made to properly transfer the counterweights, as 
long as the counterweights continue to be maintained in proper 
condition (i.e., the counterweights plating and labeling remain 
intact). The period of storage allows holders of the 
counterweights to: (1) Determine the future use of the 
counterweights; (2) decide on appropriate transfer or disposal 
alternatives if they are no longer to be used; and (3) accumulate 
several counterweights, within a reasonable time frame, in order 
to permit a more economical one-time disposal. The exemption also 
applies to persons temporarily holding the material during 
transit or if the material is mistakenly sent to a recycle or 
scrap yard, if the counterweight is properly maintained and 
transferred within a reasonable period of time using an option 
listed in RIS-01-013.
 
The NRC recognizes that some counterweights have been 
inappropriately sent to scrap yards or recyclers in the past. As 
the petitioner points out, a review of data in NMED indicates 
that alarms have been set off at scrap yards. The current 
exemption does not expressly prohibit transfers to any persons, 
including scrap yards or recyclers. However, the physical, 
metallurgical, or chemical modification of the counterweight is 
prohibited; therefore, counterweights should not be sent to 
locations where, in all likelihood, they will be altered or 
modified. Further, the detection and recovery of counterweights 
inappropriately sent to scrap yards or recyclers can lead to 
additional costs for the transferor or recipient. Although the 
NRC could amend the existing exemption to prohibit transfers to 
recyclers or scrap yards, the NRC does not believe that such an 
amendment would significantly reduce the number of these 
inappropriate transfers. The current regulation requires that 
counterweights held under this exemption must be labeled 
``Unauthorized Alterations Prohibited.'' The NRC believes that 
persons who have inappropriately transferred counterweights to a 
recycle or scrap yard, despite the existing labeling on the 
counterweight, may not be aware of the prohibitions listed in the 
exemption itself. If a regulation requiring reporting of 
transfers were implemented, the transfer report might make it 
easier to identify the transferor so that appropriate action to 
retrieve the counterweight could be taken. However, the NRC 
believes that if someone were aware of these reporting 
requirements, they would likely be cognizant that the transfer to 
a recycler or a scrap yard is not allowed to begin with.
 
During resolution of the petition, the NRC considered additional 
options for rulemaking that might clarify the intent of this 
regulation and increase control over the use of depleted uranium 
aircraft counterweights. The NRC considered two types of 
rulemaking actions: (1) Specific licensing and (2) development of 
a general license specifically applicable to aircraft 
counterweights. In both cases, the NRC's analysis concluded that 
any benefits of the action were small compared to the costs and 
potential impacts associated with the action.
 
In the case of specific licensing, the costs to the industry and 
government would involve development and review of applications, 
and inspection of the new licensees. Because the NRC has no 
evidence to indicate that public health and safety is 
significantly impacted under the current exemption, the NRC 
believes the costs to implement specific
 
[[Page 2056]] licensing would outweigh the benefits of licensing.
 
Additionally, should counterweights be required to be held under 
a specific license, disposal alternatives would be reduced to 
disposal in a low-level waste site which would further increase 
the regulatory burden and costs related to this action.
 
Although implementation of a general license would presumably add 
additional requirements to those found in the existing exemption, 
the general license would be less burdensome to both holders of 
the counterweights and the government than a specific license.
 
However, the NRC believes that the costs related to regulatory 
development and implementation are still believed to outweigh any 
benefits that might be achieved by the creation of a general 
license. As with specific licensing, the options for disposal 
could be limited to low-level waste facilities, thus increasing 
the regulatory burden and costs for disposal. Although the NRC 
could develop a general license which allows some of the same 
disposal/transfer options that are currently available, State 
regulations and/or the licenses of disposal facilities may 
preempt the utilization of those options.
 
The NRC determined that modifying the exemption in 10 CFR 
40.13(c)(5) or increasing the regulatory structure (through a new 
general license or specifically licensing the holders), pursuant 
to the petitioner's request would add little, if any, additional 
benefits to the protection of public health and safety. 
Therefore, the NRC is denying the petitioner's request that the 
exemption in 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5) be amended to clarify the 
requirements for storage. However, the NRC believes that most of 
the petitioner's apparent goals can be better achieved by 
publication of guidance in the form of a new RIS. The purpose of 
the guidance would be to clarify the intent of the existing 
regulations related to storage of depleted uranium aircraft 
counterweights. The NRC would issue the guidance to known holders 
of aircraft counterweights and other agencies and organizations 
that may have occasion to be interested in counterweights.
 
In a supplement to this petition (February 2001), the petitioner 
suggested that 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5) should be amended to clarify 
that only counterweights manufactured from depleted uranium, and 
not natural uranium, are covered under the exemption. Currently 
10 CFR 40.13(c)(5) begins ``Uranium contained in.* * *.'' The 
petitioner identifies an apparent inconsistency with the labeling 
requirements in 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5)(ii) that require the 
counterweight to be impressed with ``Depleted Uranium.'' As a 
result, the petitioner states that the exemption should be more 
specific to begin the exemption with ``Depleted uranium contained 
in.* * *.'' A historical review of this issue indicates that the 
exemption was originally meant to apply to counterweights 
manufactured from both natural uranium and depleted uranium. On 
July 18, 1969 (34 FR 12107), a proposed rule was published in the 
Federal Register proposing to modify the regulation to require 
that the counterweights be impressed with the word ``Uranium'' 
rather than ``Caution--Radioactive Material-- Uranium,'' as was 
required before the 1969 amendment. However, when the final rule 
was published on September 5, 1969 (34 FR 14067), the regulation 
required the counterweight to be impressed with the words 
``Depleted Uranium,'' as exists in the current regulation. No 
explanation for this change was mentioned in the Federal Register 
notice or Commission papers related to this action. The 
presumption is that this change was made because most, if not 
all, aircraft counterweights were and have been made of depleted 
uranium. The cost of depleted uranium is significantly less than 
the cost of natural uranium. While the NRC believes that the 
modification in 1969 effectively limits the exemption to include 
only depleted uranium counterweights because of the new labeling 
requirement, the NRC also believes the generic use of the word 
uranium at the start of the exemption is still necessary because 
footnote 2 to 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5) grandfathers counterweights 
properly labeled and made before June 30, 1969. These 
counterweights may have included a small number of natural 
uranium counterweights. The NRC is denying this issue in the 
petition to allow for the possibility that there are some 
counterweights still in existence that were made from natural 
uranium prior to 1969.
 
The petitioner also requested that the NRC modify its regulations 
in 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5)(iv) to better delineate the scope of 
activities allowed as part of the repair or restoration of the 
plating or covering of an aircraft counterweight. The petitioner 
is concerned that some activities could impact the depleted 
uranium within the counterweight. The paragraph in question 
states ``The exemption contained in this paragraph shall not be 
deemed to authorize the chemical, physical, or metallurgical 
treatment or processing of any such counterweights other than 
repair or restoration of any plating or any other covering.'' The 
intent of this paragraph is to delineate the scope of activities 
allowed under the exemption. Although the counterweight may be 
modified to restore or repair the plating or covering around the 
counterweight, the depleted uranium within the counterweight 
cannot be altered at any time under the exemption, even as part 
of restoration or repair of the plating or other covering. As a 
result, actions such as chemical baths, sanding of oxidized 
depleted uranium, or electroplating, each of which would likely 
result in modification of the depleted uranium counterweight 
itself, are not permitted under the exemption.
 
However, repainting or placing a new covering over the 
counterweight (to the extent it does not interact with the 
depleted uranium in the counterweight) is permitted under the 
exemption as the long as the impressings and other required 
markings remain legible as required under 10 CFR 40.13(c)(5)(ii) 
and (iii). The NRC is denying this issue in the petition because 
it has been determined that the existing regulation conforms with 
the petitioner's request and does not require additional 
clarification through rulemaking. However, the NRC believes that 
it may be worthwhile to provide additional guidance related to 
this aspect of the exemption. Therefore, the NRC plans to address 
this issue in the proposed RIS by clarifying the intent of the 
existing regulations related to the restoration and repair of 
depleted uranium counterweights.
 
In conclusion, no new information has been provided by the 
petitioner to support the petitioner's request that additional 
rulemaking is necessary at this time. Existing NRC regulations 
provide the basis for reasonable assurance that the common 
defense and security and public health and safety are adequately 
protected.
 
Additional rulemaking would impose unnecessary regulatory burden 
and does not appear to be warranted. However, NRC does believe 
that some additional clarification, as originally requested by 
the petitioner, can be provided through guidance. Therefore, the 
NRC plans to issue a regulatory information summary which will 
provide clarification of the existing exemption as related to (1) 
long-term storage of the counterweights, (2) restoration and 
repair of the counterweights, and (3) removal of the 
counterweights from aircraft, rockets, projectiles, and missiles.
 
For the reasons cited in this document, the NRC denies this 
petition.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of January, 2005.
 
 
[[Page 2057]] For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission.
 
[FR Doc. 05-589 Filed 1-11-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 16 [DU-WATCH] monitoring Chernobyl
 
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 01:14:51 -0600 (CST)

 
Living in the Dead Zone; Chernobyl Revisited
The International Herald Tribune, December 23, 2004
By Martin Cruz Smith
Soure: The New York Times

Chernobyl -- Outside, a hard winter's afternoon settles on the 
village, but inside their cottage Nikolai and Nastia lay out a 
spread: apples from their orchard, pickles from their garden, 
mushrooms from the woods around and full glasses of samogon, 
otherwise known as Ukrainian moonshine. Samogon, the locals say, 
offers protection from radioactivity, a consideration since we are in 
a "black village" written off for human occupation in 1986 after the 
explosion of Reactor 4 at the Chernobyl nuclear power station a mere 
dozen miles away.

"You grow your own food?" a guest asks.

"All of it," Nastia says. 

The guest takes a discreet glance at his dosimeter.

The village is called "black," as in abandoned. But as if to make the 
name literally true, the neighboring houses have turned black and 
tilted into a slow slide into the earth. Trees reach in and out the 
windows. The yards are littered with bureaus, picture frames, chairs.

At the beginning of the cleanup, the authorities buried the most 
radioactive houses, until it dawned on them that they were doing an 
excellent job of poisoning the groundwater. So the contaminated 
houses stand. For how long? According to an ecologist at the power 
station: "In 250 years everything is back to normal. Except for 
plutonium -- that will take 25,000 years."

Nikolai and Nastia's cottage is basically one room around an oven 
with a built-in shelf to sleep on during the coldest nights.

"It's home," Nastia says. She wears a sweater and shawl permanently. 
Her smile is bright steel, and her blue eyes shine with delight and a 
certain sense of collusion. Visitors are rare in the 19-mile-radius 
Zone of Exclusion around the reactors and, of course, she is not 
supposed to be there at all. Nastia and Nikolai were evacuated like 
everyone else, but sneaked like partisans back to their cottage in 
the woods. So much for zone security.

Since then, the authorities have largely let Nastia and Nikolai alone 
among the zone's phantom population of returnees, scavengers and 
poachers. Almost perversely, the wildlife there is flourishing; 
poachers hunt wild boar, served later in the finest restaurants of 
Kiev and Moscow. Scavengers cut up abandoned radioactive cars and 
trucks to sell as parts in the chop shops of Russia.

Nikolai and Nastia aren't on the run, they've just become invisible. 
They didn't vote in the recent presidential runoff election; there 
were no polling booths in the black villages. (To vote, they would 
have had to be bused out of the zone to cast a ballot bearing the 
address they had been assigned to and escaped from.) Doctors warned 
Nastia that if she remains in her village, radioactivity will give 
her cancer in 25 years. Nastia is 75 now. She says she'll take her 
chances.

Nastia sings a traditional harvest song in a young, birdlike voice. 
The samogon has brought out a fine sweat on every brow.

What amazes me is not that two elderly peasants have become 
invisible, but that Chernobyl itself has, as if it were a subject too 
awful to contemplate. In the rain, the sarcophagus, the 10-story 
steel-and-concrete box heroically constructed over Reactor 4, leaks 
like a radioactive sieve into groundwater that drains in the Pripyat 
River, which feeds the Dnepr, which is the drinking water for Kiev.

Ninety percent of the core is still in the reactor, breaking down and 
heating up, and the station's managers say that the sarcophagus 
itself could collapse at any time.

How dangerous would that be? Estimates of deaths from the explosion 
range from 41 to more than 300,000. The Zone of Exclusion is not an 
area of containment, no more than a circle drawn on the dirt would 
stop an airborne stream of plutonium, strontium, cesium-137. Seven 
million people live on contaminated land in Ukraine, Belarus and 
Russia. People around the world carry in their chromosomes the mark 
of Chernobyl.

We search in Iraq for weapons of mass destruction, while a more 
likely danger is another explosion at Chernobyl. It may not be a 
meltdown, but it will be the mother of all dirty bombs. (A better 
sarcophagus is promised in five years, but at the site there is 
little sign of activity, let alone urgency.)

And in all the drama of the recent election, the inspiring rallies in 
Independence Square, the spirited presidential debate on Monday and 
the apparent triumph of good over evil, the subject of another 
nuclear disaster rarely came up, and then mostly in nationalist 
rhetoric: It is an article of faith that the West forced Ukraine in 
2000 to close the perfectly good reactors that remained at Chernobyl. 
The truth is that you have to sympathize with Viktor Yushchenko, the 
likely winner in the rerun of the presidential runoff on Sunday, 
because he will have to deal with Chernobyl. Or not.

So, no wonder we're drinking samogon. The air is yeasty with it.

Nastia sings, and I picture her and Nikolai plucking apples off their 
poisoned tree, digging potatoes from their poisoned earth, fishing in 
their poisoned stream.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Help save the life of a child.  Support St. Jude Children's Research Hospital's
'Thanks & Giving.'
http://us.click.yahoo.com/0iazvD/5WnJAA/xGEGAA/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/
*****************************************************************
 17 Guardian Unlimited: NRC Drops Fine Against Tennessee Valley
 
From the Associated Press        
	 
[UP] 

Wednesday January 12, 2005 2:31 AM
 	
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has
reached a settlement with the Tennessee Valley Authority over
its treatment of a nuclear plant worker who had raised safety
concerns. 

The settlement announced Tuesday drops the $110,000 fine against
the TVA, the country's largest public utility. The regulatory
agency said the work environment at the TVA improved
sufficiently since the case dating to 1996 at the TVA's Sequoyah
Nuclear Plant near Chattanooga. 

The case involved TVA's treatment of Gary L. Fiser, a chemistry
and environmental protection program manager who had raised
safety concerns about the Sequoyah station and filed a Labor
Department complaint in 1993 partly because of those concerns. 

Three years later, Fiser was laid off with hundreds of others.

But Fiser said his bid for another job within TVA was undermined
by his whistleblower activities. 

The NRC agreed, and proposed a maximum fine of $110,000 against
TVA in 2001. 

The settlement, reached on Nov. 10, ends the case without
penalty and drops citations against two managers. 

TVA provides electricity to 8.5 million people in seven Southern
states. 
  
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 18 Portsmouth Herald: Bush looks to promote nuclear power
 
Wed. January 12, 2005
                                                                        
By John J. Fialka Wall Street Journal 

President Bush says the nation needs advanced nuclear-power
plants, calling them a clean, "renewable" energy source for the
future. 

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal on Monday, Bush
said he looks forward to working with Congress on an energy bill
that includes incentives for the nuclear-power industry. "It
[nuclear power] certainly answers a lot of our issues. It
certainly answers the environmental issue," he said. 

"It’s always gratifying to have the president on your side,"
said John W. Rowe, chairman and chief executive of Exelon Corp.
of Chicago, which operates the nation’s largest group of
nuclear-power plants. 

New Mexico Republican Pete V. Domenici, chairman of the Senate
Energy Committee, said he welcomed Bush’s remarks. "Without any
question," he said, the long-term electricity-generating
alternative to the nation’s dwindling supplies of natural gas
"will have to be nuclear power. If America is afraid of it, the
world will use it." Sen. Domenici is expected to offer an energy
bill that will include financial incentives for the first new
nuclear-power plants. 

Nuclear power now supplies 20 percent of the nation’s
electricity, according to the U.S. Department of Energy, while
coal-fired plants provide 51 percent and natural-gas-fed plants
generate 17 percent. Unlike other major sources of electrical
energy, nuclear-power plants don’t pollute the air or produce
carbon dioxide, which is thought to cause global warming. But
nuclear wastes must be disposed of in a way that protects people
from radiation. 

Rowe said the industry needs Congress and the White House to
help remove the legal and regulatory obstacles to using Yucca
Mountain, the federal repository for nuclear wastes in Nevada.
The industry is also looking for government help in building and
licensing prototypes for a new generation of nuclear plants with
safety systems that would be relatively immune to accidents
caused by operator error or equipment malfunctions. For the
first prototype, the engineering and design work alone are
expected to cost $520 million. 

Rowe said he believes the next nuclear-power plants to be built
would include the new safety systems. The industry projects that
the earliest start for a privately constructed plan would be
2013. 

Portsmouth Herald 

  Copyright © 2005 Seacoast Online. All rights reserved. Please
*****************************************************************
 19 ITAR-TASS: Chernobyl accident veterans to resume hunger strike in St Pete

12.01.2005, 05.25

St PETERSBURG, January 12 (Itar-Tass) - Veterans of the 1986
Chernobyl nuclear accident who were placed on disability schemes
and benefits earlier because of exposure to high doses of
radiation while liquidating the aftermath of that accident
resume a hunger strike Wednesday, said Sergei Kulish, an
initiator of the action. 

The Chernobyl veterans living in St Petersburg demand bigger
compensation payments, he said. 

Participants in the strike do not have enough confidence that
the plenary session of Russia’s Supreme Court scheduled for
January 18 will answer their demands, Kulish said. 

The debt on benefit payments that the veterans did not receive
for many years has not been redeemed and other issues the
veterans are facing remain unsolved. 

As it was previously, the strikers will gather at a private
apartment in Sestroretsk, the northwest suburb of St Petersburg. 

Members of the Chernobyl Union from other parts of Russia will
join the ten residents of St Petersburg taking part in the
action. 

© ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy,
*****************************************************************
 20 Newsday: New York official threatens lawsuit over Millstone impact plan

 NY Newsday.com      

January 12, 2005, 10:06 AM EST

 WATERFORD, Conn. --             

A Long Island official is threatening to sue to force the closure 
of the Millstone Power Station, unless his town is included in 
emergency evacuation plans. 

Southold town supervisor Joshua Horton confronted Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission officials Tuesday at meeting on the 
re-licensing application for the Connecticut nuclear plant. 

He called the NRC's draft environmental impact statement "gravely 
flawed," because is does not include the 22,000 residents of his 
town, which encompasses the island's north fork across Long 
Island Sound from Millstone's nuclear reactors. 

"Strong winds from the north and northeast often blow across the 
water directly to our shores," Horton said. "We are the first 
affected residents to the south of this plant," with only two 
roads that lead west, away from Millstone. "To say we are beyond 
the affected area is false and cannot be the basis for a proper 
environmental impact statement." 

Horton asked for "a fully funded federal emergency management 
study of Southold Town's unique geographic challenges and how 
this relates to the threat of a radioactive release" at 
Millstone. The re-licensing review process should be considered 
incomplete without such a study, he said. 

The NRC's draft environmental impact statement includes one 
significant environmental impact of extending licenses at 
Millstone 2 and Millstone 3 through 2035 and 2045. It says 
studies have shown the plant's cooling equipment has contributed 
to a dramatic decrease in the number of winter flounder in 
Niantic Bay. 

The report says the adverse effects are not great enough to 
prevent extending the licenses for both reactors. 

NRC experts discussed the findings of the draft environmental 
impact statement for two hours and took public comment. 

The agency plans to issue a final environmental impact statement 
in July and could make a final decision on re-licensing the 
plant's two reactors in the summer of 2006. 

The Millstone plants provide nearly 50 percent of Connecticut's 
electricity, said John Markowicz, executive director of the 
Southeastern Connecticut Enterprise Region. 

Information from: The Day, http://www.theday.com 

Copyright © 2005, The Associated Press     
*****************************************************************
 21 NRC: Carolina Power & Light Company; Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 
 
                         FR Doc 05-591 
[Federal Register: January 12, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 8)] 
[Notices] [Page 2188-2189] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12ja05-128]                         
 
Units 1 and 2; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental 
Impact Statement and Conduct Scoping Process Carolina Power & 
Light Company (CP), now doing business as Progress Energy 
Carolinas, Inc., has submitted an application for renewal of 
Facility Operating Licenses, DPR-71 and DPR-62, for an additional 
20 years of operation at the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, 
Units 1 and 2 (BSEP). BSEP is located in Brunswick County in 
southeastern North Carolina, near the mouth of the Cape Fear 
River. The operating licenses for BSEP, Units 1 and 2, expire on 
September 8, 2016, and December 27, 2014, respectively. The 
application for renewal was received on October 20, 2004, 
pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54 
(10 CFR Part 54). A notice of receipt and availability of the 
application, which included the environmental report (ER), was 
published in the Federal Register on November 18, 2004 (69 FR 
67611). A notice of acceptance for docketing of the application 
and a notice of opportunity for hearing regarding renewal of the 
facility operating licenses was published in the Federal Register 
on December 6, 2004 (69 FR 70471-70473). The purpose of this 
notice is to inform the public that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC) will be preparing an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) in support of the review of the license renewal 
application and to provide the public an opportunity to 
participate in the environmental scoping process, as defined in 
10 CFR 51.29. In addition, as outlined in 36 CFR 800.8, 
``Coordination with the National Environmental Policy Act,'' the 
NRC plans to coordinate compliance with Section 106 of the 
National Historic Preservation Act in meeting the requirements of 
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).
 
In accordance with 10 CFR 51.53(c) and 10 CFR 54.23, CP submitted 
the ER as part of the application. The ER was prepared pursuant 
to 10 CFR Part 51 and is available for public inspection at the 
NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 
11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852, or 
from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's Agencywide 
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is 
accessible at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html , which 
provides access through the NRC's Electronic Reading Room link. 
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter 
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should 
contact the NRC's PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, or 301- 
415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. The application may also 
be viewed on the Internet at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati 
ons.html. In addition, the William Madison Randall Library, 
located at 601 S. College Road, Wilmington, North Carolina 28403, 
has agreed to make the ER available for public inspection.
 
This notice advises the public that the NRC intends to gather the 
information necessary to prepare a plant-specific supplement to 
the Commission's ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) 
for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' (NUREG-1437) in support 
of the review of the application for renewal of the BSEP 
operating licenses for an additional 20 years. Possible 
alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include the 
no action alternative and reasonable alternative energy sources. 
The NRC is required by 10 CFR 51.95 to prepare a supplement to 
the GEIS in connection with the renewal of an operating license. 
This notice is being published in accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the NRC's regulations 
found in 10 CFR Part 51.
 
The NRC will first conduct a scoping process for the supplement 
to the GEIS and, as soon as practicable thereafter, will prepare 
a draft supplement to the GEIS for public comment. Participation 
in the scoping process by members of the public and local, State, 
Tribal, and Federal government agencies is encouraged. The 
scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS will be used to 
accomplish the following:
 
[[Page 2189]] a. Define the proposed action which is to be the 
subject of the supplement to the GEIS; b. Determine the scope of 
the supplement to the GEIS and identify the significant issues to 
be analyzed in depth; c. Identify and eliminate from detailed 
study those issues that are peripheral or that are not 
significant; d. Identify any environmental assessments and other 
EISs that are being or will be prepared that are related to, but 
are not part of the scope of the supplement to the GEIS being 
considered; e. Identify other environmental review and 
consultation requirements related to the proposed action; f. 
Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation 
of the environmental analyses and the Commission's tentative 
planning and decision-making schedule; g. Identify any 
cooperating agencies and, as appropriate, allocate assignments 
for preparation and schedules for completing the supplement to 
the GEIS to the NRC and any cooperating agencies; and h. Describe 
how the supplement to the GEIS will be prepared, and include any 
contractor assistance to be used.
 
The NRC invites the following entities to participate in scoping: 
a. The applicant, Carolina Power & Light Company, now doing 
business as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc; b. Any Federal agency 
that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to 
any environmental impact involved, or that is authorized to 
develop and enforce relevant environmental standards; c. Affected 
State and local government agencies, including those authorized 
to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards; d. Any 
affected Indian tribe; e. Any person who requests or has 
requested an opportunity to participate in the scoping process; 
and f. Any person who has petitioned or intends to petition for 
leave to intervene.
 
In accordance with 10 CFR 51.26, the scoping process for an EIS 
may include a public scoping meeting to help identify significant 
issues related to a proposed activity and to determine the scope 
of issues to be addressed in an EIS. The NRC has decided to hold 
public meetings for the BSEP license renewal supplement to the 
GEIS. The scoping meetings will be held at the Southport City 
Hall, 201 E. Moore Street, Southport, North Carolina 28461, on 
Thursday, January 27, 2005.
 
There will be two sessions to accommodate interested parties. The 
first session will convene at 1:30 p.m. and will continue until 
4:30 p.m., as necessary. The second session will convene at 7 
p.m. with a repeat of the overview portions of the meeting and 
will continue until 10 p.m., as necessary. Both meetings will be 
transcribed and will include: (1) An overview by the NRC staff of 
the NEPA environmental review process, the proposed scope of the 
supplement to the GEIS, and the proposed review schedule; and (2) 
the opportunity for interested government agencies, 
organizations, and individuals to submit comments or suggestions 
on the environmental issues or the proposed scope of the 
supplement to the GEIS. No formal comments on the proposed scope 
of the supplement to the GEIS will be accepted during the 
informal discussions. To be considered, comments must be provided 
either at the transcribed public meetings or in writing, as 
discussed below.
 
Persons may register to attend or present oral comments at the 
meetings on the scope of the NEPA review by contacting Mr. 
Richard L. Emch, Jr., by telephone at 1-800-368-5642, extension 
1590, or by e-mail to the NRC at BrunswickEIS@nrc.gov no later 
than January 18, 2005. Members of the public may also register to 
speak at the meeting within 15 minutes of the start of each 
session. Individual oral comments may be limited by the time 
available, depending on the number of persons who register. 
Members of the public who have not registered may also have an 
opportunity to speak, if time permits. Public comments will be 
considered in the scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS. 
The meeting room is on the second floor of the building, and 
there is no elevator. Therefore, the meeting room is not handicap 
accessible. Mr. Emch will need to be contacted no later than 
January 18, 2005, if special equipment or accommodations are 
needed to attend or present information at the public meeting, so 
that the NRC staff can determine whether the request can be 
accommodated.
 
Members of the public may send written comments on the 
environmental scope of the BSEP license renewal review to the 
Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative 
Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite 
the publication date and page number of this Federal Register 
notice. Comments may also be delivered to the NRC, Room T-6D59, 
Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 
from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. during Federal workdays. To be 
considered in the scoping process, written comments should be 
postmarked by March 11, 2005. Electronic comments may be sent by 
email to the NRC at BrunswickEIS@nrc.gov and should be sent no 
later than March 11, 2005, to be considered in the scoping 
process. Comments will be available electronically and accessible 
through ADAMS at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 
Participation in the scoping process for the supplement to the 
GEIS does not entitle participants to become parties to the 
proceeding to which the supplement to the GEIS relates. Notice of 
opportunity for a hearing regarding the renewal application was 
the subject of the aforementioned Federal Register notice (69 FR 
70471). Matters related to participation in any hearing are 
outside the scope of matters to be discussed at this public 
meeting.
 
At the conclusion of the scoping process, the NRC will prepare a 
concise summary of the determination and conclusions reached, 
including the significant issues identified, and will send a copy 
of the summary to each participant in the scoping process. The 
summary will also be available for inspection in ADAMS at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. The staff will then 
prepare and issue for comment the draft supplement to the GEIS, 
which will be the subject of separate notices and separate public 
meetings. Copies will be available for public inspection at the 
above-mentioned addresses, and one copy per request will be 
provided free of charge. After receipt and consideration of the 
comments, the NRC will prepare a final supplement to the GEIS, 
which will also be available for public inspection.
 
Information about the proposed action, the supplement to the 
GEIS, and the scoping process may be obtained from Mr. Emch at 
the aforementioned telephone number or e-mail address.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of January 2005.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Pao-Tsin Kuo, Program Director, License Renewal and Environmental 
Impacts Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. 05-591 Filed 1-11-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 22 DEMOCRACY BETRAYED
 
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:15:50 -0600 (CST)

 
Caduceus - Democracy Betrayed

http://www.caduceus.info/articles/denver.htm

The horror of Depleted Uranium is not limited to Iraq - it may well
be at our doorsteps. The information which some governments
are concealing is presented here.
By James Denver

'I'm horrified. The people out there - the Iraqis, the media and the 
troops - risk the most appalling ill health. And the radiation from depleted 
uranium can travel literally anywhere. It's going to destroy the lives of 
thousands of children, all over the world. We all know how far radiation can 
travel. Radiation from Chernobyl reached Wales and in Britain you sometimes 
get red dust from the Sahara on your car.'
The speaker is not some alarmist doom-sayer. He is Dr Chris Busby, the 
British radiation expert, Fellow of the University of Liverpool in the 
Faculty of Medicine and UK representative on the European Committee on 
Radiation Risk, talking about the best kept secret of this war: the fact 
that, by illegally using hundreds of tons of depleted uranium (DU) against 
Iraq, Britain and America have gravely endangered not only the Iraqis but 
the whole world. For these weapons have released deadly, carcinogenic and 
mutagenic, radioactive particles in such abundance that - whipped up by 
sandstorms and carried on trade winds - there is no corner of the globe they 
cannot penetrate - including Britain. For the wind has no boundaries and 
time is on their side: the radioactivity persists for over 4,500,000,000 
years and can cause cancer, leukaemia, brain damage, kidney failure, and 
extreme birth defects - killing millions of every age for centuries to come. 
A crime against humanity which may, in the eyes of historians, rank with the 
worst atrocities of all time.
Yet, officially, no crime has been committed. For this story is a dirty 
story in which the facts have been concealed from those who needed them 
most. It is also a story we need to know if the people of Iraq are to get 
the medical care they desperately need, and if our troops, returning from 
Iraq, are not to suffer as terribly as the veterans of other conflicts in 
which depleted uranium was used.
A dirty Tyson
'Depleted' uranium is in many ways a misnomer. For 'depleted' sounds weak. 
The only weak thing about depleted uranium is its price. It is dirt cheap, 
toxic, waste from nuclear power plants and bomb production. However, uranium 
is one of earth's heaviest elements and DU packs a Tyson's punch, smashing 
through tanks, buildings and bunkers with equal ease, spontaneously catching 
fire as it does so, and burning people alive. 'Crispy critters' is what US 
servicemen call those unfortunate enough to be close. And, when John Pilger 
encountered children killed at a greater distance he wrote: 'The children's 
skin had folded back, like parchment, revealing veins and burnt flesh that 
seeped blood, while the eyes, intact, stared straight ahead. I vomited.' 
(Daily Mirror)
The millions of radioactive uranium oxide particles released when it burns 
can kill just as surely, but far more terribly. They can even be so tiny 
they pass through a gas mask, making protection against them impossible. 
Yet, small is not beautiful. For these invisible killers indiscriminately 
attack men, women, children and even babies in the womb - and do the gravest 
harm of all to children and unborn babies.
A terrible legacy
Doctors in Iraq have estimated that birth defects have increased by 2-6 
times, and 3-12 times as many children have developed cancer and leukaemia 
since 1991. Moreover, a report published in The Lancet in 1998 said that as 
many as 500 children a day are dying from these sequels to war and sanctions 
and that the death rate for Iraqi children under 5 years of age increased 
from 23 per 1000 in 1989 to 166 per thousand in 1993. Overall, cases of 
lymphoblastic leukemia more than quadrupled with other cancers also 
increasing 'at an alarming rate'. In men, lung, bladder, bronchus, skin, and 
stomach cancers showed the highest increase. In women, the highest increases 
were in breast and bladder cancer, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.1
On hearing that DU had been used in the Gulf in 1991, the UK Atomic Energy 
Authority sent the Ministry of Defence a special report on the potential 
damage to health and the environment. It said that it could cause half a 
million additional cancer deaths in Iraq over 10 years. In that war the 
authorities only admitted to using 320 tons of DU - although the Dutch 
charity LAKA estimates the true figure is closer to 800 tons. Many times 
that may have been spread across Iraq by this year's war. The devastating 
damage all this DU will do to the health and fertility of the people of Iraq 
now, and for generations to come, is beyond imagining.
We must also count the numberless thousands of miscarried babies. Nobody 
knows how many Iraqis have died in the womb since DU contaminated their 
world. But it is suggested that troops who were only exposed to DU for the 
brief period of the war were still excreting uranium in their semen 8 years 
later and some had 100 times the so called 'safe limit' of uranium in their 
urine. The lack of government interest in the plight of veterans of the 1991 
war is reflected in a lack of academic research on the impact of DU but 
informal research has found a high incidence of birth defects in their 
children and that the wives of men who served in Iraq have three times more 
miscarriages than the wives of servicemen who did not go there.
Since DU darkened the land Iraq has seen birth defects which would break a 
heart of stone: babies with terribly foreshortened limbs, with their 
intestines outside their bodies, with huge bulging tumours where their eyes 
should be, or with a single eye - like Cyclops, or without eyes, or without 
limbs, and even without heads. Significantly, some of the defects are almost 
unknown outside textbooks showing the babies born near A-bomb test sites in 
the Pacific. Doctors report that many women no longer say 'Is it a girl or a 
boy?' but simply, 'Is it normal, doctor?' Moreover this terrible legacy will 
not end. The genes of their parents may have been damaged for ever, and the 
damaging DU dust is ever-present.
Blue on blue
What the governments of America and Britain have done to the people of Iraq 
they have also done to their own soldiers, in both wars. And they have done 
it knowingly. For the battlefields have been thick with DU and soldiers have 
had to enter areas heavily contaminated by bombing. Moreover, their bodies 
have not only been assaulted by DU but also by a vaccination regime which 
violated normal protocols, experimental vaccines, nerve agent pills, and 
organophosphate pesticides in their tents. Yet, though the hazards of DU 
were known, British and American troops were not warned of its dangers. Nor 
were they given thorough medical checks on their return - even though 
identifying it quickly might have made it possible to remove some of it from 
their body. Then, when a growing number became seriously ill, and should 
have been sent to top experts in radiation damage and neurotoxins, many were 
sent to a psychiatrist.
Over 200,000 US troops who returned from the 1991 war are now invalided out 
with ailments officially attributed to service in Iraq - that's 1 in 3. In 
contrast, the British government's failure to fully assess the health of 
returning troops, or to monitor their health, means no one even knows how 
many have died or become gravely ill since their return. However, Gulf 
veterans' associations say that, of 40,000 or so fighting fit men and women 
who saw active service, at least 572 have died prematurely since coming home 
and 5000 may be ill. An alarming number are thought to have taken their own 
lives, unable to bear the torment of the innumerable ailments which have 
combined to take away their career, their sexuality, their ability to have 
normal children, and even their ability to breathe or walk normally. As one 
veteran puts it, they are 'on DU death row, waiting to die'.
Whatever other factors there may be, some of their illnesses are strikingly 
similar to those of Iraqis exposed to DU dust. For example, soldiers have 
also fathered children without eyes. And, in a group of eight servicemen 
whose babies lack eyes seven are known to have been directly exposed to DU 
dust. They too have fathered children with stunted arms, and rare 
abnormalities classically associated with radiation damage. They too seem 
prone to cancer and leukaemia. Tellingly, so are EU soldiers who served as 
peacekeepers in the Balkans, where DU was also used. Indeed their leukaemia 
rate has been so high that several EU governments have protested at the use 
of DU.
The vital evidence
Despite all that evidence of the harm done by DU, governments on both sides 
of the Atlantic have repeatedly claimed that as it emits only 'low level' 
radiation DU is harmless. Award winning scientist, Dr Rosalie Bertell who 
has led UN medical commissions, has studied 'low level' radiation for 30 
years.2 She has found that uranium oxide particles have more than enough 
power to harm cells, and describes their pulses of radiation as hitting 
surrounding cells 'like flashes of lightning' again and again in a single 
second.2 Like many scientists worldwide who have studied this type of 
radiation, she has found that such 'lightning strikes' can damage DNA and 
cause cell mutations which lead to cancer. Moreover, these particles can be 
taken up by body fluids and travel through the body, damaging more than one 
organ. To compound all that Dr Bertell has found that this particular type 
of radiation can cause the body's communication systems to break down, 
leading to malfunctions in many vital organs of the body and to many medical 
problems. A striking fact, since many veterans of the first Gulf war suffer 
from innumerable, seemingly unrelated, ailments.
In addition, recent research by Eric Wright, Professor of Experimental 
Haematology at Dundee University, and others, have shown two ways in which 
such radiation can do far more damage than has been thought. The first is 
that a cell which seems unharmed by radiation can produce cells with diverse 
mutations several cell generations later. (And mutations are at the root of 
cancer and birth defects.) This 'radiation induced genomic instability' is 
compounded by 'the bystander effect' by which cells mutate in unison with 
others which have been damaged by radiation - rather as birds swoop and turn 
in unison. Put together, these two mechanisms can greatly increase the 
damage done by a single source of radiation, such as a DU particle. 
Moreover, it is now clear that there are marked genetic differences in the 
way individuals respond to radiation - with some being far more likely to 
develop cancer than others. So the fact that some veterans of the first Gulf 
war seem relatively unharmed by their exposure to DU in no way proves that 
DU did not damage others.
The price of truth
That the evidence from Iraq and from our troops, and the research findings 
of such experts, have been ignored may be no accident. A US report, leaked 
in late 1995, allegedly says, 'The potential for health effects from DU 
exposure is real; however it must be viewed in perspective... the financial 
implications of long-term disability payments and healthcare costs would be 
excessive.'3
Clearly, with hundreds of thousands gravely ill in Iraq and at least a 
quarter of a million UK and US troops seriously ill, huge disability claims 
might be made not only against the governments of Britain and America if the 
harm done by DU were acknowledged. There might also be huge claims against 
companies making DU weapons and some of their directors are said to be 
extremely close to the White House. How close they are to Downing Street is 
a matter for speculation, but arms sales makes a considerable contribution 
to British trade. So the massive whitewashing of DU over
the past 12 years, and the way that governments have failed to test 
returning troops, seemed to disbelieve them, and washed their hands of them, 
may be purely to save money.
The possibility that financial considerations have led the governments of 
Britain and America to cynically avoid taking responsibility for the harm 
they have done not only to the people of Iraq but to their own troops may 
seem outlandish. Yet DU weapons weren't used by the other side and no other 
explanation fits the evidence. For, in the days before Britain and America 
first used DU in war its hazards were no secret.4 One American study in 1990 
said DU was 'linked to cancer when exposures are internal, [and to] chemical 
toxicity - causing kidney damage'. While another openly warned that exposure 
to these particles under battlefield conditions could lead to cancers of the 
lung and bone, kidney damage, non-malignant lung disease, neuro-cognitive 
disorders, chromosomal damage and birth defects.5
A culture of denial
In 1996 and 1997 UN Human Rights Tribunals condemned DU weapons for 
illegally breaking the Geneva Convention and classed them as 'weapons of 
mass destruction' 'incompatible with international humanitarian and human 
rights law'. Since then, following leukaemia in European peacekeeping troops 
in the Balkans and Afghanistan (where DU was also used), the EU has twice 
called for DU weapons to be banned.

Yet, far from banning DU, America and Britain stepped up their denials of 
the harm from this radioactive dust as more and more troops from the first 
Gulf war and from action and peacekeeping in the Balkan and Afghanistan have 
become seriously ill. This is no coincidence. In 1997, while citing 
experiments, by others, in which 84 percent of dogs exposed to inhaled 
uranium died of cancer of the lungs, Dr Asaf Durakovic, then Professor of 
Radiology and Nuclear Medicine at Georgetown University in Washington was 
quoted as saying, 'The [US government's] Veteran Administration asked me to 
lie about the risks of incorporating depleted uranium in the human body.' He 
concluded, 'uranium. does cause cancer, uranium does cause mutation, and 
uranium does kill. If we continue with the irresponsible contamination of 
the biosphere, and denial of the fact that human life is endangered by the 
deadly isotope uranium, then we are doing disservice to ourselves, 
disservice to the truth, disservice to God and to all generations who 
follow.' Not what the authorities wanted to hear and his research was 
suddenly blocked.
During 12 years of ever-growing British whitewash the authorities have 
abolished military hospitals, where there could have been specialized 
research on the effects of DU and where expertise in treating DU victims 
could have built up. And, not content with the insult of suggesting the 
gravely disabling symptoms of Gulf veterans are imaginary they have refused 
full pensions to many. For, despite all the evidence to the contrary, the 
current House of Commons briefing paper on DU hazards says 'it is judged 
that any radiation effects from.possible exposures are extremely unlikely to 
be a contributory factor to the illnesses currently being experienced by 
some Gulf war veterans.' Note how over a quarter of a million sick and dying 
US and UK vets are called 'some'.
The way ahead
Britain and America not only used DU in this year's Iraq war, they 
dramatically increased its use - from a minimum of 320 tons in the previous 
war to at minimum of 1500 tons in this one. And this time the use of DU wasn't 
limited to anti-tank weapons - as it had largely been in the previous Gulf 
war - but was extended to the guided missiles, large bunker busters and big 
2000 pound bombs used in Iraq's cities. This means that Iraq's cities have 
been blanketed in lethal particles - any one of which can cause cancer or 
deform a child. In addition, the use of DU in huge bombs which throw the 
deadly particles higher and wider in huge plumes of smoke means that 
billions of deadly particles have been carried high into the air - again and 
again and again as the bombs rained down - ready to be swept worldwide by 
the winds.
The Royal Society has suggested the solution is massive decontamination in 
Iraq. That could only scratch the surface. For decontamination is hugely 
expensive and, though it may reduce the risks in some of the worst areas, it 
cannot fully remove them. For DU is too widespread on land and water. How do 
you clean up every nook and cranny of a city the size of Baghdad? How can 
they decontaminate a whole country in which microscopic particles, which 
cannot be detected with a normal geiger counter, are spread from border to 
border? And how can they clean up all the countries downwind of Iraq - and, 
indeed, the world?
So there are only two things we can do to mitigate this crime against 
humanity. The first is to provide the best possible medical care for the 
people of Iraq, for our returning troops and for those who served in the 
last Gulf war and, through that, minimize their suffering. The second is to 
relegate war, and the production and sale of weapons, to the scrap heap of 
history - along with slavery and genocide. Then, and only then, will this 
crime against humanity be expunged, and the tragic deaths from this war 
truly bring freedom to the people of Iraq, and of the world.
Read the full article in issue 60 of Caduceus...
References
1. The Lancet volume 351, issue 9103, 28 February 1998.
2. Rosalie Bertell's book Planet Earth the Latest Weapon of War was reviewed 
in Caduceus issue 51, page 28.
3. www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_ii/du_ii_tabl1. htm#TAB L_Research Report 
Summaries
4. www.wagingpeace.org/articles/02.01/020117moret.htm The secret official 
memorandum to Brigadier General L.R.Groves from Drs Conant, Compton and Urey 
of War Department Manhattan district dated October 1943 is available at the 
website www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/Leuren-Moret-Gen-Groves21feb03.htm
5. www.gulflink.osd.mil/du_iitab11.htm#tab L_research report summaries

Further information

The Low Level Radiation Campaign hopes to be able to arrange a limited 
number of private urine tests for those returning from the latest Gulf war. 
It can be contacted at: The Knoll, Montpelier Park, Llandrindod Wells, LD1 
5LW. 01597 824771. Web: www.llrc.org

James Denver writes and broadcasts internationally on science and 
technology.

) Caduceus, 2003.
*****************************************************************
 23 [DU-WATCH] WAMC Roundtable Segment on Depleted Uranium 1/6/05
 
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 01:39:55 -0600 (CST)

 
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wamc/news.newsmain? 
action=article&ARTICLE_ID=726111

WAMC (90.3 FM) Roundtable Segment on Depleted Uranium 1/6/05

  ALBANY, NY  (2005-01-10) Susan Arbetter and Alan Chartock interview  
Professor John Arnason, investigative journalist David Rose, and local  
activist Sharon Herr about Depleted Uranium and the National Lead Plant  
in Colonie, New York. An essay on D.U. by Joan Walker follows.

Charles Jenks, attorney at law
President of the Core Group
Traprock Peace Center
103A Keets Road
Deerfield, MA 01342
413-773-5188; fax 413-773-7507
charles@mtdata.com
http://www.traprockpeace.org

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Give the gift of life to a sick child. 
Support St. Jude Children's Research Hospital's 'Thanks & Giving.'
http://us.click.yahoo.com/3iazvD/6WnJAA/xGEGAA/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 [du-list] Never mind the Depleted Uranium, taste the
 
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:24:23 -0800

 
<x-flowed>
       Can Rumsfeld "Defend" Himself Against Aspartame Lawsuit?
        http://www.mercola.com/2005/jan/12/rumsfeld_aspartame.htm

       Much controversy has surrounded the issue of whether or not the 
artificial sweetener aspartame is safe for consumption. However, the hot 
debate has reached an all-time high, as a $350-million class-action lawsuit 
has been filed in order to prove how deadly aspartame consumption truly is 
to the human body.

       Also included in the lawsuit is the central role played by Donald 
Rumsfeld, current United States Secretary of Defense, in helping to get 
aspartame approved through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 
Plaintiffs claim that, despite objections of numerous FDA health 
researchers and negative studies, Rumsfeld used his political power and 
influence to get aspartame approved by the FDA.

       Those charged in the lawsuit are being accused of knowingly using 
the neurotoxic aspartame as a sugar substitute in the manufacture of Equal, 
while fully aware that consumption of it could lead to a plethora of health 
problems.

       "Unsweetened" Health Problems Linked to Aspartame

         a.. Death
         b.. Arthritis
         c.. Brain cancer
         d.. Memory loss
         e.. Hearing loss
         f.. Hypertension
         g.. Abdominal pain
         h.. Headache/Migraines
       According to the affidavit, the doctor directing the studies -- 
which showed conclusive evidence that the artificial sweetener caused 
critical health problems and even death -- has been missing since 
aspartame's approval in 1984. All records of the studies, including filed 
notes and/or translations, have been destroyed.

       Defendants stand firm in their belief that aspartame consumption is 
not harmful to humans.

       The artificial sweetener can be found in more than 5,000 food 
products and all diet soft drinks sold in the United States.

       News Target Network December 27, 2004


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Dr. Mercola's Comment:

       You may recall my lengthy comment regarding Secretary of Defense 
Donald Rumsfeld's latest "tap dance" in front of U.S. soldiers in Iraq and 
the media over the lack of proper armament. Now you've learned that 
Rumsfeld was the same " political heavyweight hired to get aspartame 
approved some two decades ago.

       What a prescription for disaster.

       Aspartame was successfully kept off the market for over ten years 
prior to GD Searle hiring Donald Rumsfeld as their CEO. Shortly after he 
was hired aspartame became approved through an unbelievable conflict of 
interest. Several FDA commissioners that voted against approving aspartame 
were replaced by those that voted for it and got it approved. Shortly after 
aspartame approval these FDA commissioners were given cushy jobs with 
quarter million dollar salaries as a reward for their help.

       This is criminal behavior of the first magnitude and these 
individuals and Searle have never been punished. Having Donald Rumsfeld 
grease the wheels was likely a major reason this was allowed to occur.

       This artificial sweetener is 180 to 200 times sweeter than the 
refined sugar it is meant to replace, though is known to erode intelligence 
and affect short-term memory. In addition, about 70 percent of the 
population suffers from an excess of insulin, which is often marked by 
excess weight, high blood pressure, diabetes or high cholesterol -- nearly 
all of these people would benefit from avoiding ANY sweeteners, including 
aspartame and sucralose.

       Thus, a great way for anyone to satisfy their sweet tooth NATURALLY 
is with stevia -- a healthy alternative to sugar.

       Unlike aspartame and other artificial sweeteners that have been 
cited for dangerous toxicities, stevia is a natural alternative that's 
ideal for diabetics, those watching their weight and anyone interested in 
maintaining their health by avoiding sugar. Stevia can be used in 
appetizers, beverages, soups, salads, vegetables, desserts -- virtually 
anything! It is, hands down, the best alternative to sugar you will ever taste.

       WARNING: I want to emphasize, however, that if you have insulin 
issues, I recommend that you avoid sweeteners all together including 
stevia, as they all can worsen the problem. But for everyone else, if you 
are going to sweeten your foods and beverages anyway, I strongly encourage 
you to do so with stevia.

       And, since more than 5,000 products contain aspartame as a 
sweetener, it is certainly in your best interest, as well as that of your 
family's health, to read the labels of any processed food you're concerned 
about.

       If you are interested in learning more about Rumsfeld's role in 
bringing aspartame to America (and damaging the health of millions), I 
could not urge you more strongly to read my recent interview with filmmaker 
Cori Brackett who made the outstanding documentary Sweet Misery.

       If you, or someone you know and love, drinks diet soda or consumes 
aspartame in any form, then this video is an absolute must-see for you. You 
can purchase it on my site with the 100-percent assurance that if you are 
not as convinced as I am that this is one of the most helpful, 
life-changing health movies you have seen you can return it to our site for 
a full no-questions-asked refund.

       Related Articles:

         Aspartame Disease: An FDA-Approved Epidemic

         Aspartame -- History of Fraud and Deception

         Aspartame: What You Don't Know Can Hurt You

         Aspartame Can Harm Your Health

         Aspartame -- Avoid It


   ----------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 1/10/05


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?
Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/TzSHvD/SOnJAA/79vVAA/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/
  

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 25 kitsapsun.com: Admiral's e-mail says nuclear submarine impact was "incredibly
hard"

By Sun news services

January 11, 2005

The nuclear submarine that ran aground Saturday in the South
Pacific hit so "incredibly hard" that about 60 of its 137 crew
members were injured and the sailor who died was thrown 20 feet
by the impact, according to a New York Times story quoting a
Navy admiral. 

Messages sent by Rear Adm. Paul F. Sullivan, a former Trident 
submarine commander at Bangor who now commands submarine forces 
in the Pacific, said USS San Francisco's hull was severely 
damaged after the head-on crash into what Navy officials believe 
was an undersea mountain that was not on the navigation charts. 
		
 One message said USS San Francisco was traveling at high speed,
and the impact practically stopped it in its tracks and caused
flooding in parts of the bow, according to the New York Times. 

The messages by Rear Adm. Sullivan paint a more dire picture of
the accident, which occurred 360 miles southeast of Guam, than
had previously been disclosed. They also hint at the extensive
efforts to steady the vessel and save the sailor who died. 

One of the admiral's e-mails indicated that the Navy had tried
to evacuate the fatally injured man, Machinist Mate 2nd Class
Joseph A. Ashley, within hours after he had been thrown forward
and hit his head on a metal pump, which knocked him unconscious. 

Petty Officer Ashley's father, Daniel L. Ashley, said in an
interview he had been told that as a helicopter hovered over the
choppy seas, crew members could not maneuver a stretcher
carrying his son through the submarine's hatches before he died,
according to the New York Times. 

"They tried numerous times to maneuver him through various
hatches," Mr. Ashley said. "But it just didn't happen." 

Adm. Sullivan, who is based in Hawaii, sent the e-mail messages
to other Navy officials. As the messages circulated within the
submarine community, two people provided copies to The New York
Times, and Navy officials confirmed their authenticity. 

The e-mail also indicated that about 60 crew members had been
injured. All the Navy had said publicly was that 23 crew members
were treated for broken bones, cuts and bruises. 

The messages said those 23 were hurt seriously enough that they
were unable to stand their watch duties as the submarine limped
back to Guam. Mr. Ashley said the submarine's captain, Cmdr.
Kevin Mooney, told him by phone on Monday that among the injured
crew members, "there were a lot of broken fingers, broken arms
and legs and one fractured back." 

Navy officials said yesterday that the rest of the injuries were
minor. 

The admiral's e-mail also said an outer hull ripped open at the
submarine's nose, causing flooding in a dome with sonar sensors
and in four of the ballast tanks used to submerge the vessel or
take it to the surface. 

The flooding caused the submarine to sit deeper in the water and
made it hard to maneuver on the trip back to Guam. Sailors had
to keep pumping pressurized air into the tanks to prevent the
water from rising and to maintain buoyancy, the New York Times
reported. 

An inner hull, which surrounds the crew's living and work
spaces, held firm, the e-mail said. The nuclear reactor and
critical propulsion systems were not damaged. 

In the e-mail, Adm. Sullivan did not discuss why the vessel ran
aground. The Navy is investigating, and the admiral, who
ultimately will have to decide whether to reprimand any of the
submarine's crew members, did not respond to requests for
comment. 

Navy officials have said that the submarine, which was headed
for Australia, appeared to have smashed into an undersea
mountain that was not on its charts. Mr. Ashley, who lives in
Akron, Ohio, said Cmdr. Mooney told him the same thing on
Monday. 

"He said, 'On the charts we have, this is a clear area all the
way through to Australia,' " Mr. Ashley told the New York Times. 

Navy officials said the San Francisco was traveling at 30 knots
when it careened off some part of the undersea mountain range.

In one of the e-mail messages, Rear Adm. Sullivan wrote that on
impact, the vessel made a "nearly instantaneous deacceleration"
to about 4 knots. 

Mr. Ashley said Commander Mooney told him that his son had just
gotten off watch duty in the engine area and was chatting with
other sailors when the accident occurred. 

Mr. Ashley said his son, who was 24, "loved the Navy and that
submarine" and had just re-enlisted. 

Mr. Ashley said Cmdr. Mooney, who could not be reached for
comment, also told him that his son's condition seemed to worsen
as sailors labored to tilt the stretcher through the evacuation
hatch. 

Mr. Ashley said that at the end of the conversation, Cmdr.
Mooney told him that he took full responsibility for the
sailor's death. Mr. Ashley said he replied that he had heard all
he needed "to know that you and your crew did everything you
could do to save my son's life."  

2005© The SUN, 545 5th St., PO Box 259, Bremerton, WA 98337, 
Toll-free 1-888-377-3711, For news, stories and content issues: 
lpritchett@kitsapsun.com, Lloyd Pritchett, Web Editor For 
technical issues and advertising: webmaster@thesunlink.com, Jim 
W. Coleman, Interactive Media
*****************************************************************
 26 Bradenton Herald: Chao vows to hasten injury compensation

| 01/12/2005 | 

DONNA WRIGHT

 Herald Staff Writer

U.S. Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao vowed Tuesday to do
everything in her power to help energy workers and their
families who sacrificed for America's freedom. 

Chao promised to work as quickly as possible to settle a backlog
of 25,000 Energy Employees Injury Compensation claims the
Department of Labor inherited from the Department of Energy. 

Those claims were filed by workers employed by the DOE of the
agency's contractors. 

Energy employees' claims had been handled differently from the
employees of Loral American Beryllium Co. in Tallevast, which as
a private vendor falls under a different provision of the
compensation act. 

The Department of Labor has always processed the claims for
beryllium vendor companies. 

But the DOE was responsible for processing the claims for its
own employees. DOE failed to process those claims quickly. 

As of July 30, the DOE had paid only 14 claims out of nearly
25,000 filed, according to the agency's Web site. 

In October, Congress passed the responsibility for processing
energy employees' claims to the Department of Labor in an
amendment to the 2005 Defense Authorization Act. 

Chao told reporters Tuesday that the Department of Labor has
already paid three of the claims in the backlog. 

Within a month, she hopes to pay 100 more, primarily to
survivors of workers who died from their exposure to radiation
and beryllium while making nuclear weapons. 

That's good news for former workers employed at the Pinellas
Science, Technology, and Research Center, formerly known as the
Pinellas Plant in Pinellas County. 

As direct employees of the DOE those former Pinellas workers
stand to benefit from Chao's promise to expedite their claims. 

The Pinellas Plant was built in 1957 by the U.S. government to
produce precisely-timed neutron generators used to initiate
nuclear explosions. 

The plant stopped production of weapon-related components in
1994, when it changed its mission to environmental management,
according to the DOE Web site. 

The amended provisions of the compensation act also opened the
door to extend eligibility to workers employed at DOE plants
after weapons production ended, if evidence of residual
radiation is present, labor officials said. 

To qualify, a company must be listed in a study of residual
contamination prepared in 2003 by the National Institute for
Occupational Health and Safety, a division of the Centers for
Disease Control. 

The new provisions in Part E extend eligibility to those
facilities where radioactive contamination has been found, but
not to plants that have known residual beryllium contamination. 

Congress has asked NIOSH to update that report by 2006. 

American Beryllium is listed in the 2003 report but
investigators said too little is known about the work done at
the Tallevast plant to know if residual contamination is an
issue. 

Apparently NIOSH was not aware of a 1997 environmental audit by
Tetra Tech for Lockheed Martin, then owners of the former
Tallevast plant. 

That audit included 78 wipe samples for beryllium dust.
Beryllium was detected in all 78 wipe samples ranging from 4.1
micrograms per cubic foot to a maximum of 120,000 micrograms per
cubic foot. 

The highest concentrations were found above the former beryllium
production area ceilings on the fiberglass or ceiling tiles and
from the exhaust stacks of the former beryllium vacuum systems. 

Richard Miller, senior policy analyst for the Government
Accountability Project, a watchdog group advocating for
beryllium workers, said those results justify re-evaluating the
Tallevast plant. 

If residual beryllium contamination can be documented, Miller
said, former American Beryllium workers will have evidence they
need to push lawmakers to extend their eligibility period as
well. 

Chao said the Department of Labor is in the middle of writing
final regulations due by June on how the new provisions will be
administered. 

But some claims from survivors can be paid before those
regulations are written, Chao said. The Department of Labor is
processing those claims now. 

Chao expects to approve hundreds of additional cases before the
June deadline. 

"America's energy workers helped build the technology that won
the Cold War," Chao said. "Because of their exposure to certain
materials, many of them became ill and many gave their lives. .
. . The Department of Labor is committed to ensuring that they
are compensated as quickly as possible." 

But based upon the experiences of some former American Beryllium
workers, the Department of Labor's track record in quick
settlement of claims falls short of Chao's promise. 

Ray Stephens learned in August that his beryllium sensitivity
test was positive. A second test in September confirmed the
positive result. Since then he has had several additional
medical procedures to establish the extent of his illness from
beryllium dust exposure. 

Despite his positive test results in September, Stephens did not
receive his medical benefits card until five months later. 

Stephens said he will believe Chao's promise when he see
results. 

"I find it hard to believe," Stephens said. "I really do."   

*****************************************************************
 27 Las Vegas SUN: Sick Test Site workers may get paid more quickly

Today: January 12, 2005 at 11:21:05 PST 
 

By Suzanne Struglinski 
<suzanne@lasvegassun.com>
 SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU

 WASHINGTON -- Hundreds of former Nevada Test Site workers and
other Energy Department employees who are ill may have their
claims for compensation quickly resolved through a new Labor
Department program.

 The department will review all the claims that the Energy
Department previously examined, including those deemed
ineligible for compensation. Workers will have to wait until the
agency publishes regulations, probably in May, detailing how it
will compensate them, according to Shelby Hallmark, who is in
charge of the Labor Department's worker compensation programs.
The process is supposed to be easier under a new law.

 President Bush signed the Defense Authorization bill late last
year, which transferred a part of the Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Act, a program plagued with
delays, from the Energy Department to the Labor Department.

 About 2,000 claims have been filed from workers in Nevada,
according to the Labor Department's statistics but only 985 have
received a final decision. The remaining wait for final
decisions on their claims.

 Hallmark said he has received 20,000 claim folders from the
Energy Department and Labor Department employees are now
beginning to review them. Some claims have already been paid
out, even without the final regulations in place, to get the
program going. He said the department is mainly looking at
claims already approved to get payments out as soon as possible.

 Hallmark said Nevadans' claims will be processed through the
department's Seattle office, but the Worker's Compensation
Resource Center in Las Vegas will remain open.

 Congress designed the change to eliminate rules that blocked
eligible workers from getting money and give responsibility to a
department with more experience in worker compensation program,
said Kate Kimpan, a former energy fellow on the staff of Sen.
Jim Bunning, R-Ky., who helped change the law.

 This could mean thousands of dollars in payment for lost wages,
disability and medical expenses for some Nevada residents that
have been waiting for answers since the compensation program's
creation in 2000. The change does not guarantee everyone
payments, but it is supposed to get answers to people faster.

 Those who have already applied for the compensation do not have
to submit any new paperwork.

 "People do not have to refile or lose their place in line,"
Kimpan said.

 Prior to the change, the Energy Department and the Labor
Department split responsibilities under the law designed to help
people who are sick from their work at government nuclear
facilities, including at least five in Nevada including the
Yucca Mountain project, the Nevada Test Site and the Nevada
Operations Office also known as the North Las Vegas Facility are
eligible.

 Applicants must have a disease that may have been caused by a
toxic substance they were exposed to during their employment
such as asbestosis, liver disease or heavy metal poisoning.

 After reviewing an application, if determined the person
qualified for the program, the Energy Department forwarded it to
a physician's panel. If the panel approved the claim, the Energy
Department would not pay the worker any money but would assist
him or her in getting worker's compensation from the state.

 But an agreement between the state and the Energy Department
declared that a positive finding from the physician's panel had
no effect on the state's worker compensation decision and Nevada
state law requires a worker to have a "willing payor" to agree
to give them money for their illness.

 Under the new program, the money will come straight from the
federal government, eliminating the chance the contractor or
other company would not be willing to pay the claims.

 "For individual workers, it's momentous," said Nancy Ann
Leeder, Nevada's attorney for injured workers.
 Leeder represents workers in the state suing for compensation.
She said by not forcing workers to get money out of their former
employers but straight from the department will reduce
litigation.

 "I think its beneficial," Leeder said. "It won't be employers
arguing against workers anymore, at least theoretically."

 Lawmakers and the Government Accountability Office consistently
pointed to the Energy Department's slow progress in handling its
portion of the program. GAO estimated the Energy Department's
backlog of claims would take 13 years to complete.

 The department received about 25,000 applications and only had
completed around 6,000 claims. The department helped 31 workers
receive worker's compensation totaling $703,000 but no claims
were paid for 556 applicants from Nevada, according to the
department.

 Richard Miller with the Government Accountability Project, who
closely monitors the compensation process, called the previous
plan "a mouse inside the boa constrictor."

 "They didn't know what they were doing," Miller said of the
Energy Department.

 Kimpan said the Energy Department has no expertise in workers'
compensation claims processing but the Labor Department does.

 California resident Joyce Brooks filed for compensation three
years ago for her husband Carl Brooks. He was diagnosed with
pulmonary fibrosis in July 1999 and died six months later. He
had worked at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and
would travel to work at the Nevada Test Site, Joyce Brooks said.

 Carl Brooks worked with beryllium, and Joyce Brooks later
discovered he was never tested for beryllium disease, but
wondered if that triggered the illness that eventually killed
him.

 Some earlier claims were denied, but after combing through
medical records and old files herself, Joyce Brooks found some
new information and forwarded it to the department.

 "I wanted to find out what he passed away from, it took him so
fast," she said.

 She hopes the new process may lead to some payment for her
husband. Survivors of the former workers can still receive the
benefits.

 "It sounds more promising," she said. "It was kind of a promise
to my husband."

 The Energy Department will still assist in collecting
employment records to verify a person worked at a particular
site during a particular time, Kimpan said, but everything else
will be handled by the Labor Department.

 Under the Labor Department's control, there is no estimate yet
on how long it will take claims to go through the process, but
advocates for the change say it will be faster.

 The Labor Department already oversees a separate but related
part of the same compensation law that gives a $150,000 lump sum
payment and covers medical expenses for workers who contracted
chronic beryllium disease, silicosis or radiation-induced cancer
from work performed at the Nevada Test Site, the Yucca Mountain
Site Characterization Project and a long list of other
department sites across the country.

 Labor has received about 61,000 claims and made final decisions
on more than 35,000 of them, according to department data as of
Jan. 6. It has paid out just over $49 million in medical bills
and $980 million in compensation, including $13 million in
Nevada. 
         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 28 NRC: NRC Hearing Process on Pa. Irradiator Concludes
 
News Release - Region I - 2005-00 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 
COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, 
King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 No. I-05-004                          
January 11, 2005 CONTACT:     Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil 
A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331                     E-mail: 
opa1@nrc.gov  
  

A Nuclear Regulatory Commission judge has issued an order that
officially concludes the agencys hearing process for a Bucks
County, Pa., commercial irradiator. That action occurred after a
settlement was reached earlier between some residents who live
near the facility and the company that operates the irradiator,
and no other residents expressed an interest in pursuing
challenges of their own.
 
CFC Logistics, Inc., submitted an application to the NRC in
February 2003 for a license to operate an irradiator in Milford
Township, Pa. In response, a group of residents who live in
close proximity to the facility petitioned the NRC in June of
that year for a hearing on the validity of the application.
While a judge from the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
(ASLBP) was considering the request, the NRC staff issued an
operating license to the company on Aug. 27, 2003, after
performing a thorough review of its irradiator proposal. The
residents' motion for a stay of the effectiveness of that
license was denied by the judge on Sept. 23, 2003.
 
On Oct. 29, 2003, the Presiding Officer in the matter, Judge
Michael C. Farrar, found that at least three of the petitioners
had legal standing and that some of the safety issues they had
raised were germane to the proceeding. On that basis, they were
granted the right to an evidentiary hearing on whether the
license should remain in effect. A prehearing conference was
held on Dec. 11, 2003, in Quakertown, Pa.
 
After conferring with lawyers for the company and the residents,
Judge Farrar determined that neither side would be opposed to
settlement talks aimed at resolving the concerns. In line with
that development, an order was issued by the ASLBPs Chief
Administrative Judge in March of 2004 appointing an ASLBP judge
to conduct such discussions. That Settlement Judge, Paul
Abramson, met with the parties  both separately and together  on
numerous occasions over an extended period of time in an attempt
to reach an agreement satisfactory to both sides.
 
The talks resulted in a settlement agreement that the Presiding
Officer approved in an order issued on Nov. 4, 2004. Under the
agreement, two concerns raised by the residents were addressed:
(1) the company agreed to install a backup generator to provide
a continuous power supply for the pump which drives the air flow
through the chamber containing the irradiators radioactive
sources; and (2) the company agreed to install a light-beam
trip-switch that would trigger an audible and visual alarm if a
cask containing a replacement radioactive source was positioned
so that it would traverse sources already installed in the
irradiator. CFC Logistics stressed that it was making the
changes even though it did not believe they were needed for safe
operation of the facility. In exchange for the companys
concessions, some of the petitioners agreed to drop their
opposition to the irradiator license and to withdraw from the
case.
 
The settlement approval order offered the opportunity for other
petitioners who lived near the irradiator but who had not signed
the Settlement Agreement to pursue their challenges to the
irradiator license, with deadlines specified for their filings.
Those deadlines have now passed, with no additional filings
made. Therefore, the hearing process is now considered closed
and the Presiding Officer today formally terminated the
proceeding.
 
In the order terminating the proceeding, Judge Farrar noted the
work of both sides in the proceeding. Those who participated in
the negotiations have our appreciation for working diligently to
resolve the controversy between the company and the community in
which it is located, he said.
   



  


 	Last revised Tuesday, January 11, 2005 	
*****************************************************************
 29 Tri-City Herald: 100 sick worker cases being paid 

This story was published Wednesday, January 12th, 2005
 
By Annette Cary Herald staff writer 

Two months after taking over a troubled program to compensate
ill workers at Hanford and other nuclear sites, the Department
of Labor is ready to pay 100 workers or their survivors. 

The department expects to approve hundreds of additional claims
by May, said Labor Secretary Elaine Chao in a conference call to
reporters Tuesday. 

"Energy workers built the technology that won the Cold War,"
said Chao, choking with emotion. "The administration and all
Americans are grateful to the sacrifice of these workers and
their families." 

They deserve "quick and compassionate" compensation and the
Department of Labor is committed to offering that, she said.
 
Four years ago Congress approved a two-part compensation program
for nuclear workers made ill by workplace exposures. 

The first, administered by Labor officials, offered $250,000 and
medical care to Hanford workers who developed cancer from
exposure to radiation or a rare lung disease from exposure to
the metal beryllium. It's paid $17.8 million to Hanford and
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory workers, former workers or
their survivors. 

The second part of the program was administered by the
Department of Energy and made little progress. It paid benefits
for occupational injuries from exposure to toxic substances,
whether radiological, chemical or biological. DOE received about
$100 million to administer the program but paid just 100 claims
by fall. 

That compares to 12,800 claims paid by Department of Labor
nationwide by the end of 2004 at a cost of about $1 billion. 

Congress, upset by the slow progress made by the Department of
Energy, moved its part of the program to the Department of Labor
in early November. 

The Department of Labor already has paid claims in the two
months it has administered that part of the program, now called
Part E. Payments have been made to two widows of workers at the
Oak Ridge, Tenn., nuclear facility, and a widow at the Gaseous
Diffusion Plant in Paducah, Ky. 

The rest of the first 100 claims approved should be paid within
the next month, Chao said. 

The department is working to have regulations for the program
published in May. But in the meantime it has preliminary
procedures in place to pay the most straightforward claims. Not
only the first 100 claims but possibly several hundred more
claims could be ready to pay by then. 

However, that's out of a backlog of about 25,000 claims
accumulated by the Department of Energy. The Department of Labor
is keenly aware that workers have waited two or three years for
their claims to be processed, said Shelby Hallmark, director of
the office of Workers compensation program at the Department of
Labor. 

"We're going to work hard to see that claimants experience a
seamless transition," Chao said. 

The Department of Labor also plans to review claims dismissed by
DOE to make sure they were correctly handled. 

Part E will pay $125,000 to survivors if a covered condition
caused or contributed to the employee's death. In addition, if
an employee missed substantial periods of work before retirement
age, an additional $25,000 or $50,000 may be paid. 

Payments made before regulations are published in May are
expected to be the $125,000 lump sums. 

Benefits for employees are more complicated. They are eligible
for $2,500 for each 1 percent permanent impairment caused by
covered conditions. They will receive $15,000 for any year in
which they lost at least half their wages because of a covered
illness or $10,000 if they lost 25 percent to 50 percent of
their wages. 

More information can be found at www.dol.gov/esa on the
Internet. Click on "Energy" under the heading of "Office of
Workers Compensation Program." 

Claims continue to be accepted for both parts of the program.
Call the Hanford Resource Center in Richland at 946-3333 or
1-888-654-0014. 

In many cases claimants may qualify for compensation under both
parts of the program.
 
© 2005 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 30 SF Chronicle: U.S. to speed payouts on lab worker claims 
/ Cases of exposure at nuclear facilities stuck in backlog
 
Edward Epstein, Chronicle Washington Bureau Wednesday, 

January 12, 2005                                

Washington -- Labor Secretary Elaine Chao pledged Tuesday to 
expedite payments to thousands of people, including many in the 
Bay Area, who may have developed cancer or other serious diseases 
while working at nuclear weapons research facilities. 

The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program 
has been in existence for four years, but has been dogged by a 
slow-moving bureaucracy. Chao acknowledged that her department, 
which under legislation passed by Congress last year is taking 
over a key part of the program from the Energy Department, is 
trying to whittle a backlog of 25,000 claims from workers and 
their survivors. 

Some people, ill with cancers or berylliosis, a serious 
respiratory ailment caused by exposure to beryllium used to 
initiate chain reactions in nuclear weapons, have been waiting 
four years for their claims to be decided and their frustrations 
are mounting. 

The first three claims were paid in recent days to survivors of 
deceased workers in Tennessee and Kentucky under the revised 
program, Chao said, and hundreds more will be paid before final 
regulations are issued, probably in May. 

"American energy workers helped to build the technology that won 
the Cold War,'' Chao told reporters in a conference call. "Their 
sacrifices helped keep America free. They and their survivors 
deserve quick and compassionate compensation.'' 

Chao's resolve was welcomed by Inga Olson of the group Tri-Valley 
CAREs, (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) which has 
helped file claims with hundreds of workers from the Lawrence 
Livermore, Lawrence Berkeley and Sandia national labs and the 
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. 

"Those are positive signs -- that the Labor Department is paying 
some survivors. The people here in Livermore are hopeful that the 
new program will make a difference,'' she said. 

Over the past four years, the federal program has paid about $5.5 
million for about 40 cases at Lawrence Berkeley and Livermore 
labs, but no claims were paid at Sandia or Stanford. 

In all, federal records show about 2,300 claims were filed in the 
Bay Area. Many are still pending, including those held up while 
what are called exposure study dose reconstructions are carried 
out by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 

Those studies involve trying to figure out how much exposure 
workers making claims had to beryllium, uranium, plutonium or 
other dangerous substances. Authorities then estimate what 
percentage of the disease is attributable to work at the weapons 
facilities. 

But families complain that records are incomplete and that some 
workers have been shuttled among several facilities, even nuclear 
test sites. 

The slow-moving process has taken a toll on those who have fallen 
ill and their survivors. 

"I wanted to find out what caused my husband's death,'' said 
Joyce Brooks of Livermore. Her husband Carl Brooks, a 32-year 
worker at the Lawrence Livermore and Berkeley labs, died in 2000 
at age 69. He died of a lung disease she believes was caused by 
exposure to beryllium, although she has had a hard time nailing 
down that diagnosis because Carl Brooks didn't get certain blood 
tests that would allow for a definitive medical opinion. 

Working with a specialist at the University of Iowa medical 
school, Joyce Brooks, is trying to convince the Labor Department 
to pay her a survivor's benefit that could be worth $125,000. The 
latest step was a letter she received recently from the 
department saying her claim met two of three criteria needed for 
acceptance. 

Labor Department analysts in Seattle are reviewing her latest 
evidence, raising Brooks' hope that her 4-year-old claim will 
finally be paid. 

"When you die at 69, it's too early. I felt we should have had at 
least 10 more years together. I just want them to admit what 
caused his death,'' said Brooks, 72, the mother of five and 
grandmother of nine. 

The paperwork and frustrations involved in filing a claim can 
discourage many potential claimants. To help them, the Labor 
Department opened a center in Livermore last year to assist in 
filling out forms and getting the needed medical information 
after lobbying by Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Walnut Creek, and Sen. 
Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. 

Tauscher, whose district includes the Livermore and Sandia labs, 
said, "I have long sought legislative solutions that would reduce 
the exhausting delays in awarding assistance to employees who 
became ill while serving our nation's energy infrastructure and I 
appreciate Secretary Chao's commitment to achieve that goal.'' 

Olson of Tri-Valley CAREs said the center is encouraging more 
people to come forward, but others still won't do it. 

"Some workers are not applying because it's just too much work. 
They're working on living and dealing with their diseases,'' she 
said. 

Claims center 

The Labor Department center for help in filing claims can be 
reached at (925) 606-6302. 

E-mail Edward Epstein at eepstein@sfchronicle.com. 				

*****************************************************************
 31 MSNBC: Russian study links rocket fuel, health woes

  Unpublished report sees impact on children near space launch 
site  
    
  A Russian-built Proton rocket lifts off from the Baikonur 
Cosmodrome in July 2000, carrying the Zvezda service module for 
the international space station.   

  By Robert Roy BrittSenior science writerUpdated: 4:40 p.m. ET

Jan. 12, 2005

A new study out of Russia says that children in some areas near 
Kazakhstan's Baikonur Cosmodrome are twice as likely to require 
medical attention as other children in the region.

According to an unpublished report, the cause of illness is 
believed to be highly toxic fuel from spent rocket stages that 
spills onto the sparsely population region. Baikonur is where 
Russia's space agency conducts a majority of its space launches. 
The report was revealed today in the journal Nature.

The announcement follows the release this week of a separate 
study of the risk here in the United States of perchlorate, a 
rocket-fuel component known to be health-threatening. The 
chemical has been found in the drinking water of at least 11 
million U.S. residents. Traces of perchlorate have also been 
found in lettuce and milk.

The Russian study was done by Vector, the State Research Center 
of Virology and Biotechnology. The researchers examined health 
records from 1998 to 2000 of 1,000 children in two polluted 
areas, along with the records of 330 children in a nearby 
unpolluted area.

The study is controversial even before it has been officially 
released.

Baikonur is a significant revenue source for the Russian 
government, the journal notes, estimating that profit from a 
single commercial launch may be as high as $25 million. The 
spaceport is critical to NASA, too. It is the only place from 
which supplies and crews headed for the International Space 
Station can be lofted into orbit while the U.S. shuttle fleet is 
grounded. NASA and the European Space Agency both contract with 
their Russian counterpart to use Baikonur.

The Russian government has rejected the results of the study 
while medical experts elsewhere say they have not had a chance to 
judge its validity. 

U.S. tried to bury pollutant study, group says

U.S. contamination

While NASA uses its Florida-based Cape Canaveral facility to 
launch rockets out over the sea rather than over populated areas, 
the United States is not free of Space Age contamination.

A study in 2003 found that lettuce grown in parts of the western 
United States were tainted with perchlorate, the main component 
of rocket fuel and missile propellant. It is in the drinking 
water of between 11 million and 20 million people in several 
states, various studies conclude.
z Among contaminated sources is the Colorado River, which 
provides water to Los Angeles, Phoenix and Las Vegas and is used 
to irrigate 70 percent of the nation's lettuce crops, according 
to the Environmental Working Group, which performed the 2003 
study in cooperation with scientists at Texas Tech University.

Most of the perchlorate in U.S. water comes from military bases 
or plants operated by federal defense contractors, the study's 
scientists said. Perchlorate is also a component of fireworks.

In excess quantities, perchlorate is thought to disrupt the 
production of hormones and, in fetuses, potentially cause mental 
retardation, loss of hearing and speech, and motor skill 
deficits. In adults, high doses can disrupt the function of the 
thyroid gland.

Another study by the Environmental Working Group found 
perchlorate levels in milk ranging from 1.7 to 6.4 parts per 
billion. The group has urged state and federal agencies to 
consider stricter procedures to measure and control the 
contamination.

New research A follow-up study in 2004 by the Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA) found traces of perchlorate in bottled water 
at retail stores, in milk across the country, and in lettuce 
tested in several states. FDA officials said there is no cause 
for alarm, and that further study was needed to determine just 
how toxic the chemical is.
z "The scope of the data is too limited" for any conclusions to 
be drawn, according to an FDA statement, which advised: "Until 
more is known about the health effects of perchlorate and its 
occurrence in foods, FDA continues to recommend that consumers 
eat a balanced diet."

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 
perchlorate is present in the drinking water of 11 million 
Americans at concentrations of 4 parts per billion or higher. In 
an effort to determine acceptable limits of perchlorate 
consumption, the EPA set a "daily reference dose" of 0.00003 
milligrams per kilogram of body weight, which the agency said 
would correspond to a drinking-water concentration of 1 part per 
billion based on assumptions about body weight and daily water 
consumption.

An new study of perchlorate risk, just released by the National 
Academies' National Research Council (NRC) on Monday, suggests 
doses up to 20 times higher may be acceptable. 

"Daily ingestion of up to 0.0007 milligrams per kilogram of body 
weight can occur without adversely affecting the health of even 
the most sensitive populations," the NRC report concludes.

The NRC researchers, scientists from various institutions and 
fields of expertise, drew on past studies in which patients have 
been administered perchlorate, ironically to treat thyroid 
conditions. 

"A few patients had serious adverse reactions," the NRC states, 
but more recently "patients with hyperthyroidism have been 
treated effectively and safely with moderate doses of perchlorate 
for up to two years."

A perchlorate dose of more than 0.4 milligrams per kilogram per 
day would be required "to adversely affect thyroid hormone 
production and cause hypothyroidism," the study concludes. 
"However, the dose required to cause hypothyroidism in pregnant 
women, infants, children, and people with low iodide intake or 
pre-existing thyroid dysfunction might be lower."

Lauren Sucher, a spokesperson for the Environmental Working 
Group, said in a telephone interview today that the EPA will have 
to consider other factors in setting a drinking water standard, 
however. Babies, for example, are at higher risk due in part to 
their lower body weight.

"Once the EPA takes into account childrens' and babies' exposure 
to this rocket fuel component and figures in food exposure, they 
should reach a much lower drinking water standard," Sucher told 
SPACE.com. 

Confusion near Baikonur

Near Baikonur, a variety of illnesses were noted.

The level of some blood and endocrine, or gland disorders in 
polluted areas is more than twice the regional average. But 
experts outside Russia who have seen the study can't verify how 
the data was collected. "They say that although such results 
should be regarded with caution, given the sometimes disorganized 
state of the country's medical records, the problem deserves 
international attention," the journal states.

The study was led by epidemiologist Sergey Zykov, who said it 
confirms pollution fears raised by environmental groups. Zykov 
said Russian space agency officials had a "negative attitude" to 
studies from outside the agency. Another scientist who has 
campaigned against launches alleges to have been harassed by 
security officials, the journal article said.

Nature confronted Russian officials, who admit there's pollution 
but "rejected the conclusions of Zykov's study."

There are other complexities.

Valerie Beral, an epidemiologist at Cancer Research UK in Oxford, 
said some studies of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident produced 
conclusions that could not be replicated by other scientists. In 
some cases, Russian researchers have been accused of releasing 
alarming findings to attract funding from the West.

In an editorial, the journal said "ESA and NASA use Baikonur,
but neither they nor the Russian administrators of the base seem
overly concerned about the population." Further study is needed,
the editorial urged, and ESA and NASA should contribute to
financing it.

Â© 2005 Space.com. All rights reserved. .

*****************************************************************
 32 NRC: NRC Extends Opportunity to Request Use of New Standard for Addressing Existing Fire
Protection Issues

News Release - 2005-00 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office 
of Public Affairs     Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 
20555-0001     E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 05-009     January 12, 
2005   
  

  
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has extended, to Dec. 31,
2005, the date for nuclear power plant operators to request use
of a new, optional fire protection standard to resolve existing
issues with a plants fire protection plans. 

The new standard, which focuses resources on issues of the
greatest risk significance, was announced in July 2004 and is
described in a press release on the NRCs Web site at this
address:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2004/04-076.ht
ml. Nuclear power plant operators originally had until Jan. 16
to request the new standard be applied to existing issues.
 
The NRC concluded the extension protects public health and
safety, since nuclear plant operators must have the means to
compensate for any existing problems to be dealt with under the
standard, said Sunil Weerakkody, Chief of the Fire Protection
Engineering Section in the NRCs Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
 
The Nuclear Energy Institute asked the NRC, in July 2004, to
extend the deadline to Dec. 31 to allow for adequate planning
and budgeting by plant operators. NRC staff considered possible
safety implications, the need to start bringing fire-protection
issues to closure, and other factors before agreeing to the
extension.
 
The NRCs decision, and a companion Enforcement Policy revision,
are outlined in a Federal Register notice, to be published
shortly. The revised policy will be available on the NRC Web
site at this address:
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/enforcement/enforc-pol.p
df [PDF Icon] . The NRCs Public Document Room (phone
800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737) can help interested persons obtain
these materials.
   



  


 	Last revised Wednesday, January 12, 2005 	
*****************************************************************
 33 NA: Report assesses health implications of perchlorate exposure -
                   
National Academies advisory
 
12 Jan 2005[ align=] 

Washington - A new report by the National Academies' National
Research Council on the health effects of perchlorate, a
chemical that in high doses can decrease thyroid function in
humans and that is present in many public drinking-water
supplies, says daily ingestion of up to 0.0007 milligrams per
kilogram of body weight can occur without adversely affecting
the health of even the most sensitive populations. That amount
is more than 20 times the "reference dose" proposed by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency in a recent draft risk
assessment. 

Environmental releases of perchlorate -- a component of rocket
fuel and fireworks -- have been discovered in 35 states, and
more than 11 million people have perchlorate in their drinking
water at concentrations of 4 parts per billion or higher. As it
considers a first-ever national standard for acceptable levels
of perchlorate in drinking water, EPA has issued a series of
draft risk assessments, each containing a reference dose upon
which a standard could be based. Controversies over the
scientific conclusions reached in the risk assessments, however,
led the federal government to request that the National Research
Council review the issue. 

The most recent EPA risk assessment, published in 2002, proposes
a daily reference dose of 0.00003 milligrams per kilogram
(mg/kg) of body weight, which the agency said would correspond
to a drinking-water concentration of 1 part per billion based on
certain assumptions about body weight and daily water
consumption. The committee that wrote the Research Council
report did not include a corresponding drinking-water
concentration with its reference dose because the assumptions
that are used to derive drinking-water standards involve
public-policy choices that were beyond the committee's charge. 

Perchlorate inhibits the thyroid's uptake of iodide, which is
essential for the production of thyroid hormones. One potential
consequence of that effect is low thyroid hormone production, or
hypothyroidism. EPA has predicted that an ultimate consequence
of that effect is the development of thyroid tumors -- a
conclusion the agency based on the occurrence of a few thyroid
tumors in rats exposed to perchlorate. The committee disagrees
with EPA's conclusion and thinks that perchlorate exposure is
unlikely to lead to thyroid tumors in humans. Humans are much
less susceptible to disruption of thyroid function or formation
of thyroid tumors than rats, and therefore the way rats
responded to perchlorate exposure is not a good indicator of how
humans would react. 

In the past, high doses of perchlorate were used to treat
patients with hyperthyroidism, or excessive thyroid hormone
production, but a few patients had serious adverse reactions,
and the use of perchlorate in this manner was largely abandoned.
More recently, patients with hyperthyroidismhave been treated
effectively and safely with moderate doses of perchlorate for up
to two years. Perchlorate has been administered to healthy
subjects in doses ranging from 0.007 mg/kg to 9.2 mg/kg per day
with no changes in thyroid hormone production to suggest any
adverse effect on thyroid function. On the basis of these and
other studies, the committee concluded that a perchlorate dose
of more than 0.4 mg/kg per day would be required to adversely
affect thyroid hormone production and cause hypothyroidism.
However, the dose required to cause hypothyroidism in pregnant
women, infants, children, and people with low iodide intake or
pre-existing thyroid dysfunction might be lower. 

There have been studies on the health effects of human
populations exposed to perchlorate, but they were studies in
which data were available for geographic areas, not for
individuals. Relationships observed at the geographic level may
not apply at the individual level, and therefore such studies
cannot provide direct evidence of causation. They can support a
possible association between two events, however, which allowed
the committee to reach some conclusions based on those studies.
In particular, the committee found that the available evidence
is not consistent with an association between exposure to
perchlorate in the drinking water at concentrations up to 120
parts per billion during pregnancy and changes in thyroid
hormone production in normal-birth weight, full-term newborn
infants. The evidence is insufficient to determine whether or
not there is an association between perchlorate exposure and
adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in children. 

Because of the weaknesses in the studies of the health effects
in human populations exposed to perchlorate in the environment,
the committee recommended against using them to determine a
reference dose. Rather, it recommended using a 2002 clinical
study in which groups of healthy men and women were administered
perchlorate in daily doses ranging from 0.007 mg/kg to 0.5 mg/kg
for 14 days. The study found no statistically significant
inhibition of iodide uptake by the thyroid at the 0.007 mg/kg
daily dose. The findings in this study are supported by the
results in four other studies of healthy subjects, including a
six-month study. The committee recommended that an uncertainty
factor of 10 be applied to the 0.007 mg/kg per day level to
protect the fetuses of pregnant women who might have
hypothyroidism or iodide deficiency. This results in the 0.0007
mg/kg per day reference dose recommended in the report. 

One committee member, concerned over the adequacy of the data,
dissented and thought that an additional uncertainty factor of
three should be applied. The rest of the 15-member committee
responded by pointing out that the key study examined the
effects of four dose levels in a total of 37 subjects, and that
four other studies had remarkably similar results. The committee
was unanimous in all other findings and recommendations. 

The committee emphasized that the reference dose should be based
on inhibition of iodide uptake by the thyroid in humans, which
is not an adverse effect but the key biochemical event that
precedes any health effects caused by perchlorate exposure. The
committee called this a "conservative, health-protective
approach to perchlorate risk assessment." It also suggested
studies that have the potential to more precisely define "safe"
perchlorate exposures. Future findings could result in the need
to adjust the reference dose recommended in the report, the
committee acknowledged. 

The study was sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of
Energy, and NASA. The National Research Council is the principal
operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences and the
National Academy of Engineering. It is a private, nonprofit
institution that provides science and technology advice under a
congressional charter. A committee roster follows. 

Copies of Health Implications of Perchlorate Ingestion will be
available later this winter from the National Academies Press;
tel. 202-334-3313 or 1-800-624-6242 or on the Internet at
http://www.nap.edu. Reporters may obtain a pre-publication copy
from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed
above). 

[ This news release and report are available at
http://national-academies.org] 

Contacts: Bill Kearney, Director of Media Relations 
Maureen O'Leary, Director of Broadcast and Special Projects 
Megan Petty, Media Relations Assistant 
Office of News and Public Information 
202-334-2138; e-mail news@nas.edu 

National Research Council 
Division on Earth and Life Studies 
Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology and Institute of
Medicine 
Board on Health Sciences Policy 

Committee to Assess the Health Implications of Perchlorate
Ingestion 

Richard B. Johnston Jr., M.D. (chair) Associate Dean Research
Development; 
Professor Department of Pediatrics 
University of Colorado School of Medicine; and Executive Vice
President for Academic Affairs National Jewish Medical and
Research Center 
Denver 

Stacy Branch, D.V.M., Ph.D. 
Consultant and Owner 
Djehuty Biomed Consulting; and 
Adjunct Associate Professor Department of Animal Science 
School of Agriculture and Environmental Science 
North Carolina Agricultural and Technical University 
Clayton 

Gregory Brent, M.D. 
Professor of Medicine and Physiology 
David Geffen School of Medicine 
University of California, Los Angeles; 
Chief 
Endocrinology and DiabetesSection; and Director of Fellowship
Program 
Endocrinology, Metabolism, and Diabetes Section 
VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System 
Los Angeles 

Rosalind Brown, M.D. 
Director of Clinical Trials Research 
Endocrine Division 
Children's Hospital 
Boston 

Charles C. Capen, D.V.M., Ph.D. 
Distinguished University Professor 
Ohio State University 
Columbus 
David Cooper, M.D. 
Professor of Medicine - Endocrinology 
Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; 
Professor of International Health 
Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health; 
Director Thyroid Clinic 
Johns Hopkins Hospital; and 
Director Division of Endocrinology 
Sinai Hospital of Baltimore 
Baltimore 

Richard Corley, Ph.D. 
Staff Scientist, Biomonitoring and Biological Modeling Group 
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 
Richland, Wash. 

Linda D. Cowan, Ph.D. 
George Lynn Cross Research Professor 
Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology 
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center 
Oklahoma City 

James C. Lamb IV, Ph.D., J.D. 
Senior Vice President 
The Weinburg Group, Inc. 
Washington, D.C. 

George Lambert, M.D. 
Director 
Center for Childhood Neurotoxicology and Exposure Assessment
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute 
Rutgers University 
Piscataway 

R. Michael McClain, Ph.D. 
Toxicology Consultant McClain Associates; and Adjunct Professor 
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute 
University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey 
Randolph 

Susan L. Schantz, Ph.D. 
Professor of Toxicology 
University of Illinois 
Urbana-Champaign 

Dalene Stangl, Ph.D. 
Director 
Institute of Statistics and Decision Sciences, and Professor of
Statistics and Public Policy 
Duke University 
Durham, N.C. 

Lynette Stokes, M.P.H., Ph.D. 
Chief 
Bureau of Hazardous Material and Toxic Substances 
Environmental Health Administration 
Department of Health 
Washington, D.C. 

Robert D. Utiger, M.D. 
Clinical Professor of Medicine 
Harvard University School of Medicine 
Boston 

STAFF 
Ellen Mantus, Ph.D. Study Director 

Contact: Bill Kearney
 news@nas.edu
 The National Academies

*****************************************************************
 34 Paducah Sun: Paducah sick worker
 
http://www.paducahsun.com

Sick-worker case backlog means 6-month pay delay 
By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com 270.575.8656 

Wednesday, January 12, 2005 

Labor Secretary Elaine Chao says it will take her staff until
May to make preparations for the 25,000 backlogged claims. 
It will be midyear before disabled Paducah Gaseous Diffusion
Plant workers start being compensated for diseases related to
toxic exposure, the U.S. Labor Department says. 

That's because the department will not have regulations and
resources in place until late May to process the bulk of 25,000
claims backlogged nationwide — many for as long as four years —
under a program that had been handled by the Department of
Energy. 

Labor Secretary Elaine Chao could not estimate how long it will
take to work through the backlog but said her agency will do its
best. The Labor Department is hiring 200 more claims examiners,
either directly or by contract, to absorb the load. 

"These workers were harmed in service to our country, and
compensation to them and their families is long overdue," Chao
said. "We are working very hard to ensure that this program is
up and running as quickly as possible and that these workers
receive the compensation they are due." 

Chao and Shelby Hallmark, who heads the program, held a media
teleconference Tuesday to provide an update and answer
questions. The Labor Department took over the program in October
by an act of Congress. 

Among other things, the Labor Department pays survivors a flat
$125,000 if a worker died of a covered condition. If an employee
lost work before dying, compensation increases to $150,000 or
$175,000, depending on extent of lost wages. 

Hallmark said there about 1,000 of those cases nationwide,
including about 100 that have been approved and will be paid
within a month. Three checks have been issued so far: one to
Lera "Ernestine" Cloyes of Ashland, widow of Paducah nuclear
worker James Cloyes, and two to women in Oak Ridge, Tenn. 

For the remaining cases — those of living workers who suffered
disabilities and wage losses — regulations must be in place to
calculate the level of compensation. Fortunately, about 90
percent of those also involve claims filed under a separate
program paying $150,000 for workers with radiation-induced
cancer, chronic beryllium disease and silicosis, Hallmark said. 

"That does give us a leg up because our claims processors in the
four district offices are familiar with the cases," he said. In
some instances, claims personnel may have medical records for
the same condition that prompted a claim under both programs,
Hallmark said. 

The new program establishes a $250,000 payment cap, which means
total maximum compensation is now $400,000 under both programs.
Positive findings under the cancer program are accepted under
the toxic-exposure program for the same illnesses. 

As of Jan. 3, the Labor Department had paid $173.4 million on
behalf of 1,157 Paducah nuclear workers for radiation-induced
cancers or beryllium disease. Another 999 had been referred to
the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health to
determine if there was a link between exposure and disease. 

Most of the claims denied under the cancer/beryllium disease
program were because they were filed under both the Labor and
Energy departments for the same condition, Hallmark said, adding
that the Labor Department is reviewing those. He said 1,905
Paducah cases have been denied out of 4,433 filed. 

It is too early to determine the backlog under the
toxic-exposure program in individual cities like Paducah,
Hallmark said, but the Labor Department is working to clarify
the numbers. 

Leon Owens of the local nuclear workers' union said NIOSH
officials have agreed to meet at 10 a.m. Feb. 10 with current
and former employees to discuss an exposure profile of the
Paducah plant. He said the meeting is tentatively planned for
the Robert Cherry Civic Center to provide adequate parking. A
similar meeting is being arranged for Feb. 11 for construction
tradesmen who have worked at the plant over the years, Owens
said. 

Although the plant profile was for radiation exposure only,
workers think it should be expanded to cover work areas and
toxins to help speed up claims under the new program, Owens
said. Another concern is that the profile relies heavily on
exposure data from the Energy Department, which was spotty until
recent years. 

NIOSH spokesman Fred Blosser encouraged those who have concerns
about site profiles to contact the agency at 513-533-6800 or by
e-mail at ocas@cdc.gov. 

He said NIOSH is involved only with the program for
radiation-induced cancer and beryllium disease, not the
toxic-exposure program. There are about 11,000 radiation
exposure reconstructions pending nationwide, partly because
NIOSH was understaffed in earlier years and also has had trouble
getting old Energy Department records. 

"We've staffed up and consequently increased the rate of doing
the work," Blosser said. "To date, we've processed 6,243 cases." 
Claims may be filed at the Paducah Energy Employees Compensation
Resource Center, 125 Memorial Drive, next to Milner & Orr
Funeral Home off Blandville Road. Phone: 534-0599 or toll-free
866-534-0599. E-mail: paducah.center@eh.doe.gov. 

*****************************************************************
 35 [NukeNet] Laser Enrichment
 
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:24:18 -0800

 
<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)


Greetings everyone.

Thats great news about the Laser seperation process in America, I hope that 
we can put an end to it in Australia also.

For those who don't know about this program in Australia I am attaching a 
PDF doc (soory kind of large) that was put out by Greenpeace.


http://www.greenpeace.org.au/frontpage/pdf/silex_report.pdf

I am also hoping to talk about this when I come to America in March to join 
the International Peace Walk from Y-12 to the NPT.


Peace
Marcus Atkinson



Check out the International Peace Pilgrimage homepage.
www.peacepilgrimage.net


_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 36 [us-water-network] Panel contends perchlorate safer than EPA
 
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 01:31:17 -0600 (CST)

 
US Water Network <us-water-network@iatp.org> -- posted by
svarghese@iatp.org
============================================================ Panel
contends perchlorate safer than EPA standard!!

By Kim McGuire Denver Post Staff Writer <mailto:kmcguire@denverpost.com>

A toxic chemical used in rocket fuel and explosives and found at
three Colorado sites is safe for consumption at levels 20 times
greater than federal regulators currently allow, a panel of scientists
said Monday.

In a National Academies of Sciences report that could lead to new
drinking water standards and trigger costly cleanups at military
installations, researchers concluded that perchlorate can be consumed
at levels considerably higher than that proposed by the Environmental
Protection Agency.

But the panel, chaired by a Denver physician, stopped short of
recommending safe drinking water levels for perchlorate, saying the
highly politicized issue wasn't within its purview.

"We can't comment on water levels because it's going to vary from
place to place," said Dr. Richard Johnston Jr., the committee's
chairman and an associate dean at the University of Colorado School
of Medicine.

Several  environmental groups immediately assailed the panel's
findings, charging that the Pentagon, which has argued for weaker
standards, influenced the report.

"We've never seen such a brazen campaign to pressure the National
Academies of Sciences to downplay the hazards of a chemical, but
it fits the pattern of this administration - manipulating science
at the expense of public health," said Erik Olson, a Natural Resources
Defense Council attorney.

Academy scientists estimated that more than 11 million people in
the U.S. drink water tainted with perchlorate, which interferes
with normal thyroid function. EPA studies have found that even small
doses of perchlorate in drinking water increase the risk of thyroid
problems in fetuses and infants.

In 2002, federal environmental regulators suggested that 1 part per
billion - equivalent of a half-teaspoon in an Olympic-size swimming
pool - was an acceptable limit.

But the Pentagon argued that the EPA's studies were scientifically
flawed, saying drinking water standards could be set at levels 200
times higher.

While the NAS report didn't adopt a drinking water standard, it did
recommend a safe exposure limit equal to about 20 parts per billion.

Perchlorate has been found 35 states - just about anywhere rockets
and explosives were ever tested or made. It has also been found in
vegetables irrigated with water from the Colorado River, which has
been contaminated by a Nevada manufacturing facility.

In Colorado, state health officials have known about perchlorate
contamination at the Pueblo Army Depot for several years. More
recently, perchlorate was found at DuPont's former Louviers
explosives-manufacturing facility in Douglas County and at a nearby
mineral processing plant.

Like most states, Colorado currently does not have a drinking water
standard for perchlorate. State officials say they have been awaiting
the NAS report for guidance on the issue.

"Perchlorate is another example of an emerging contaminant," said
Gary Baughman, the state health department's director of hazardous
materials and waste management division. "We have had discussions
about it on a national level and have been very anxious to read
this this report."

EPA officials had no immediate comment but have said they will
likely set pollution limits on perchlorate by 2006.

Staff writer Kim McGuire can be reached at 303-820-1240 or
kmcguire@denverpost.com.

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2646351,00.html

============================================================ View
the ARCHIVES of this list at:

http://216.43.125.72/listarchive/

For help with listserv SUBSCRIPTIONS visit:

http://216.43.125.72/listarchive/subscriptions.cfm

Questions, comments, concerns? Email us: support@iatp.org
*****************************************************************
 37 Hearings on rad waste; Exelon Nuclear face lift
 
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:27:34 -0800

 
<x-flowed>
N E W S R E L E A S E COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Department of Environmental Protection
Commonwealth News Bureau
Room 308, Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg, PA 17120


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
1/12/2005
CONTACT:
Ron Ruman
Phone: (717) 787-1323


DEP TO HOLD MEETING, HEARING ON ALARON¹S PROPOSED EXPANSION IN LAWRENCE
COUNTY

Events Mark Latest in Series of Ongoing Efforts by DEP to Give Residents
Opportunities to Comment on Plans for Expanded Waste Treatment Plant





HARRISBURG: Environmental Protection Deputy Secretary for Air, Recycling and
Radiation Protection Thomas Fidler today announced that DEP will hold a
public meeting and hearing on Alaron Corp¹s application to include the
processing of mixed hazardous and low-level radioactive waste, commonly
called mixed waste, among the treatment services it offers at its Lawrence
County facility.

The informational meeting will be held from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. Tuesday, Jan.
18 at the New Beaver Borough Building, 778 Wampum-New Galilee Road. This
meeting will be followed immediately by a public hearing from 7 p.m to 9
p.m. at the same site. One public meeting was held already in early
December.

Alaron Corp. currently is engaged in the treatment and decontamination of
low-level radioactive materials and waste under a license from the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, and the company will continue to operate that portion
of the business.

Alaron Corp. is seeking a hazardous waste permit to process paper, rags,
plastic, glass, floor sweepings and other materials that are contaminated
with solvents, oils and other fluids that cause the waste to be classified
as hazardous and low-level radioactive wastes. The process the company
proposes involves stabilizing and reducing the volume of the waste by
compaction under extreme pressure, and preparing it for disposal at
out-of-state disposal facilities.

Alaron¹s only client is the U.S. Department of Energy, which retains
responsibility for the transportation, treatment and disposal of the
material.

The mixed waste, which comes from government facilities, has been difficult
to dispose of because authorized disposal facilities can accept only limited
volumes and forms of this material. As a result, there are large amounts of
mixed waste at federal government sites awaiting proper treatment and
disposal. The mixed waste is classified as Class A low-level radioactive
waste, the least radioactive class.

At the Jan. 18 public meeting, DEP will describe the application review
process and siting criteria. The meeting will include time for public
questions on the permitting process and the Phase I Commercial Hazardous
Waste Treatment Facility Siting Application. General information about the
application and permit review process will be available prior to the
meeting, similar to what DEP sponsored Dec. 7.

During the public hearing from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., DEP will take public
testimony on the Phase I application. To reserve time to testify at this
hearing, contact DEP Community Relations Coordinator Freda Tarbell at
814-332-6848.

DEP will accept written comments on the application until Feb. 4. Written
comments should be sent to: Hazardous Waste Facility Siting Team Leader,
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, P.O. Box 8471,
Harrisburg, PA 17105-8471. Comments also may be submitted electronically at
EPHazWasteSitingTeam@state.pa.us.

Copies of the Phase I application are available for review or copying
between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. at the following locations:

·    DEP¹s Northwest Regional Office, 230 Chestnut St., Meadville;
814-332-6848.

·    DEP¹s Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management, Division of
Hazardous Waste Management, 14th Floor Rachel Carson State Office Building,
400 Market St., Harrisburg; 717-787-6239.

·    Alaron Corp., 2138 State Route 18, Wampum; 724-535-5777.

It is advisable to call ahead for an appointment to review and copy to
ensure proper assistance. DEP may charge a fee for copying.

³DEP wants to ensure the public and local government with every opportunity
to offer input,² Fidler said. ³This application will be thoroughly reviewed
at the local, state, and federal levels before any permits are issued.²

For more information on hazardous waste, visit DEP¹s main Web site at
www.dep.state.pa.us.


# # #
2005

Return to Main News Releases Page.


Individuals & Families | Students | Educators | Farmers | Local Government |
Business
PA Home Site | Ask DEP | Plug-Ins | Home Page



Contact Webmaster





</x-flowed>

Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\Nuclear face lift.pdf"
*****************************************************************
 38 PCNH: Brush Wellman reaches $276,289 settlement with Ohio EPA -
                    
portclintonnewsherald.com
 
Wednesday, January 12, 2005   

 Air pollution violations at Elmore plant
 
News Herald reports 
  
The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency has reached a $276,289
settlement with Brush Wellman Inc. to resolve air pollution
violations that occurred at its Elmore facility. 

The violations, which occurred on various dates between 1980 and
2004, included failure to monitor and/or record various
information associated with operation of the air pollution
control equipment as well as lost data logs. These monitoring
and record-keeping procedures are required in order to ensure
that emission control equipment is operating properly. 

The company manufactures beryllium-containing products for
electrical, mechanical and aerospace uses. 

According to a news release from the EPA, the company also
failed to evaluate emissions from equipment that processes
beryllium fluoride by the required date. A rotary calciner
processes the bulk solid materials at medium-to-high
temperatures. EPA says the company violated federal air quality
rules by not disclosing carbon monoxide emissions greater than
250 tons per year when seeking a permit for its arc furnace. 

Brush Wellman also failed to address nitrogen oxide emissions
and obtain a permit-to-install for the copper-beryllium coil
strip pickling line under federal rules. The pickling line used
a chemical bath to clean the metal. 

Brush Wellman has corrected the pressure drop and flow rate
violations and provided additional information to Ohio EPA in
order to obtain the proper permit-to-install for the arc
furnace. The company has permanently shut down the pickling
line. 

The company will pay a $256,289 penalty to Ohio EPA. Half of the
EPA penalty goes to the Ohio Environmental Education Fund and
the other half to administer air pollution control programs, as
required by state law. 

The remaining $20,000 of the settlement will be paid to the Ohio
Department of Natural Resources Division of Forestry to fund
urban-area tree planting. 

The Elmore area plant is located at 14710 W. Portage River South
Road. 

Originally published Wednesday, January 12, 2005
 
 Copyright ©2004 News Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 39 UPI: Russian nuclear fuel worries Japan - 

(United Press International)
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
  January 12, 2005 			   

Tokyo, Japan, Jan. 12 (UPI) -- Russia has been using a Soviet-era 
ship to transport spent nuclear fuel through the Sea of Japan, 
raising concerns about radioactive contamination. 

Japanese nuclear experts fear the vessel and its containers are 
not up to international standards, Asahi Shimbun reported 
Wednesday.

 Despite the risks involved, Moscow is not obliged to inform 
Tokyo of such shipments. 

However, Russian authorities provided a map of the ship's route, 
for the first time, to the Japan Atomic Industrial Forum in 
autumn 2003. 

The spent fuel is taken from dismantled nuclear-powered 
submarines at a plant on the Kamchatka Peninsula in Russia's Far 
East. It is then loaded on a ship which passes through La Pérouse 
Strait between Japan's Hokkaido Island and Russia's Sakhalin 
Island. 

The ship crosses the Sea of Japan and docks at the Russian port 
of Vladivostok to keep the fuel at a nearby temporary storage 
facility. From there, the fuel is carried by train to 
reprocessing plants.

 A researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences said Moscow has 
no other route to get the spent nuclear fuel to the railway 
network. But even Russian scientists are concerned about possible 
hazards of transporting such a dangerous cargo by sea, the 
Russian researcher said. 

[UPI Perspectives]                                                                    
*****************************************************************
 40 Las Vegas RJ: EDITORIAL: An encouraging report
 
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
 
Study concludes perchlorate level in Lake Mead not a threat

A new report from the National Academy of Sciences concludes
perchlorate exposure may be safe at 20 times the level
previously set by the Environmental Protection Agency. 

Mind you, no one is saying that drinking rocket fuel is a good
idea. The panel still recommends pregnant women, particularly,
avoid water with even trace amounts of perchlorate, and take
iodine supplements if exposed. 

But at least the new study -- commissioned by the Pentagon, the
Department of Energy, NASA and the EPA -- starts to introduce
some science to the question of how concerned Las Vegans should
be about this industrial chemical leaching into Lake Mead from
old industrial sites once occupied by chemical manufacturers
Kerr-McGee and American Pacific. 

Ongoing cleanup efforts -- which are expected to continue for 20
years -- have so far reduced the amount of perchlorate
detectable in Lake Mead by about half, according to Todd Croft,
who's supervising the cleanup procedure for the state Division
of Environmental Protection. Current levels in the lake measure
about 4.2 parts per billion at last measurement -- higher than
the 1 part per billion previously sought by the EPA, but
considerably lower than the safe level recommended by the new
report. 

(One part per billion amounts to half a teaspoon of salt
dissolved in an Olympic-size swimming pool.) 

Several toxicologists told the Los Angeles Times that the study
would likely result in the federal government setting a number
between 2 and 6 parts per billion as the maximum allowable
amount of perchlorate in drinking water -- meaning clean-up
efforts at Lake Mead will obviously have to continue, as they
should. 

But while "safety first" is always a good starting point, there
has been a tendency in the past to establish "safe" limits of
sundry toxins at the low end of the scale that can be measured.
As more sensitive measuring technologies came online, "safe"
levels were lowered without regard to new science -- or to the
cost of attempting to reach these new levels. 

In a world of limited resources, millions of dollars spent to
lower exposures to infinitesimal levels -- sometimes below the
natural rate at which they occur in foods or the environment --
are dollars that can't be spent on more valuable pursuits. 

The new study should reduce public alarm, but this should by no
means be the end of the matter. Scientists of good conscience
can still differ on the interpretation of small sets of data.
Research should continue.
 
 

Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
 41 Las Vegas SUN: Administration asked opinion on nuke waste case

January 11, 2005 
 
By Benjamin Grove <grove@lasvegassun.com> LAS VEGAS SUN
 
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday asked the Bush
administration for its views on a Utah nuclear waste case that
ultimately could have implications for Yucca Mountain.

 The case involves Private Fuel Storage L.L.C., a company that
aims to construct a temporary storage area for high-level
nuclear waste on Goshute Indian land 45 miles southwest of Salt
Lake City.

 The site could eventually act as a layover storage area for
waste ultimately bound for the federal government's planned
permanent waste repository at Yucca, 90 miles northwest of Las
Vegas. Yucca would not open until 2010 at the earliest.

 Utah officials have battled to block the temporary dump. The
Nuclear Regulatory Commission is still considering whether to
license it.

 Meanwhile Utah has said that barring nuclear waste storage
should be a state's rights issue -- and used that argument when
it tried to kill the project in court. But Utah lost its latest
case in August when the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
effectively overruled Utah state laws that were designed to stop
the the dump.

 So Utah on Oct. 28 appealed to the Supreme Court to hear its
case. Utah officials generally are arguing that barring nuclear
waste storage should be a state's rights issue -- an argument
Nevada officials have lost in recent years, including last year
in a federal court.

 But more specifically, Utah is asking the court to rule that,
as a matter of law, the lower courts had no right to throw out
state laws blocking the dump.

 The high court is deciding whether to take the case, and on
Monday the court asked the U.S. solicitor general's office for
its stance on whether Utah can ban waste storage in the state
and also asked whether the federal government has exclusive
rights over nuclear waste shipping and storage.

 The solicitor general handles Supreme Court cases for the White
House and federal government.

 If the court takes the case, Utah could prod the court to
consider waste transportation issues that it has not previously
dealt with, said Joe Egan, a lawyer hired by Nevada to fight
Yucca legal battles.

 But the Utah and Nevada cases are different in a number of ways
so it's not clear yet how the Bush administration's opinion --
or the Supreme Court's -- would relate to Yucca, Utah assistant
attorney general Denise Chancellor said.

 In its case Utah is specifically asking for the Supreme Court
to examine whether the lower court had the right to overrule its
state laws banning the Goshute dump, and it is unclear whether
those laws could be compared to Nevada state laws aimed at
blocking Yucca.

 Also, while the Utah site would be developed as a private
venture, federal law specifically says that Yucca is to be the
nation's waste repository, if it is scientifically suitable. The
Energy Department has concluded that it is, and President Bush
formally approved making it so.
 
         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 42 Las Vegas SUN: State amends Yucca silica suit

January 11, 2005 
 
SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU

 WASHINGTON -- Lawyers for Nevada on Monday filed an amended
lawsuit in a case involving ailing Yucca Mountain workers.

 Washington D.C.-area lawyer Joe Egan, hired by the state to
lead Yucca legal battles, first filed a class action lawsuit in
March on behalf of Yucca workers exposed to silica dust, which
can cause lung disease.

 The suit was filed against nine corporate contractors working
on the planned nuclear waste repository. The companies have
denied Egan's charges that they willfully ignored silica
problems.

 U.S. District Judge James Mahan last month told Egan the
complaint was serious enough to go forward and should be
examined through the discovery process, but he scolded Egan for
excessive language in the lawsuit, and told him to cut the
hyperbole.

 The amended 31-page complaint filed by Egan in the U.S.
District Court of Nevada on Monday was edited and seven pages
shorter, but still concludes that the corporate defendants
"deliberately and deceitfully" exposed thousands of workers and
visitors to toxic materials, including silica, erionite and
mordenite.

 The defendants, which include Bechtel SAIC, Co., Parsons
Brinckerhoff Construction Services and Kiewet Construction, have
30 days to file a reply.

 The companies vow to fight the charges in court.
 
         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 43 dBusinessNews: Parsons Awarded Army Environmental Cleanup Contract     

: Daily Business News Delivered to Your Desktop
 
  Thursday, January 13, 2005     

Los Angeles - PASADENA -- Parsons, a global leader in 
environmental restoration, announced today that it has been 
awarded a one-year base contract with four one-year options for 
environmental cleanup services at U.S. Army installations in the 
United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Parsons 
is one of five firms awarded this contract. The initial contract 
value is $64 million but authorization exists to modify the 
contract up to the ceiling of $320 million for the total 
portfolio. 

The contract is to support a broad spectrum of the Army's cleanup 
strategy. Work will consist of a wide range of environmental 
remediation or response activities including investigations, 
remedial design, and remedial construction for hazardous 
substance and waste sites, munitions and chemical warfare 
material. 

Parsons has provided environmental cleanup at military sites for 
decades. Recent cleanup projects Parsons has managed include 
Hawaii's Kaho'olawe Island; Fort Ord in Monterey, California; 
Keesler Air Force Base in Biloxi, Mississippi; Seneca Army Depot 
in Romulus, New York; and Camp Stanley in San Antonio, Texas. 

"We're excited to continue supporting the Department of Defense 
in its efforts to clean up the environment," explains Milt 
Hunter, Parsons Senior Vice President. 

Parsons, celebrating over 60 years of setting industry standards, 
is a leader in many diversified markets, such as environmental 
compliance and remediation; facility planning, design and 
construction; military range management; homeland security; 
nuclear and chemical demilitarization, industrial processes; 
communications; transportation and water. Parsons provides 
technical and management solutions to private industrial 
customers worldwide as well as federal, regional and local 
government agencies. For more about Parsons, please visit us at .                         
  
  Posted on: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 04:01 AM                                                    

Copyright @ 2004, dBusinessNews.
*****************************************************************
 44 Jackson Hole Zone: Back DOE to reveal nuke waste numbers  
 	 	 	 
January 13, 2005

In response to concerns raised by Jackson residents, U.S.
Department of Energy officials are preparing estimates of how
much nuclear waste would be produced by a new plutonium
facility. 

DOE is proposing consolidating plutonium-238 production at the
Idaho National Lab, which sits about 100 miles west of Jackson.
Three DOE representatives returned to Jackson for a second round
of meetings Jan. 5 after Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free, a
Jackson-based group, complained about a lack of answers
regarding the proposed plutonium facility. 

KYNF board member Tom Patricelli said he was concerned the
facility might produce the kind of waste that would later need
to be treated in an incinerator. KYNF defeated an earlier
proposal by the Idaho lab to build a nuclear waste incinerator. 

DOE representative Tim Frazier stressed last week that the
facility would generate little waste. The new 50,000 square foot
facility would be designed to produce about five kilograms of
plutonium per year, he said. Frazier promised to try to provide
KYNF ballpark estimates of potential waste and emissions this
week. 

DOE wants to move plutonium production from Oak Ridge National
Laboratory in Tennessee and purification and encapsulation of
plutonium from Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico to Idaho. 

Plutonium-238 is about 270 times more radioactive per unit of
weight than plutonium-239, the common ingredient in atomic
bombs. Thus, even a few tiny particles of plutonium 238 can
carry a radioactive punch, experts warn. 		 	 

Copyright 2003  The Jackson Hole Zone All Rights
*****************************************************************
 45 DOE: Yucca Mountain in Nevada. meeting 2/9/5
 
                         FR Doc 05-595 
[Federal Register: January 12, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 8)] 
[Notices] [Page 2190] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12ja05-129] [[Page 2190]]
 
February 10, 2005--Caliente, Nevada; The U.S. Nuclear Waste 
Technical Review Board will meet to discuss DOE plans for 
transporting spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste 
to the proposed repository and development of a rail spur from 
Caliente, Nevada, to the repository site.
 
Pursuant to its authority under section 5051 of Pub. L. 100-203, 
Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987, the U.S. Nuclear 
Waste Technical Review Board will meet in Las Vegas, Nevada, on 
Wednesday, February 9, and in Caliente, Nevada, on Thursday, 
February 10, 2005. Technical and scientific issues pertinent to 
the Department of Energy's (DOE) efforts to develop a repository 
at Yucca Mountain in Nevada will be discussed on Wednesday in Las 
Vegas. The meeting in Caliente on Thursday will focus on 
transportation planning issues and on the development of a rail 
spur from Caliente to the proposed repository site at Yucca 
Mountain. Final meeting agendas will be available approximately 
one week before the meeting dates. They can be obtained from the 
Board's Web site at http://www.nwtrb.gov or by telephone request. 
The meetings will be open to the public, and opportunities for 
public comment will be provided. The Board is charged by Congress 
with reviewing the technical and scientific validity of 
activities undertaken by the DOE related to nuclear waste 
disposal as stipulated in the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act 
of 1987.
 
On Wednesday, the meeting is scheduled to begin at 8 a.m. and to 
continue until approximately 5:30 p.m. It will be held at the 
Alexis Park Hotel; 375 Harmon Avenue; Las Vegas, NV 89109; 
702-796-3300 or 800-582-2228; fax 702-796-3354. On Thursday, the 
meeting will begin at 10 a.m. and continue until approximately 
4:30 p.m. It will be held at the Caliente Youth Center; Highway 
93, North 4; Caliente, Nevada 89008.
 
The meeting on Wednesday will include DOE program and project 
updates for fiscal year 2005. Updates on technical and scientific 
topics also will be presented, including the DOE's efforts to 
integrate elements within the waste management system, the DOE's 
approach to integrating total system performance assessment with 
repository design, and the DOE's thermal management strategy for 
a Yucca Mountain repository.
 
On Thursday, the meeting will begin with discussions of DOE plans 
for a national program for transporting spent nuclear fuel and 
high- level radioactive waste from reactor and defense facilities 
to the proposed repository and of efforts to integrate 
transportation activities with waste acceptance and repository 
operations.
 
After the lunch break, information will be presented on the 
planning and development of the proposed Nevada rail spur. Local, 
state, and tribal representatives will present their views on 
these activities.
 
Time will be set aside at the end of both days for public 
comments. Those wanting to speak are encouraged to sign the 
``Public Comment Register'' at the check-in table. A time limit 
may have to be set on individual remarks, but written comments of 
any length may be submitted for the record. Interested parties 
also will have the opportunity to submit questions in writing to 
the Board. As time permits, submitted questions relevant to the 
discussion may be asked by Board members.
 
Transcripts of the meetings will be available on the Board's Web 
site, by e-mail, on computer disk, and on a library-loan basis in 
paper format from Davonya Barnes of the Board's staff, beginning 
on March 18, 2005.
 
A block of rooms has been reserved at the Alexis Park Hotel for 
meeting participants. When making a reservation, please state 
that you are attending the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board 
meeting. Reservations should be made by January 14, 2005, to 
ensure receiving the meeting rate.
 
For more information, contact Karyn Severson, NWTRB External 
Affairs; 2300 Clarendon Boulevard, Suite 1300; Arlington, VA 
22201- 3367; 703-235-4473; fax 703-235-4495.
 
Dated: January 7, 2005.
 
William D. Barnard, Executive Director, Nuclear Waste Technical 
Review Board.
 
[FR Doc. 05-595 Filed 1-11-05; 8:45 am]

 
*****************************************************************
 46 Rocky Mountain News: Quick action promised to nuke workers

Secretary of Labor vows survivors will get their checks soon

By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News

January 12, 2005

Hundreds of the 23,000 sick nuclear weapons workers and their 
survivors who've been waiting up to four years for federal aid 
will start seeing checks any day now. That's the word from 
Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao, whose department took over the 
compensation program after the Department of Energy managed to 
get only 31 workers paid while spending $95 million on paperwork. 
			
 In 2000, Congress passed a program to aid thousands of workers
at atom bomb plants who were sickened by exposure to radiation
or toxic chemicals on the job. Among them were workers at the
former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant 16 miles northwest of
downtown Denver. 

But Congress divided the compensation program into two, with
drastically different results. 

Only 10 of 1,700 Rocky Flats applicants have been paid workers
compensation under the half of the program run by the Department
of Energy. 

In contrast, the Department of Labor side of the program, which
covers different illnesses and provides different aid, has paid
242 Colorado atom- bomb workers $35.7 million in compensation
and for medical bills. Labor has rejected applications of 880
Colorado workers and has yet to resolve 1,090 cases. 

Energy spent so much money getting so little done in part by
paying a contractor $35 an hour for mail clerks labeled "data
analysts," a government audit showed. It also spent $4.8 million
on a computer program it could have purchased for $50,000,
according to an Energy Department consultant. 

Atom-bomb workers criticized the department for what they called
sloppy mistakes. Sandy Simons, of Morrison, said he was rejected
because reviewers missed 90 pages of his file documenting 19
months of work in a plutonium lab at Los Alamos during World War
II. 

After senators slammed the DOE for its performance, Congress
transferred the Energy program to Labor last fall. 

On Tuesday, Chao promised quick action to help workers "whose
sacrifice helped keep America free." 

But she didn't put a date on when they might see cash in hand.

So far, three widows have been paid under the revised program,
she said. None are in Colorado. 

Survivors will be paid first because they don't have to wait for
regulations to be published in May. That's because the $125,000
death benefit is set in law, said Shelby Hallmark, the Labor
executive in charge. 

He hopes to pay hundreds of survivors before the rules are
published "to show that we are dead serious about getting
payments out as quickly as we can." 

Sick workers, however, must wait for the rules, which will spell
out how much they'll be paid depending on level of impairment
and lost wages. 

Approval under the old Energy program only gave workers the
chance to seek workers compensation from companies and insurers
that were often defunct or unwilling to pay. The new law pays
workers from the federal budget. 

Hallmark's promise to eventually review cases denied by Energy
gives hope to people like former Rocky Flats worker George
Barrie, of Craig. Energy decided that the plutonium he
accidentally inhaled and drank caused only one of his 30
ailments. Hallmark's statements imply that Barrie's bill for the
one illness will be paid soon and that the rest of his case will
get a second look. 

Bomb worker aid 

• Oct. 11, 2000 Congress acknowledges nuclear bomb workers
risked their lives and passes compensation program for those
sickened by the job. 

• March 30, 2004 Senators discover the Department of Energy has
spent $74 million on paperwork but only one worker has been
paid. About 23,000 applicants await action. 

• April 2, 2004 Two top Energy officials in charge of the
program resign. 

• June 16, 2004 Senate approves transfer of Energy program to
Labor Department, which has decided 22,000 cases in its part of
the program and paid out $800 million. 

• Oct. 8, 2004 Final plan goes to president.  

SITE MAP PHOTO REPRINTS CORRECTIONS    2005 © The E.W. Scripps
*****************************************************************
 47 DenverPost.com: Flats families await U.S. aid
 
Article Published: Wednesday, January 12, 2005                  
                
Labor secretary vows faster action on compensation

By Kim McGuire Denver Post Staff Writer

 Federal officials said Tuesday that families of seven sickened
Colorado nuclear workers should receive compensation this month,
and they hope to approve hundreds of claims nationwide by this
summer. 

The announcement signaled momentum in a newly created workers'
compensation program managed by the U.S. Department of Labor.
This week, the department issued the first three checks to
survivors in Tennessee and Kentucky.
 
Labor Secretary Elaine Chao pledged at a Washington news
conference to expedite the thousands of claims that remain.
 
"These workers were harmed in service to our country, and
compensation to them and their families is long overdue," Chao
said.
 
Congress gave Labor officials authority to manage the program
last year after complaints that the Department of Energy
processed claims too slowly.
 
During the four years DOE ran the program, it paid out 31 of
25,000 worker claims. In Colorado, only a few workers received
compensation.
 
Chao said the department has approved 100 claims by survivors
nationwide since October and plans to distribute those payments
within the next month: Seven were filed by survivors of Colorado
nuclear workers.
 
She said living former workers will likely begin receiving
compensation and medical benefits after the department
establishes the program's regulatory framework in May.
 
During the Cold War, tens of thousands of workers handled
hazardous materials such as plutonium, beryllium and uranium.
Years later, many became ill.
 
About 1,700 Rocky Flats workers and their families want to be
compensated for illnesses they say they incurred while working
at the plant near Golden.
 
Terrie Barrie, whose husband worked as a machinist at Rocky
Flats and suffers from 30 different ailments, said Tuesday's
announcement indicates that help may finally be on the way.
 
"It's significant to workers as a whole," said Barrie. "We're
very glad that survivors are getting paid, but we hope that
living workers will be compensated soon, as well."
 
The Labor Department anticipates cutting through the backlog by
not requiring a panel of doctors to sign off on each case and by
providing direct payments instead of using contracts.
 
"Many of the (Rocky Flats workers) are pretty weary," said
Barrie. "But they remain hopeful that the Department of Labor
will do what's right."
 
Staff writer Kim McGuire can be reached at 303-820-1240 or
kmcguire@denverpost.com.
 		   	 	
All contents Copyright 2005 The Denver Post or other copyright
*****************************************************************
 48 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Hanford arguments heard
 	 	 	 	 	 
[seattlepi.com]     

Wednesday, January 12, 2005
 
By SHANNON DININNY THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

YAKIMA -- The Energy Department and Washington state squared off 
in federal court yesterday over whether the state has authority 
to regulate storage of a certain type of radioactive trash at the 
Hanford Nuclear Reservation.
 
The waste, known as mixed transuranic waste, typically is debris, 
such as clothing, equipment and pipes left over from nuclear 
weapons production, which has been contaminated with plutonium 
and hazardous chemicals.
 
The state sued the Energy Department in 2003 to block shipments 
of the untreated waste to Hanford out of concern that it could be 
stranded at the site and add more waste to a spot already 
considered the nation's most contaminated nuclear site.
 
The Energy Department has said the waste eventually will be 
shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico.
 
And once the waste is designated as destined for WIPP, storage 
requirements do not apply, Mike Zevenbergen, a Justice Department 
lawyer, told U.S. District Judge Alan McDonald on behalf of the 
Energy Department.
 
The state, however, has the authority to ban storage of waste 
already restricted from land disposal, such as hazardous waste, 
said Andrew Fitz, a state assistant attorney general. The waste 
may be safe to be stored at WIPP, but that doesn't mean it's safe 
to be stored at Hanford, he said.
 
McDonald said he would take his time in ruling, given the 
complexity of the issues and the impact a decision could have on 
other lawsuits.
                 
  [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 
98119 (206) 448-8000
 
 Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com
©1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer
*****************************************************************
 49 ABQjournal: LANL Shutdown Cost Review Sought
 
Wednesday, January 12, 2005 

LANL Shutdown Cost Review Sought 

Albuquerque Journal--> By Adam Rankin Journal Staff Writer

     A powerful Texas congressman wants to know how much
taxpayer money was spent during Los Alamos National Laboratory's
operations shutdown and subsequent restart, which is still
ongoing.

     Rep. Joe Barton, a Republican and chairman of the House
Energy and Commerce Committee, sent a letter Tuesday to the
comptroller general of the United States seeking a review of
costs associated with LANL director Pete Nanos' decision to
cease all lab operations in July.

     "I would like you to review the stand down at LANL to
determine (1) the total costs to the taxpayers... (2) the status
of major research projects that have been disrupted, and how
these programs recover; and (3) whether the costs associated
with work suspension are reimbursable to the University of
California under its contract," Barton wrote.

     LANL spokeswoman Kathy DeLucas said the work shutdown was
something LANL had to do itself, or DOE would have likely
required it.

     "It was something that we had to do, and we are learning
from it," she said.

     The work stand down was initiated after two classified
computer disks were discovered missing and a laser accident
seriously injured a student intern's eye. The Department of
Energy instituted a nationwide classified work stand down a few
days later until each DOE facility could account for all its
classified computer materials.

     At the time of the work shutdown, Nanos told employees in
an e-mail that the move was necessary to ensure that the lab
operates safely and meets national security obligations.

     Since then, LANL's 12,000 employees in 25 divisions have
been working on reviewing safety and security procedures. Nearly
all of the divisions and projects have been approved for restart
and only a few of the higher-risk operations have yet to resume.

     In his letter to the comptroller general, David M. Walker,
Barton placed fault for the shutdown on the University of
California, which has operated LANL since 1943 when it was
formed to develop the atomic bomb.

     "These incidents are the latest examples of a historical
and cultural lack of focus and attention to safety and security
management by the University of California," Barton wrote.

     LANL spokesman Kevin Roark said lab officials plan "to
support and cooperate fully with comptroller Walker and chairman
Barton with any and all information that they request."

     "Oversight is something that we are very, very used to,"
Roark said.

     The cost of LANL's restart was about $134 million as of
Nov. 10, according to Barton, who cited figures from a Nov. 22
letter from Nanos.

     "However... the final cost of this work suspension will
likely be much higher," Barton wrote.

     Roark said it is higher, but declined to give a figure,
saying it isn't appropriate to disclose the most recent tally
until Barton and Walker are updated.

     "We've been tracking it ever since DOE asked us to develop
a methodology to do so," Roark said.

     Roark was careful to say that the shutdown and restart
won't cost taxpayers any extra money.

     "We are not talking about extra money above and beyond what
we normally spend day-to-day," he said. "Safety and security is
central to our mission. If we can solve, to the degree possible,
these safety and security issues, that in the long run makes the
lab more cost effective, not less."
 
Copyright 2005 Albuquerque Journal 
*****************************************************************
 50 Albuquerque Journal: LANL Shutdown Cost Review Sought 

Wednesday, January 12, 2005 

By Adam Rankin Journal Staff Writer 

A powerful Texas congressman wants to know how much taxpayer 
money was spent during Los Alamos National Laboratory's 
operations shutdown and subsequent restart, which is still 
ongoing. Rep. Joe Barton, a Republican and chairman of the House 
Energy and Commerce Committee, sent a letter Tuesday to the 
comptroller general of the United States seeking a review of 
costs associated with LANL director Pete Nanos' decision to cease 
all lab operations in July. 

"I would like you to review the stand down at LANL to determine 
(1) the total costs to the taxpayers... (2) the status of major 
research projects that have been disrupted, and how these 
programs recover; and (3) whether the costs associated with work 
suspension are reimbursable to the University of California under 
its contract," Barton wrote. LANL spokeswoman Kathy DeLucas said 
the work shutdown was something LANL had to do itself, or DOE 
would have likely required it. "It was something that we had to 
do, and we are learning from it," she said. 

The work stand down was initiated after two classified computer 
disks were discovered missing and a laser accident seriously 
injured a student intern's eye. The Department of Energy 
instituted a nationwide classified work stand down a few days 
later until each DOE facility could account for all its 
classified computer materials. 

At the time of the work shutdown, Nanos told employees in an 
e-mail that the move was necessary to ensure that the lab 
operates safely and meets national security obligations. Since 
then, LANL's 12,000 employees in 25 divisions have been working 
on reviewing safety and security procedures. 

Nearly all of the divisions and projects have been approved for 
restart and only a few of the higher-risk operations have yet to 
resume. In his letter to the comptroller general, David M. 
Walker, Barton placed fault for the shutdown on the University of 
California, which has operated LANL since 1943 when it was formed 
to develop the atomic bomb.

"These incidents are the latest examples of a historical and 
cultural lack of focus and attention to safety and security 
management by the University of California," Barton wrote. 

LANL spokesman Kevin Roark said lab officials plan "to support 
and cooperate fully with comptroller Walker and chairman Barton 
with any and all information that they request." "Oversight is 
something that we are very, very used to," Roark said. 

The cost of LANL's restart was about $134 million as of Nov. 10, 
according to Barton, who cited figures from a Nov. 22 letter from 
Nanos. 

"However... the final cost of this work suspension will likely be 
much higher," Barton wrote. Roark said it is higher, but declined 
to give a figure, saying it isn't appropriate to disclose the 
most recent tally until Barton and Walker are updated. "We've 
been tracking it ever since DOE asked us to develop a methodology 
to do so," Roark said. 

Roark was careful to say that the shutdown and restart won't cost 
taxpayers any extra money. "We are not talking about extra money 
above and beyond what we normally spend day-to-day," he said. 
"Safety and security is central to our mission. If we can solve, 
to the degree possible, these safety and security issues, that in 
the long run makes the lab more cost effective, not less."

Copyright 2005 Albuquerque Journal 
*****************************************************************
 51 Cascadia Scorecard Weblog: The Hanford Files
 
Northwest Environment Watch's take on the news that really 
matters
 
January 12, 2005
 
The Hanford Files
 
Here's a clear example in which an ounce of prevention would
have been worth at least a pound of cure:  the Nuclear
Reservation, the facility in central Washington that, for four
decades, produced plutonium for the nation's nuclear arsenal.
 
The site is severely contaminated, and cleanup costs are
absurdly expensive, somewhere in the range of through 2035. 
Now, as the Tri-City Herald , new liabilities are piling up,
this time to compensate workers from Hanford and other federal
nuclear sites whose health has suffered as a result of their
on-the-job exposures.  The Department of Labor has just taken
over one such , after it languished in the hands of the Energy
Department.  Through the end of 2004, a similar Labor Department
compensation program for nuclear workers had racked up outlays
of about US$ one billion.
 
All of this, obviously, is being paid for by federal taxpayers,
adding expenses to an already out-of-balance federal buget.  It
all makes me wish that someone had been taking precautions
earlier on.  That way, my kids wouldn't still be paying in their
middle age for toxic blunders that were made before their father
was born.
 
Posted by Clark Williams-Derry | 
 
*****************************************************************
 52 EPA: Hanford waste charactorization headed to WIPP

                         FR Doc 05-618 

[Federal Register: January 12, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 8)] 
[Proposed Rules] [Page 2101-2105] From the Federal Register 
Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12ja05-31]                         

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 194 [FRL 7860-2]
 
Proposed Approval of Waste Characterization Activities at the 
Hanford Central Characterization Project 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, we, or Agency) 
is announcing, and soliciting public comment for 45 days on, 
EPA's proposed approval of the Hanford Central Characterization 
Project (CCP) to characterize retrievably-stored, 
contact-handled, transuranic (TRU) debris waste for disposal at 
the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). EPA is also proposing to 
designate any changes or expansions to this waste 
characterization approval as Tier 1, according to EPA's recently 
effective procedures for approval of WIPP waste generator sites. 
A Tier 1 designation means that DOE must first obtain written 
approval from EPA prior to disposing of waste characterized using 
new or revised processes, equipment, or waste streams. The 
documents related to this proposed approval are available for 
review in the public dockets listed in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 
In accordance with our 40 CFR 194.8(b) approval process, the EPA 
conducted an inspection of the Hanford CCP from September 8-12, 
2003. The purpose of the inspection was to determine the 
technical adequacy of the CCP as implemented at Hanford for the 
characterization of transuranic waste from the Plutonium 
Finishing Plant (PFP) to be disposed of at the WIPP in New 
Mexico. During the EPA inspection, EPA evaluated several waste 
characterization (WC) activities used to characterize 
retrievably-stored, contact- handled debris waste. EPA evaluated 
the equipment, procedures and personnel training/experience for 
acceptable knowledge (AK), nondestructive assay (NDA), 
nondestructive examination (NDE) and data transfer for the WIPP 
Waste Information System (WWIS).

DATES: EPA is requesting public comment on the documents. 
Comments must be received by EPA's official Air Docket on or 
before February 28, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by mail to: EPA Docket 
[[Page 2102]] 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-2004-0477. 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: Mr. 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 . 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-2004-0477. 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 Ave., 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/.

    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/ 
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, 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

[[Page 2103]]

at 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-2004-0477. 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, Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0477. 
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-2004-0477.

    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- 2004-0477. 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-2004-0477.

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 operates the WIPP near Carlsbad in southeastern New 
Mexico as a deep geologic repository for disposal of transuranic 
(TRU) radioactive waste. As defined by the WIPP Land Withdrawal 
Act (LWA) of 1992 (Pub. L. 102-579), as amended (Pub. L. 
104-201), 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 in the United States consists of items 
contaminated during the 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 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 WC 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 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).

    In July 2004, EPA finalized changes to Sec.  194.8(b) of the 
WIPP Compliance Criteria that modified the approval process for 
waste characterization programs at TRU waste generator/storage 
sites. According to these changes, EPA's waste characterization 
approval process will follow these steps for newly approved 
sites:

     EPA will conduct a baseline inspection at a TRU waste 
generator/storage site in accordance with the Sec.  194.8 
requirements and evaluate various waste characterization program 
components based on the site's demonstration of its capabilities.

     Following a baseline inspection, EPA will issue a Federal 
Register notice discussing the inspection results and a proposed 
``baseline compliance decision.'' The Federal Register notice 
will specify what subsequent WC program changes or expansion must 
undergo further EPA inspection or approval under section 194.24 
by assigning ``tiering'' designations to these activities.

     EPA will seek public comment on the proposed baseline 
compliance decision and place supporting documentation in the 
public dockets.

     After consideration of public comment, EPA will issue a 
final baseline compliance decision for a TRU waste site. 
Following this approval, EPA will continue to evaluate and 
approve, if necessary, changes to the approved WC program 
activities in accordance with the assigned tiering designations.

    Waste generator sites are permitted to initiate waste 
characterization activities at a site prior to EPA's inspection. 
EPA inspectors observe all major elements of the waste 
characterization process during the baseline inspection. However, 
the waste generator sites are not permitted to ship characterized 
waste to WIPP without EPA's written approval.

    Today's proposed baseline compliance decision for the Hanford 
CCP is the first action under the new approval process at 40 CFR 
194.8(b). The Central Characterization Project was established by 
DOE to augment the ability of TRU waste sites to characterize and 
certify waste in accordance with EPA's WIPP Compliance Criteria. 
Because the CCP is essentially a mobile waste characterization 
facility, EPA treats CCP at Hanford (as we have with the CCP at 
other waste generator sites) as a separate WC program from the 
main Hanford site. Therefore, the Hanford CCP must meet all of 
the waste characterization and quality assurance requirements of 
the WIPP Compliance Criteria.

    EPA conducted the inspection of the Hanford CCP from 
September 8- 12, 2003. The purpose of the inspection was to 
determine the technical adequacy of the Hanford CCP to 
characterize TRU debris waste from the Plutonium Finishing Plant 
using acceptable knowledge (AK), nondestructive assay (NDA), 
nondestructive examination (NDE), and data transfer to the WIPP

[[Page 2104]]

Waste Information System (WWIS). EPA inspectors observed testing 
of debris waste drums to measure radiological contents using the 
Mobile Segmented Gamma Scanner (SGS). As part of NDE, EPA 
inspectors also observed the examination of the physical content 
of debris waste drums using real-time radiography (RTR). (Visual 
examination was not evaluated as part of this inspection. Visual 
examination of these contact-handled TRU debris containers was 
performed using the Hanford main site's approved processes.) 
EPA's inspection identified several findings of non-conformance 
and concerns that prevented EPA from issuing an approval for the 
Hanford CCP. While DOE worked to resolve EPA's inspection 
findings, the Hanford CCP facility continued to characterize 
waste but did not ship any waste to WIPP. In fact, all of the 
Hanford CCP waste for which DOE is seeking approval, is currently 
characterized and awaiting EPA's approval for shipment.

    In 2004, DOE was able to demonstrate adequate resolution of 
the inspection findings and concerns to EPA.

    Between the time when EPA conducted the inspection and the 
time when the inspection findings were resolved, EPA's changes to 
the waste characterization approval process became effective 
(October 14, 2004). Under the newly revised 40 CFR 194.8(b), EPA 
is proposing to approve the disposal of retrievable-stored, 
contact-handled, TRU debris waste, characterized by the Hanford 
CCP at the WIPP using AK, NDA using the Mobile Segmented Gamma 
Scanner (SGS), NDE using real-time radiography (RTR). (Visual 
examination was not evaluated as part of this inspection. Visual 
examination of these contact-handled TRU debris containers was 
performed using the Hanford main site's approved processes.) 
EPA's inspection report is available from our docket and online. 
The inspection report describes what we inspected, what we 
determined to be technically adequate, what we identified as 
deficiencies and the corrective action that was required for 
EPA's proposed approval. In addition, the inspection report 
explains the basis for the tiering requirement and the subsequent 
reporting requirements.

    EPA is proposing a Tier 1 designation for any changes to the 
approved Hanford CCP waste characterization activities. This 
means that DOE must obtain written approval from EPA prior to 
using any new or revised processes, equipment, or waste streams.

    When EPA finalized the changes to the Compliance Criteria, 
EPA indicated that ``the first approvals conducted under the new 
process are likely to be highly detailed and very intensive, 
since EPA will need to work with DOE and stakeholders to ensure 
that the full range of waste characterization activities is 
identified and placed in appropriate reporting/approval tiers.'' 
We envisioned that this scheme, applied at a typical DOE waste 
generator site, would address a variety of possible program 
changes or expansions as clean-up operations progressed or more 
sophisticated techniques were developed. In such a case, various 
tiering levels would be necessary to address the relative 
significance of potential program changes. The Hanford CCP, 
however, is not typical of the situation we would expect for most 
approvals. As noted previously, Hanford CCP has already completed 
its intended waste characterization activities. All 
characterization was accomplished using exclusively the equipment 
and procedures described in our proposed approval, and was 
applied solely to the PFP debris waste stream. Because CCP 
operations at Hanford have concluded, we do not expect any 
changes or expansions to its waste characterization program. 
Therefore, for efficiency and simplicity, we are categorizing any 
and all changes as Tier 1. We believe this approach is simple and 
expedient, given that changes are not expected. Furthermore, this 
is appropriate given that any changes, if they did occur, would 
require re-deployment of the CCP at Hanford and warrant a high 
level of scrutiny. We emphasize that EPA does not believe that 
the Hanford CCP baseline compliance decision is typical of the 
inspections and approvals that will be done in the future under 
the new requirements of 40 CFR 194.8(b).

    In summary, through this Federal Register notice, EPA is 
notifying the public that EPA is proposing to approve the Hanford 
CCP to characterize retrievably-stored, contact-handled, TRU 
debris waste from PFP for disposal at WIPP using AK; NDA using 
the Mobile Segmented Gamma Scanner (SGS); NDE using real-time 
radiography (RTR). (Visual examination was not evaluated as part 
of this inspection. Visual examination of these contact-handled 
TRU debris containers was performed using the Hanford main site's 
approved processes.) EPA is also proposing a Tier 1 designation 
for any and all changes or expansions to this approval. 
Additional EPA approval is required prior to applying approved 
processes and equipment to new waste streams, and prior to the 
use of new equipment or procedures to the approved waste stream.

                     Summary of Hanford CCP Approval
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
 Waste characterization element    PFP debris waste     PFP
solid waste
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
AK..............................  Approved..........  Not
approved.
NDA.............................  Approved--SGS.....  Not
approved.
NDE.............................  Approved--RTR.....  Not
approved.
                                  Approved--VE*.....  Not
approved.
WWIS............................  Approved..........  Not
approved.
Load Management.................  Not approved......  Not
approved.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------

* Approved process for main Hanford site.
[[Page 2105]]

    Following a review and evaluation of public comments, EPA 
will finalize the proposed baseline compliance decision for the 
Hanford CCP. EPA will notify DOE of our final decision via letter 
and post the final decision on our Web site.

    Dated: January 4, 2005. Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Assistant 
Administrator for Air and Radiation. [FR Doc. 05-618 Filed 
1-11-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
 
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************