Source:
http://web.archive.org/web/20010203115500/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/World/Europe/2001-01/fisk170101.shtml
Comment: I think the governments of NATO are very sensitive to the accusation
of War Crimes, particularly as in regard to DU use in Serbia. This
article, which
I found in the WayBack article ( archive.org ) from a bad link at
http://www.stopnato.org.uk/du-watch/
should re-surface and be sent to all the NATO governments, over and over again,
until this issue surfaces in the political realm. I believe the way to
stop DU is to
force the issue in the public mind. That means lots and lots of
email. I'm starting
right now.
---- Steve Moyer
Robert Fisk: Are the governments of Nato guilty of committing a heinous war
crime?
'Mr Blair, Mr Clinton, Lord Robertson and the rest don't want to know about
the dying Serbs of Bosnia'
By Robert Fisk
17 January 2001
Nato is on the run. It's not difficult to see why. The moral crusader
against Serb barbarism wielded a sword made of depleted uranium (DU). And
as more and more evidence proves a terrible connection between DU weapons
and an explosion of cancers and leukaemias among thousands of civilians who
were close to DU detonations, the sword now appears far more disturbing
than the object of the crusade. After ignoring the hundreds of children
and thousands of adults who died in a plague of cancers and leukaemias
after the use of DU in the Gulf War, the Americans and the British are
still vainly claiming that there is "no evidence" of any ill-effects after
its use in Bosnia in 1995. Or in the war against Serbia in 1999.
Needless to say, there is a highly racist element to our concerns about DU.
It is only the fate of European or American soldiers that has caused Nato's
flurry of denials. Yesterday's Nato press conference claimed albeit
unconvincingly only that Nato personnel had not been affected. A handful
of unexplained cancers in the Italian and German military had created more
furore among European prime ministers than the cull of Muslim or Serb
Orthodox lives in Iraq and Bosnia. When I first reported the appalling
increase in child cancer in Iraq after the Gulf War, the British government
simply said there was no scientific evidence. Now they say the same about
the Serb victims.
And, of course, no Nato official, no Nato scientist, no Nato doctor has
been to examine and investigate the cases of the Serbs from the Nato
bombing site at Hadjici, who have been dying over the past five years a
fate that was revealed in The Independent at the weekend.
No Nato personnel have been to see 12-year old Sladjana Sarenac, who, at
the age of six, played with shrapnel after the bombing in 1995, who
developed a mysterious "yellow sand" under her fingernails within two
months, whose nails then dropped out, who went into a 30-hour coma, who
bleeds internally and, with blood spots under the skin on her face, appears
to have leukaemia. If a single Nato doctor wants to contact me in Sarajevo
today (international telephone: 00387-33-288000, extension 215), I will
personally drive him to Sladjana's unlit home at Bratunac (her parents
spend so much in medical expenses that they can't pay the electricity bill)
so that he can see her.
However, I expect no calls. Nato says it has no evidence. The truth is that
it doesn't want any evidence. And as long as it can rely on scientific
surveys by American professors often at institutes heavily funded by the
US Department of Defence and on a forthcoming Royal Society team that did
not even bother to visit Bosnia, let alone Iraq, Nato thinks it can get
away with it. The last thing Nato officials, in their supposed thirst for
knowledge about DU, wish to be given is the very knowledge that awaits them
in the hills and deserts where their tanks and aircraft used depleted
uranium bombs and shells.
So let's take a look at just one little bit of evidence that Lord George
Robertson, the Secretary General of Nato, and his friends in Brussels have
ignored in their denial of DU dangers. Almost 10 years ago, in the
immediate aftermath of the Gulf War, Lieutenant Colonel MV Ziehmn, of the
Los Alamos National Laboratories, wrote a memorandum to a Major Larson of
the US military. Dated 1 March, it begins in typical Nato-speak with
the usual ignorance-is-bliss version of DU:
"There is a relatively small amount of lethality data for uranium
penetrators, either the tank fired long version or the GAU-8 round fired
from theA-10 close air support aircraft. The recent war has likely
multiplied the number of DU rounds at targets by order of magnitude. It is
believed that DU penetrators were very effective against Iraqi armour..."
So far, so good. But then comes this paragraph: "There has been and
continues to be a concern regarding the impact of DU on the environment.
Therefore, if no one makes a case for the effectiveness of DU on the
battlefield, DU rounds may become politically unacceptable and thus be
deleted from the arsenal." Note the bit about DU becoming "politically
unacceptable".
But wait. Here's paragraph three:
"If DU penetrators proved their worth during recent Gulf combat activities,
then we should assure their future existence (until something better is
developed) through Service/DOD [Department of Defence] proponency. If
proponency is not garnered, it is possible that we stand to lose a valuable
combat capability."
And there you have it. DU should be explained away as an effective,
cancer-free weapon "proponency" in Col Ziehmn's Strangelove language
until "something better" (and less cancerous) comes along. If not, the poor
old military will "lose" the right to use this vile weapon. And here, for
form's sake, is the final, killer paragraph:
"I believe we should keep this sensitive issue at mind when after-action
reports are written."
Could there, I wonder, be a more effective encouragement to military
officers to doctor their reports on the real effects of DU? And isn't this
just the craven, mendacious reasoning that lies behind all those bland
statements of Messrs Robertson/Shea/ Laity et al in Brussels?
And just for good measure, here's a paragraph from a letter by Alan Casson,
an official with the Ministry of Defence's Gulf Veteran Illnesses Unit to
Rabbi Dr Michael Hilton on 16 March 1998. Dr Hilton had asked if
"radioactive weapons" had been used in the Gulf.
Most of the DU ammunition in the Gulf, Mr Casson explains, was "fired into
sparsely populated desert regions" hardly a description he would have
dared use about Bosnia and Kosovo although "the Government acknowledges
that some Iraqi personnel (military and civilian) may have been exposed to
DU and to the products of DU combustion during or immediately following the
Gulf War, but we have no information regarding any Iraqi casualties which
may have resulted from such exposure."
But, of course, there is information aplenty about those Iraqi civilians.
As the Ministry of Defence, the US Department of Defence and Nato know full
well. Which is why they don't want to visit the dying Serbs of Bosnia. Mr
Blair, Mr Clinton, Lord Robertson and the rest don't want to know; and of
course, they will get away with it.
Yes, I know Saddam is a wicked man. But the dying children of Iraq are not
war criminals. Yes, I know the Serbs butchered their way across Bosnia. But
12-year old Sladjana Sarenac is not a war criminal. And that is the whole
point; because if our governments are at last forced to acknowledge that DU
is responsible for the slow death of thousands of civilians, and that they
secretly knew this would happen all along, then they will have something in
common with Iraq and Serbia: they, too, will have committed a war crime.
This e-mail message was published
on the web
and can be found by searching the MetaMind.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Has someone you know been affected by illness or disease?
Network for Good is THE place to support health awareness efforts!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RzSHvD/UOnJAA/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/
*****************************************************************
26 Bellona: Ukraine catch man at airport with uranium
Ukraine's SBU security service have arrested a man at Kiev
airport who had a case containing radioactive uranium-238 in his
car, Reuters reported.
2005-03-02 12:40
The man was detained at Boryspil airport, Ukraine's main
international gateway, with 582 grams of uranium. "SBU officers
detained the person who was moving a case with a radioactive
substance ãranium-238 -- in his car," the government said in a
statement. It said ministry specialists had seized the case. A
ministry official said an investigation had been launched.
Depleted uranium, where uranium-238 is normally found, can
theoretically be used to make nuclear "dirty bombs", but it is
often used in gun ammunition and armour because of its high
density.
Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] ,
President: Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no]
Information: info@bellona.no [info@bellona.no] , Technical
contact: webmaster@bellona.no [webmaster@bellona.no]
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
27 Sarasota Herald-Tribune: Persistence pays off
[http://www.michaelsaunders.com/
Wednesday, March 2, 2005 OPINION
Finally, partial recognition of a beryllium worker's plight
When federal officials denied Tim Brady's request for help with
his medical bills a few months ago, the decision prompted an
obvious and disturbing question: What's it going to take for
beryllium workers to get assistance?
The answer, apparently, is persistence. The answer, apparently,
is always going to be persistence.
Brady, a former employee of the American Beryllium Co. in
Tallevast, had become a symbol of the environmental and public
health crisis in the community just north of the
Manatee-Sarasota county line.
The 40-year-old suffers from a chronic lung ailment and other
illnesses requiring more than $60,000 in medical treatment a
year. His symptoms mirror chronic beryllium disease, a
debilitating sickness linked to exposure to a toxic metal --
used at the Tallevast plant -- to make nuclear-weapon components
and other military parts.
Last week, Brady received word from the feds that he is
eligible, after all, for a program that pays up to $150,000 to
workers who can document their beryllium exposure and their
illnesses.
The government's reversal appears to be only a partial victory
for Brady, because officials still haven't agreed to pay for
monthly blood transfusions that help boost his immune system.
But, as Tallevast activists note, the decision is a positive
development. It's also another reminder that, at each and every
turn of this crisis, persistence has paid off.
The same level of determination will be needed in the months
ahead as the push continues to help others like Tim Brady and to
clean up widespread pollution in Tallevast.
Last modified: March 02. 2005 12:00AM
heraldtribune.com
the Herald-Tribune newspaper and SNN Channel 6 ©
. All rights reserved. Starting first
*****************************************************************
28 Newsday: NUCLEAR MEDICINE FUNDS TO DISAPPEAR UNDER PLAN
New York City - Health and Science
Newsday.com
Wednesday, Mar 2, 2005, 10:13 PM EST NEW YORK NOW:
Brookhaven lab would be devastated if the House approves proposal
by the Department of Energy
BY JAMIE TALAN STAFF WRITER
Proposed budget cuts by the Department of Energy would phase out
research in nuclear medicine at Brookhaven National Laboratory
and elsewhere.
Brookhaven scientists would lose up to $6million a year in
federal funding. The plan also would eliminate funding of nuclear
medicine at 23 universities
and three other national labs.
"It's a bad dream," said Stephen Dewey, a Brookhaven
neuroscientist whose work on addiction relies on the scanning
technology. "It's outrageous."
Nuclear scanning machines help doctors diagnose dozens of
diseases, including heart disease, cancer and Alzheimer's.
Brookhaven is the birthplace of some of the most widely used
radiotracers, which are used to peer deeply and safely into the
body. It is among a handful of
laboratories directly funded by the Department of Energy.
Last month, the Office of Management and Budget announced cuts
including $37 million for nuclear medicine research nationwide.
The budget drops from $37 million to $13 million in fiscal year
2006, and thereafter is eliminated, if approved by
the House in September.
"We judged that the DOE was not the appropriate place for
research on nuclear medicine," budget office spokesman Noam
Nuesner said. He said the National Institutes of Health "would be
a better source."
But the National Institutes of Health also has been hard-hit by
federal cuts, and none of its agencies has been designated to
fund this research, said Dr.
Thomas Budinger, a department head of nuclear medicine and
functional imaging at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
in California. His lab would lose more than $2 million a year in
funding.
"I'm struggling now to cover that loss," he said. "This is a
shock to all of us."
Since the Department of Energy's beginnings in the 1970s, it has,
by congressional mandate, funded medical uses of nuclear energy.
Before that, the
Atomic Energy Commission funded this research. Highly sensitive,
low-dose radioactive material is used.
z In the 1970s, scientists at Brookhaven developed
fluorodeoxyglucose, a radiotracer used in virtually every center
that houses a positron emission tomography machine, known as a
PET scan. The Energy Department also paid for work on thallium, a
radiotracer commonly used to view the heart. Brookhaven
scientists continue to develop radiotracers, including one to
trace the effects of
nicotine on the brain and another to measure a chemical involved
in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
"We need funding to take this technology into the future," added
Joanna Fowler, director of Brookhaven's Center for Translational
Neuroimaging. Today's patients are using technology developed
decades ago.
The Society for Nuclear Medicine has encouraged its members to
write letters opposing the cuts.
"There doesn't seem to be any basis for the reductions and no
contingency plans for how these critical research demands will be
met," said Robert Waters, a government affairs representative for
Washington- based law firm Gardner,
z Carton and Douglas, which represents the medical society. "The
field has been left high and dry."
Copyright © 2005, [http://www.nynewsday.com]
*****************************************************************
29 AU ABC: Veterans mount legal challenge over atomic testing legacy
02/03/2005:
[http://www.abc.net.au/]
Australian Broadcasting Corporation Lateline
Reporter: Suzanne Smith
SUZANNE SMITH: October 1952. Australian soldiers prepare for a
cataclasmic blast. It is the start of 11 years of British
nuclear tests on Australian soil. The bomb was rigged in the
hull of the frigate HMS Plymm, in a lagoon off the Montebello
Islands. The bomb is four times the size of the one that
devastated Hiroshima and radioactive dust particles spread as
far as Brisbane and Adelaide. RAAF pilots flew planes like this
into the plume on sampling sorties, without any protection or
radiation monitoring devices. One week later divers spent four
hours at Ground Zero dropping a line into the lagoon to check
for depth. Bill Fitzgerald was one of those men.
Were you wearing any protective clothing?
BILL FITZGERALD: No protective clothing, shorts only. I pulled
the line up myself, hand over hand, not realising at that stage
that perhaps I could have been contaminated. Because there
wasn't any decontamination on that island for our crew until
four or five weeks after the bomb.
SUZANNE SMITH: One month after detonation Bill Fitzgerald and
his crew were again sent to the Islands to test radiation
levels. This time they wore protective clothing and were
monitored.
BILL FITZGERALD: We were told not to switch our Geiger counters
on until we were in a certain area, but we did switch them on
and we found that the Geiger counter went right off scale. That
is recorded in my papers, but all the other exposure is not
recorded.
SUZANNE SMITH: Bill, like many other veterans, claim they were
unaware of any risks to their health.
BILL FITZGERALD: I didn't even think about it. None of us did.
Even though when Sir William Penny took passage on our ship to
the Montebellos, he did make a statement that some of us may be
sterile for a period of up to five years.
PROF GRANT SUTHERLAND: That amazes me, frankly.
SUZANNE SMITH: Geneticist, Professor Grant Sutherland, is the
key scientific advisor to the Department of Veterans Affairs'
current investigation. He says there is no scientific basis for
the warning given by British Chief Scientist, Sir William Penny,
seen here at the Emu Field test in South Australia.
PROF GRANT SUTHERLAND: They may have been told that. I've got no
idea of what the basis for that information was. They would need
to get far greater doses of radiation than I'm sure that
anybody, in other than an accident situation, would get for them
to be sterilised by it.
SUZANNE SMITH: However Bill Fitzgerald believes the radiation
did make him sterile for five years and led to chronic illness
for his granddaughter Phoebe. She was born with spina bifida.
BILL FITZGERALD: It's really upsetting me today because I'm
going back over that life. I've got a picture of her here.
That's Phoebe in the wheelchair, and her shunt had
malfunctioned. This was a rather large deformity for this child.
She was in a coma for 30 days.
PROF GRANT SUTHERLAND: The most likely event from small to
moderate doses of radiation is that there is a slight increase
in the risk of leukemia and some cancers. The risks of increased
likelihood of having children with birth defects, though, has
really never been shown. Spina bifida is now recognised as being
primarily due to a deficiency of folic acid very early in
pregnancy.
SUZANNE SMITH: Such conclusions conflict with new research by
two outspoken scientists in the UK. The first is Dr Sue
Rabitt-Roff.
DR SUE RABITT-ROFF: Work done at the laboratory level with mice
and other creatures in the past 10 to 15 years, and work that
was done in fact 50 years ago by scientists who won the Nobel
Prize in 1947/1948, which was well known to the scientists who
were developing the nuclear weapons tests, shows that the damage
can be transmitted through at least four to five generations of
creatures.
SUZANNE SMITH: Dr Rabbitt-Roff also says that veterans' children
in the UK are five times more likely to suffer from spina bifida.
DR SUE RABITT-ROFF: The point about spina bifida is that it has
been found in other populations and other children where the
parents have been involved in the radiation industry, whether
it's the weapons industry or the nuclear energy industry.
SUZANNE SMITH: However senior officials in the Department of
Veterans Affairs say Rabbitt-Roff's work has a gross recruitment
bias. Her numbers come from the death certificates of vocal
veterans groups; their members are likely to be sicker than
other vets. Unrepentant, Dr Rabbitt-Roff says the opposition to
her work, in Australia, is ironic.
DR SUE RABITT-ROFF: The irony is that in Australia veterans are
paid compensation. I know of at least a dozen cases where men
have been compensated with one, 200, $A300,000 for injuries
suffered at nuclear weapons tests. But it's virtually a secret
program, a closed program. The men are made awards on the
grounds that they don't discuss it with anybody for fear of
losing the award. I think the Government has a great fiscal
interest in keeping this a very closed activity.
SUZANNE SMITH: The acknowledged radiation expert, Professor Yuri
Debrova, studies irradiated families living near the Chernobyl
disaster and Soviet test sites. The fallout doubled the normal
rate of genetic mutation in families.
PROF YURI DEBROVA: When you irradiate people the mutation rate
in their germ cells, eggs and sperms, I would rather put it this
way; sperms and eggs is elevated and therefore they pass more
mutations to their children than those families which have not
seen exposure to radiation.
SUZANNE SMITH: While the 1985 Royal Commission found that one in
four vets will contract some form of radiation related disease,
the Government contends smoking or service in the Korean and
Vietnam Wars might also influence cancer rates. The US
Government, however, has a much more generous policy.
The US Government compensates for 21 forms of cancer. In
Australia we compensate for just two; leukemia and multiple
myeloma. Australian veterans are hoping a High Court action in
the UK in June will force a change in Government policy.
Bill Fitzgerald wants to make it clear that he has no gripes
against the navy or the Department of Veterans Affairs, but he
wants the Australian Government to act.
BILL FITZGERALD: It's not about me, it's about all of the people
that were involved, when Marilinga, Montebellos, whatever. The
air crews, the army guys, the navy fellows. A lot of people were
exposed to radiation.
[http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm]
*****************************************************************
30 AU ABC: Veterans widow fights Govt for compensation
[http://www.abc.net.au/] [contact and search links]
Australian Broadcasting Corporation Lateline
Broadcast: 02/03/2005
Reporter: Tony Jones
TONY JONES: And we invited the Veterans Affairs' Minister,
Deanne Kelly, to respond to the veterans' claims. She declined
our offer. Instead tonight we talk a woman who has spent the
last 15 years fighting the Government for compensation for the
death of her husband, Bill Smith, also a navy diver at the
Montebello atomic tests. Bill Smith died of non-Hodgkins
Lymphoma in 1990. I spoke to Margaret Smith just a short time
ago.
Margaret Smith, thank you for joining us.
MARGARET SMITH: Thank you.
TONY JONES: Could you start by telling us a little bit about how
your husband Bill got involved in these nuclear tests in the
first place and what he did?
MARGARET SMITH: Well he joined the navy in 1945, when he was not
quite 18. He was in there for 13 years and he was a diver in the
navy.
TONY JONES: So what happened? He has obviously told you, over
many years I imagine, the stories of what happened when he was a
diver at the Montebello tests. Can you tell us a little bit
about that?
MARGARET SMITH: Well, I remember him saying that he was sent
into radioactive waters to recover a barge and some cable, and
when that was brought on board the ship it was heavily covered
in growth and wrigglies. Someone saw it and was it was too hot
and they were told to put it back in the water. Then the deck
was just covered in this heavy growth and they had to clean it
all up.
TONY JONES: How long after the actual nuclear explosions was
this? Do you know?
MARGARET SMITH: I can't recall, really, now. It might have been
a week. I don't know.
TONY JONES: Did he tell you was he wearing any sort of
protective gear, or was he wearing a monitor to show how much
radiation he was absorbing?
MARGARET SMITH: No, no, no. He didn't. I think he only had
shorts on and breathing apparatus. But the other gear wasn't
suitable for where they were diving.
TONY JONES: Did he feel at the time that he might be exposed to
some danger by doing this?
MARGARET SMITH: Well he didn't think at the time, but later on
in years he was very concerned. He had pains in his back and
everything and they couldn't find out why, until in 1988 he was
very sick and they found he had non-Hodgkins Lymphoma and he was
off work for 12 months having chemo. He went back in January
1990 and it flared up again and he died in May 1990. A terrible
death, a terrible death. He was just skin and bone.
TONY JONES: What do you think, Margaret, was the official
attitude towards men like Bill who were there as servicemen, and
presumably some servicewomen, at those tests?
MARGARET SMITH: Well, they keep saying it didn't happen in
wartime, but he was employed by the navy and they are
responsible for his death and all the others.
TONY JONES: I know that in the past you've referred to them as
guinea pigs. Is that what you think?
MARGARET SMITH: Yes, that's right, he was a guinea pig and he
gave himself a death sentence when he went into the water.
TONY JONES: There was a class action, wasn't there, that Bill
was involved in? Why did that get dropped in the end?
MARGARET SMITH: Because he took that out in 1988, and as I said
he died in 1990. I continued because just to help the ones who
were living and the ones that have died. But I have got
absolutely nowhere. I've just been absolutely stressed out over
it. I've recently withdrawn the case because I would have lost
my house, and the Government said it was a waste of taxpayer's
money. I couldn't get Legal Aid because it was a waste of
taxpayer's money because I wouldn't win.
TONY JONES: What sort of response have you had from the
Government? I mean, I know, for example, that you've been
involved directly in this for a long time, you've even recently
written a submission to the latest inquiry.
MARGARET SMITH: Yes, that's right, and I haven't heard a word
about it.
TONY JONES: You know that the inquiry that you've written a
submission to is due to give its report fairly soon. What do you
expect from it? What's the best you can hope for?
MARGARET SMITH: Well I'd only get a gold card, and I think it's
15 years too late, as far as I'm concerned, for all the stress
I've gone through. As I said, it's not the money, I've been
fighting for justice for Bill.
TONY JONES: Who do you think, in the end, is mostly at fault
here? I mean, do you blame the British Government or the
Australian Government, or the Australian military?
MARGARET SMITH: Well, both. I think the British are looking
after their veterans, but the Australian Government is certainly
not.
TONY JONES: Do you have any hope at all that the inquiry that's
going on at the moment might bring an end to this for you?
MARGARET SMITH: I don't think so.
TONY JONES: Why not?
MARGARET SMITH: I mean it's been going on for 53 years so why
change it now?
TONY JONES: Right, Margaret Smith, we thank you very much for
coming in to talk us tonight.
MARGARET SMITH: Thank you.
[http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm]
*****************************************************************
31 Rocky Mountain News: Sick workers seek answers
Department of Labor tapped to catch up on Rocky Flats backlog
By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News
March 2, 2005
After five years of waiting for bureaucrats to fulfill
congressional orders to pay compensation to sick and dying
workers who built bombs at Rocky Flats, it didn't take long for
tempers and tears to show Tuesday night at a meeting to discuss
the latest program changes.
Congress last fall transferred the Department of Energy's 24,000
still-pending applications to the Department of Labor.
Laura Schultz, a Rocky Flats engineer on oxygen and suffering
from a multitude of ailments including cancer, seizures and
stomach problems, was shaking with frustration halfway through
the meeting over a requirement for proof that her condition was
caused by radioactive and toxic chemicals at the highly
secretive plant.
"We don't know what we were exposed to," she tried to explain to
Labor officials who had called the meeting. "It was on a
need-to-know basis."
So how, she asked, can she prove a connection to the chemicals
when no one told her what they were?
In 2000, Congress admitted that thousands of atom-bomb workers
at Rocky Flats, on the outskirts of Denver, and other plants
around the country had put their lives at risk for national
security. It devised a two-part program to decide if the
workers' cancers and other illnesses were caused by their
exposure to radiation and toxic chemicals on the job.
The Department of Labor has paid out $1 billion in compensation
in its part of the program. In contrast, the Department of
Energy has spent $95 million on paperwork and managed to pay
only 31 people.
In the public meeting Tuesday night, Labor's task force manager
for the changeover, Rachel Leiton, was asked, "How long will it
be after we file to get a decision?"
"I don't know," she replied.
"Can you give me an approximation?"
"We don't know how easy it will be to get information," she
said.
But after the meeting, Leiton told the Rocky Mountain News that
Labor has a "goal" of paying 1,200 claims this year and catching
up on the entire backlog of applications transferred from the
Department of Energy within two years.
That's significantly better than Energy, which, at this time
last year, was hoping to catch up by 2023.
But Leiton could not make any estimate when Labor will finish
the still-pending cancer claims to the original Labor program,
because they have been in the hands of another government
agency, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and
Health.
NIOSH must try to calculate each worker's radiation
contamination, based on often-incomplete and inaccurate records,
and then decide if that caused the person's cancer, before Labor
can pay the claim.
Leiton said Labor is caught up on its part of the job and it is
waiting for NIOSH decisions.
A NIOSH science official at the meeting, Jim Neton, could not
give a date for completing the work, though last year officials
estimated the work would take until 2008. He said NIOSH now is
discussing deadlines with its contractor.
Leiton did promise that Labor will do a better job of figuring
out just what chemicals were used at Rocky Flats and what damage
they do to the human body. And she promised to review denials by
the Department of Energy.
One worker, whose claim was denied, asked if the same "idiots"
would be reviewing his claim now. Leiton promised fresh eyes.
Meetings planned
• When: 2 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. today
• Where: Arvada Center for the Arts and Humanities, 6901
Wadsworth Blvd.
• Information: 720-264-3060
imsea@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-5438
*****************************************************************
32 ITAR-TASS: Duma ratifies Vienna convention on liability for nuclear damage
02.03.2005, 14.11
MOSCOW, March 2 (Itar-Tass) - The ratification of the Vienna
Convention on Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage meets Russia’s
political, economic and scientific interests, said Konstantin
Kosachev, State Duma Foreign Relations Committee chairman.
Speaking at the State Duma on Wednesday, Kosachev said the
ratification of the Vienna Convention “meets political, economic
and scientific interests of Russia.”
Russia “did not pay for damage caused by the Chernobyl disaster.
Other countries paid 1.2 billion U.S. dollar compensations to
citizens for damage,” the Duma lawmaker stressed.
“The ratification of the Vienna Convention is a step towards
protecting interests of Russian citizens in assuming civil
liability for nuclear damage,” Kosachev noted.
He emphasised that Lithuania, Ukraine, the Czech Republic,
Slovakia, Romania and Bulgaria have nuclear facilities in their
territories. It is probable that “they (nuclear facilities) may
also cause damage to these countries, which are adjacent to
Russia.”
To this end, Kosachev said the lower house is working on a draft
law “On Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage and its Financial
Support”. In his words, the draft law may be discussed at the
second reading within one-two months.
“This law will make it possible to set civil liability for
nuclear damage at the amount of 60 million U.S. dollars that
responds to the Vienna Convention minimal damage,” the lawmaker
said.
Earlier in the day, the State Duma ratified the Vienna
Convention. The major aim of the document is to provide
financial support to citizens from a nuclear accident at a civil
nuclear power plant of other state. A total of 32 states are
members of the Vienna Convention, including Ukraine and
Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and
Hungary.
© ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy,
*****************************************************************
33 DenverPost.com: Energy workers get aid faster
Article Published: Wednesday, March 02, 2005
But ill Rocky Flats alumni say benefits still falling short
By Kim McGuire Denver Post Staff Writer
Arvada - The Department of Labor has paid out more than $13
million in benefits to 111 former nuclear workers and their
families since the inception of a new compensation program,
labor officials said Tuesday during a town hall meeting.
That program, known as Part E of the Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, provides medical
benefits and compensation to workers who were exposed to toxic
chemicals while working at federal facilities.
Last year, Congress stripped the Department of Energy of its
authority to manage compensation and benefits programs after
nuclear workers complained it wasn't processing claims quickly
enough.
During the four years that DOE ran its program, it paid on only
31 of the 25,000 claims filed.
In contrast, the Labor Department has approved 256 claims,
totaling $33.5 million in compensation. That amount does not
include claims paid under the new compensation program.
Still, many ill Rocky Flats workers and their families say that
despite the changes to the compensation program, many aren't
receiving the benefits they deserve.
Levi Samora, who worked at Rocky Flats for 24 years, said he
hasn't received any compensation even though he has been
diagnosed with beryllium disease, one of the illnesses covered
by the original Department of Labor program.
"Why do I have to continue to prove what I received out there is
what I received out there?," he said, explaining that he's been
asked to have a lung biopsy.
Labor Department officials said that in the next few months they
expect to make decisions on claims filed by survivors of
deceased workers who had their illnesses verified by a panel of
physicians. Workers who had their claims approved by DOE will be
next in line for compensation.
By the end of May, the Labor Department should have new
regulations in place for Part E, which officials said should
speed up the rest of the claims.
George Barrie, a former machinist at Rocky Flats who has been
diagnosed with a number of illnesses, said many workers can't
wait any longer for help.
"You've got your work cut out for you," he told officials. "I
feel for you. But please do your best because many of us are
dying."
Labor officials will meet with former workers again today at 2
p.m. and 6:30 p.m. at the Arvada Center for the Arts and
Humanities.
Staff writer Kim McGuire can be reached at 303-820-1240 or at
kmcguire@denverpost.com [kmcguire@denverpost.com] .
All contents Copyright 2005 The Denver Post or other copyright
*****************************************************************
34 Uranium Tailings Threaten Colorado River
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 20:45:43 -0600 (CST)
Uranium mine tailings a mere 1,000 feet away from the Colorado River
threaten downstream water supplies
(http://www.newwest.net/index.php/main/article/353/ )
A coalition of 21 western state members of Congress have [written the
Department of Energy [http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_2589670 ]] to get
the tailings moved.
Pictures at :http://www.moabtailings.org/
[Thanks to peakoil.com for this information]
= = = =
STILL FEELING LIKE THE MAINSTREAM U.S. CORPORATE MEDIA
IS GIVING A FULL HONEST PICTURE OF WHAT'S GOING ON?
= = = =
Daily online radio show, news reporting: www.DemocracyNow.org
More news: UseNet's misc.activism.progressive (moderated)
= = = =
Sorry, we cannot read/reply to most usenet posts but welcome email
FOR MORE INFORMATION: http://EconomicDemocracy.org/wtc/ (peace)
http://economicdemocracy.org/eco/climate-summary.html (Climate)
And http://EconomicDemocracy.org/ (general)
** ANTI-SPAM EMAIL NOTE: For email "info" and "map" don't work. Email to
** m-a-i-l-m-a-i-l (without the dashes) at economicdemocracy.org instead
*****************************************************************
35 deseret news: Moab tailings could wash into Colorado River
[deseretnews.com]
Wednesday, March 2, 2005
A matter of when, not if, U. professor says of uranium-mining
waste
By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News
If the Moab uranium tailings pile stays where it is, eventually a
big flood will wash it into the Colorado River.
Deseret Morning News graphic
"Not could. It will happen. It's just a matter of when,"
says one of the authors of a report on the subject, D. Kip
Solomon, a University of Utah professor of geology and
geophysics.
Even if no giant flood hits in the near future,
radioactive and chemical contamination apparently has leached
from it and migrated under the river. On the other side of the
Colorado are a nature preserve and the city of Moab.
About 11.9 million tons of uranium tailings and
contaminated soil were left near the Colorado River, three miles
northwest of Moab, when Atlas Minerals Corp. stopped production
in 1984. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, the wastes
cover 130 acres and were placed in an unlined impoundment.
Atlas "placed an interim cover over the tailings pile in
1995," the DOE adds.
The department has been preparing an environmental impact
statement about what to do with the tailings, which at the
closest point reach to within about 1,000 feet of the river.
Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. recently wrote to the DOE
expressing his determination that the pile should be hauled away
from the river as soon as possible.
"Recent flooding in the St. George and Santa Clara
regions of Utah also demonstrated the swift and immense force of
moving water in the desert," he wrote.
Huntsman's concerns are backed by studies, including one
published in December 2003 by Solomon and Philip Gardner, a
graduate student at the U.
DOE studies found ammonia and uranium in gravel below the
Matheson Wetlands Preserve across the river, the researchers
wrote.
"The magnitude of these concentrations and the location
of the highest values suggest that groundwater from the mill
tailings is flowing under the Colorado River and impacting
groundwater" beneath the preserve, they added.
"We believe that there are fluids that have migrated
underneath the river," Solomon said in a telephone interview.
Contrary to earlier expectations of the DOE, the river
was not a barrier to the flow. A lot of contaminated fluids are
discharging into the Colorado, he added. But some of it goes
under the river to the Moab side.
Whether this occurs depends on the amount of water in the
river and how much groundwater pumping is going on.
When the uranium mill was working, operators leached out
material they needed by pouring fluids on the tailings. This
caused material to leak out of the pile.
"They were pushing fluids beneath the river toward Moab,"
he said. Now that operations have ceased, whether the flow is
still occurring "is a little uncertain."
The study uncovered "very, very permeable gravel deposits
beneath the mill tailings, beneath the river and beneath the
entire Matheson Wetlands Preserve," Solomon added.
Permeable gravel is important for two reasons, he said:
• The layer amounts to a hydrological "superhighway."
It's a pathway along which groundwater can migrate under the
river. If enough pumping takes place on the tailings side, water
might flow toward it. If the reverse is true, water could flow
from the tailings toward Moab.
In that case, some controls may be possible through
pumping.
• The "very coarse gravels" show that the Colorado River
has flooded in the past, bringing in gravel and boulders. "The
river has migrated laterally over very large distances through
geologic time," he said.
Above the gravel is about 15 feet of fine, silty
material. The tailings are on top of the silt, approaching
within 1,000 feet of the river in one place.
The tailings amount to "a house that's literally built on
sands and silts," Solomon said. "They're not founded on any
really competent material," meaning they could easily wash away.
At 24 and 30 feet below the surface, geologists uncovered
organic material. A lab in Florida checked the age of the wood
and peat through carbon dating.
Radiocarbon dates for samples from the two floods ranged
between 1860 and 1980 for the most recent, and between 990 and
1090 AD for the earlier material. That is about when flood
waters carried them in.
The samples were taken from a bore hole on the Moab side
of the river. But the debris indicate the river's violence
throughout the zone.
The report by Gardner and Solomon explains, "The
radiocarbon ages of these two samples indicate that there have
been two flood events in the last 1,000 years that have scoured
down to 24 and 30 feet below present land surface, respectively,
at a distance of more than 260 feet from the present river
channel."
During January's flooding, the Santa Clara River in
southwestern Utah rapidly ate away at its banks.
"The biggest meander was 700 feet," said Jan Sandberg,
engineer for the city of St. George. "There was a lot of
meandering in lots of areas."
"In the city of Santa Clara, it took a huge bite, took
out a bunch of prime real estate," said Dean Cox, emergency
services director for Washington County.
An erosion of 700 feet would not quite bring the Colorado
River onto the Moab tailings. But the Santa Clara destruction
happened with just one flood, and that river is far smaller than
the Colorado.
If a big enough flood were to race through the Colorado,
said Dianne Nielson, executive director of the Utah Department
of Environmental Quality, "We're going to have uranium mill
tailings strewn along the banks and sandbars along that river
for distances downstream."
That, Nielson added, is unacceptable.
E-mail: bau@desnews.com [bau@desnews.com]
© 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
36 Bradenton Herald: Phosphates may need exit strategy
| 03/02/2005 |
SCOTT RADWAY
Herald Staff Writer
MANATEE - By the time the state raised a red flag about the
Mulberry Corporation's financial state in April 2000, the
phosphate company "had long since stopped operating," according
to a recent Florida Department of Environmental Protection memo.
Nine months later, in early 2001, Mulberry was bankrupt.
Today, the taxpayer bill to close Mulberry's two abandoned
phosphate plants - with most of that spent on the Piney Point
plant - is expected to reach $150 million.
That's why the state has adopted new, more stringent rules to
ensure phosphate companies maintain the finances needed to close
down their plants, which can quickly become major health and
environmental hazards if left untended. Rules which proponents
say Mulberry would have failed to meet much earlier.
"We have made it a much tougher test for a company to pass" to
demonstrate financial wherewithal, said Richard Cantrell, a
state DEP deputy director.
But not everyone is happy.
"They aren't strong enough, absolutely," said Tom Reese, an
attorney and member of Agency on Bay Management in St.
Petersburg. "We will still catch the problem too late, and then
what can you do about it?"
Reese said the rules require more financial hurdles but should
take another step and require cash is set aside for a close
down. Otherwise, he said, the state will end up in line with
everyone else owed money if a company goes belly-up.
Setting aside cash deposits is one of several ways a company can
demonstrate it is financially healthy in the new rules. Others
include corporate guarantees, financial tests, closure insurance
and a letter of credit. The company chooses which it will
pursue.
Glenn Compton, chairman of ManaSota-88, a regional environmental
advocacy group, called the new rules "fatally flawed." Compton
said there needs to be more corporate disclosure and worst-case
scenario estimates of how much it cost to close a plant.
ManaSota-88 is considering challenging the new rules, which
would postpone them taking effect in July.
The biggest concern about phosphate plants is the low-level
radioactive by-product of processing called phosphogypsum, which
is stacked outside the plant and holds wastewater. At Piney
Point, millions of gallons of toxic waste water collected in
four enormous stacks and threatened to overflow into Tampa Bay
after the plant closed.
The state spent $63 million sealing the stacks and treating the
water collected inside at the Piney Point plant. Another $32
million was spent on Mulberry's Polk facility. Projections are
for $150 million in total for closing both plants, Cantrell
said.
But Cantrell said the Environmental Regulations Commission,
which passed the new rules by a 5 to 1 vote, was attempting to
balance the need to protect the state and the public from future
Piney Points and also not overburden companies with financial
restrictions.
Cantrell added that the DEP would have preferred requiring cash
to ensure closure and supported including incentives for that
method. But state law, he said, called for additional options
for companies, such as financial tests that demonstrated the
assets and capital were available.
"You don't want companies to go out of business," Cantrell said.
"We want them there to manage the site safely and securely."
Gray Gordon, manager of public affairs for Mosaic Fertilizer,
the largest phosphate company in Florida, said his company would
have to set aside several hundred million dollars to ensure all
its sites were closed. Something, which he said, would
overburden the company.
"No industry could take all the liability it could possibly have
and put that money in the bank," Gordon said, adding that new
requirements for plant management and closure plans and more
frequent financial reporting should protect the state.
"We think (the new rules) are a good change for the protection
of the state and the environment," Gordon said.
Scott Radway, environmental reporter, can be reached at 708-7919
or at sradway@HeraldToday.com [sradway@HeraldToday.com] .
*****************************************************************
37 ens: Science Panel: Some High-Level Nuclear Waste Should Stay Put
Environment News Service (ENS)
www.ens-newswire.com
WASHINGTON, DC, March 2, 2005 (ENS) - Some types of radioactive
waste at U.S. Department of Energy sites should be buried or
left in place rather than shipped to a geological repository,
such as the one proposed for Yucca Mountain, Nevada, say two new
reports from the National Academies' National Research Council.
The nation needs to establish a "formal, risk-informed" approach
to decide which wastes should stay on-site and which should be
shipped away, said the 11 member Committee on Risk-Based
Approaches for Disposition of Transuranic and High-Level
Radioactive Waste.
[tanks] The Hanford Nuclear Site in southcentral Washington
state contains underground storage tanks that holding 54 million
gallons of hazardous and radioactive waste. (Photo courtesy
Hanford [http://hanford-site.pnl.gov/] ) At issue are millions
of gallons of highly radioactive waste left over from Cold War
bomb-making now stored in steel tanks at sites in South
Carolina, Washington, and Idaho.
Reports by two panels of the National Academies urged the Energy
Department to revamp its $140 billion cleanup plans for defense
nuclear waste with the aim of transporting a smaller quantity of
it to a central repository.
The panel found that it is "technically impractical and
unnecessary" to remove every last gram of high-level radioactive
waste and ship it to a repository.
"Given the controversy surrounding this issue and the reality
that not all of the waste will or can be recovered and disposed
of off-site, the country needs a structured, well-thought-out
way to determine which wastes can stay," said David E. Daniel,
chair of the committee that wrote the report and dean, College
of Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
[Daniel] Committee Chair David E. Daniel is dean of the College
of Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. (Photo
courtesy UI [http://www.engr.uiuc.edu/about/dwelcome.php] )
"Information about the relative risks posed by various disposal
options is vital to the decision-making process, and that
information must be developed in a manner the public can trust,"
Daniel said.
The committee did not identify specific wastes that should be
approved for alternative disposal.
Some transuranic waste currently buried at these sites, which
consists of contaminated tools, clothing, and other debris, may
not need to be removed to the the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in
New Mexico, or WIPP, where this type of waste is buried in salt
caverns.
The committee did not comment on how waste remaining on-site
should be disposed of.
"The risk to workers and the environment involved in recovering
some hard-to-retrieve waste, as well as the cost of doing so,
may not be worth the reduction in risk - if any - that is
achieved by disposal in a geological repository," the committee
concluded.
The panel noted that techniques exist to separate highly
radioactive material from some wastes, greatly reducing the
potential hazard of what remains.
The scientists said agencies outside of the Energy Department
should be involved in determining what wastes should be left in
place and what should be transported to a repository, and
observed that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission both have expertise in regulating
radioactive material.
[workers] Sixty percent of the nation's nuclear waste is stored
in tanks at the Hanford Site. Here workers address one of the
177 tanks on-site. (Photo courtesy Hanford) The National
Research Council studies stemmed from a controversy triggered
when the DOE granted itself the authority to reclassify millions
of gallons of highly radioactive waste as "incidental" waste,
enabling it to leave it in tanks at facilities in Washington
state, South Carolina and Idaho, instead of moving it to a
permanent underground repository.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Yakama
Nation, the Shoshone-Bannock tribes, and the Snake River
Alliance, sued to stop the agency from abandoning the waste, and
prevailed in court in July 2003.
But last fall Congress granted DOE the authority to reclassify,
and therefore unilaterally dispose of, high-level waste in South
Carolina and Idaho, but not in Washington or any other state.
"By calling for direct external regulation over DOE’s
unilateral, ad hoc process of radioactive waste
reclassification, the National Academy of Sciences has clearly
sent a message that Congress must rein in DOE and address the
mess that it has made of nuclear waste cleanup policy," said
Geoff Fettus, the NRDC attorney who handled the case.
Most of the waste of concern is located in underground tanks at
the Hanford nuclear reservation in Washington state, the Idaho
National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory near Idaho
Falls, and the Savannah River site near Aiken, South Carolina.
The NRDC says that several tanks in Washington and South
Carolina are leaking. "More than a million gallons of this waste
have leaked from these storage tanks into the environment,"
Fettus said.
The committee recommended that DOE and other interested parties
implement a six-step decision-making process based on risk and
other factors before any waste is exempted from deep geological
disposal.
The report describes the characteristics of such a process and
provides an example that is compatible with existing
regulations, but it does not prescribe a specific process.
A second National Research Council report issued Tuesday says
the DOE should consider extending the life of facilities used to
treat and process radioactive waste at weapons and storage sites
in Idaho, South Carolina, Washington, and Tennessee.
[train] Train carrying high-level radioactive waste in casks
makes its way across Eureka County in northern Nevada. (Photo
courtesy YuccaMountain.org [http://www.yuccamountain.org/] ) DOE
currently plans to shut down these facilities when they are no
longer needed at each site, but the report says they could
potentially be used to process radioactive waste from other
sites, thereby accelerating overall cleanup efforts. Closing the
facilities prematurely could seriously delay the overall cleanup
of contaminated sites, the report warns.
The cleanup could be accelerated by declassifying contaminated
equipment left over from the Manhattan Project, according to the
report. As long as this equipment remains classified, only
employees with security clearance can work with it.
Declassification could help shorten cleanup time and decrease
costs.
In visits to the sites, the committee that wrote the report
noticed that buildings posing little risk were being destroyed
despite DOE's declared strategy of targeting the most
significant risks first.
The committee recognized that some wastes and contaminated
equipment will be left in place. To ensure the long-term safety
of what remains, the report recommends that DOE follow the
"cocooning" approach now being used to secure reactors at the
Washington site. This concept involves stabilizing and
monitoring wastes and making adaptations as new knowledge
emerges, while keeping all stakeholders clearly informed.
In light of the National Research Council conclusions, the NRDC
today called on Congress to block the DOE from disposing highly
radioactive waste in South Carolina, Idaho, Washington or New
York.
The environmental group would like to see the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency granted direct regulatory authority over the
disposal of DOE’s high-level radioactive waste.
Nevada Senator Harry Reid, a Democrat, has lobbied to prevent
the transportation of 70,000 tons of high-level radioactive
waste by road and rail from 39 states to Nevada for disposal.
"What we should do with nuclear waste is leave it where it is,"
Reid said in July 2001. "Eminent scientists say that that is the
safest way to store the nuclear waste. It could be stored on
site in dry-cask storage containers for a fraction of the cost
of a repository, a monitor retrieval storage system or a
permanent repository. It could be done with no danger."
Reid says leaving the waste in place temporarily would give
scientists time to devise better solutions.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been licensing dry cask
storage systems at many nuclear reactors across the country.
"Basically, every human individual carries responsibility for
the benefit or welfare of humanity and for the planet itself,
because this planet is our only home. We have no alternative
refuge. Therefore, everyone has the responsibility to care not
only for our fellow human beings but also for insects, plants,
animals and this very planet."
-- His Holiness Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama.
Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2005. All Rights
*****************************************************************
38 Las Vegas RJ: Agency pursues additional water
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
Nevada officials fight DOE's requestfor more gallons for Yucca
project studies By KEITH ROGERS
REVIEW-JOURNAL
The Department of Energy wants more of Nevada's water to
complete scientific work at the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear
waste repository.
Meanwhile, a project official said the repository will not be
ready to open until as late as 2015, three years past a recent
projected opening date of 2012.
State attorneys in court papers filed Tuesday argued the
department does not need more water because scientific studies
were finished when former Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham
recommended the site to President Bush in 2002.
"Despite DOE's somewhat vague assertions that it needs water
now to conduct new studies, it has no authority to do anything
other than maintain the site until it files a license
application" with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said papers
filed by Nevada Senior Deputy Attorney General Marta Adams.
In a telephone interview Tuesday, Adams said the Energy
Department "has no legal authority to conduct further scientific
studies on the site until they have a new radiation standard."
Adams said, "Now they're saying they need water. Sorry. You're
further from needing water than you've ever been."
In 2003, State Engineer Hugh Ricci denied the department
permanent rights to 140 million gallons per year of groundwater.
Later, U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt put a stay on the case
pending the outcome of a District of Columbia appeals court
ruling that invalidated the government's 10,000-year radiation
safety standard.
"Without a radiation standard in place, DOE cannot file a
supportable license application with NRC," Adams' court papers
said.
In May, Justice Department trial attorney Stephen Bartell sent
a letter to Nevada Deputy Attorney General Michael Wolz that
said DOE needs 2 million gallons of groundwater for studies of a
waste-handling facility.
That water would be in addition to what the state is supplying
to the site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
At a nuclear waste conference this week in Tucson, Ariz., the
project's deputy director, John Arthur, said the repository will
not be ready to open until as late as 2015, three years past the
2012 opening projected by former waste management chief Margaret
Chu.
An energy industry newsletter reported Arthur calculated the
opening could be as late as 2017
Before Chu's resignation and her announcement the opening was
off track, Energy Department officials said the repository was
on schedule to open in 2010.
Allen Benson, a spokesman for DOE's Office of Repository
Development in Las Vegas, said Arthur told a session of the
Waste Management '05 conference Monday that repository is
expected to open between 2012 and 2015.
"It depends on bucks and resolution of the EPA standard," Benson
said.
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
39 Las Vegas RJ: DOE urged to revamp plans for disposal of nuclear waste
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
By H. JOSEF HEBERT
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON -- A significant amount of radioactive waste from
Cold War bomb-making should remain at former production sites,
and several locations should be kept open longer than planned to
treat waste from elsewhere, scientists recommended Tuesday.
Reports by two panels of the National Academies urged the
Energy Department to revamp its massive $140 billion cleanup
plans for defense nuclear waste with the goal of transporting
less of it to a central facility.
This would allow cleanup activities to be completed sooner and
cost less, the panels said. The current cleanup schedule,
involving dozens of sites, envisions most waste treatment and
disposal to be finished in 20 years.
But the scientists also called for greater involvement outside
of the Energy Department in determining what wastes should be
left in place and what should be transported to a geological
repository.
The report said the department's credibility on decisions
involving waste disposal is hampered because the DOE both
proposes and approves waste disposition plans.
"DOE should not attempt to adopt these changes unilaterally,"
said the panel, suggesting the Environmental Protection Agency
or Nuclear Regulatory Commission and perhaps an independent
group of experts get involved in assessing how radioactive
wastes should be treated.
This approach was applauded by some environmentalists Tuesday,
who have argued that DOE has too much power in making waste
disposal decisions.
The report "clearly sent a message that Congress must rein in
DOE and address the mess that it has made of nuclear waste
cleanup policy," said Geoff Fettus, a lawyer for the Natural
Resources Defense Council.
There was no immediate reaction from the Energy Department.
Citizen activists and state officials argue that the federal
government is required to remove as much of the highly
radioactive waste left over from bomb-making as is technically
possible.
Such waste, they say, should go to an underground disposal site
known as WIPP in New Mexico or the high-level waste repository
proposed at Yucca Mountain.
States with some of the biggest cleanup challenges -- including
Washington, Idaho and South Carolina -- have argued that
high-level defense nuclear waste should be taken away for deep
geological burial.
But a National Research Council panel, asked to review the
government program, concluded that the "recovery of every last
gram" of such waste "will be technically impractical and
unnecessary."
In some cases removing waste could lead to increased human
exposures to radiation, the panel said. It also said the expense
associated with retrieval, immobilization and disposition of
some of the waste in a central repository "may be out of
proportion with the risk reduction achieved, if any."
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
40 American Online: WCS can take more waste
[http://www.oaoa.com]
Wednesday, 02 March 2005
c /o Odessa American 222 E. 4th Street P.O. Box 2952 Odessa, TX
79760
TCEQ sets public meeting for March 31
Odessa American
ANDREWS COUNTY Waste Control Specialists can now take in more
low-level radioactive waste after getting a license amendment
from the State Department of Health Services.
The company, which has facilities in western Andrews County, can
now take in 1.5 million cubic feet of waste compared to the
250,000 cubic feet it could store before the amendment was
granted.
The license amendment, approved Feb. 23, means Waste Control can
take low-level waste from almost anywhere, company General
Manager Tom W. Jones III said.
Jones said it would be a couple of weeks before Waste
Control can gauge customer response.
One place it was looking to get waste from is the former
U.S. Department of Energy uranium processing plant in Fernald,
Ohio.
But Gary Stegner, public affairs officer for the U.S.
Department of Energy Ohio field office, said a decision on where
to send waste from Fernald’s three silos wouldn’t come for
another three to four weeks.
But the amendment wasn’t granted without restrictions. Richard
Ratliff, radiation program officer for the Department of State
Health Services in Austin, said the U.S. Department of Energy
would have to provide notice to the State Department of Health
Services that the federal agency retains ownership of the waste
30 days before Waste Control can take waste.
Another condition is that DOE would remove the waste from Texas
if there were no disposal site in the state within two years.
Waste Control has applied for a license from the Texas Commission
on Environmental Quality to dispose of low-level radioactive
waste.
If WCS gets the disposal license, the waste could stay at WCS,
Ratliff said. But if WCS doesn’t get the license, and the waste
is not off-site or out of Texas by October 2007, Waste Control
could be subject to civil and administrative penalties, he said.
Meanwhile, Jones said TCEQ has declared Waste Control’s
disposal license application “administratively complete” and has
set a public meeting to take comments for 7 p.m. March 31 at
Andrews High School.
*****************************************************************
41 AU ABC: Debate flares over SA uranium mining
[http://abc.net.au/] [ABC Utilities Navigation Bar]
Thursday, 3 March 2005
South Australia is enjoying a booming interest in its uranium
resources, with two companies announcing new plans for
exploration.
But anti-nuclear activists have warned the companies may be
wasting their time.
Marathon Resources has revealed plans to expand its search for
uranium at Mount Gee, while Havilah Resources says it is setting
up a new company called Curnamona Energy to look for uranium
west of Broken Hill.
Curnamona chairman Bob Johnson says he has been encouraged by
recent comments from the SA Opposition Leader Rob Kerin that
Australia should reopen the nuclear energy debate.
"Seriously, the state should be looking at other sources of
energy," he said.
But David Noonan from the Australian Conservation Foundation
says people should be careful about investing in companies
hoping to set up new uranium mines in South Australia.
"Essentially it's clearly against Government policy and we
believe wouldn't get through the approval hurdles any more," he
said.
Mr Noonan is also critical of Curnamona's plans to use the
controversial in-situ leaching mining method.
Last Updated: 03/03/2005 08:34:00 (ACDT)
[http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm] | Information about the use
*****************************************************************
42 Pahrump Valley Times: Inyo residents leery of transports
March 2, 2005
YUCCA MOUNTAIN, HOT SPRINGS FOCUS OF TOWN HALL DISCUSSION
By ROBIN FLINCHUM SPECIAL TO THE PVT
TECOPA - Transportation of nuclear waste along California State
Route 127, the proposed Yucca Mountain Repository, and the
Tecopa Hot Springs Park were the top issues of concern to some
30 Southeast Inyo County residents who recently turned out to
meet with their newly elected Fifth District Supervisor Richard
Cervantes. After eating lunch with other seniors in the Tecopa
Senior lunch program, Cervantes spent more than two hours
answering questions and addressing local concerns at the Tecopa
Community Center.
Cervantes said he has been invited by the Department of Energy
to come to Washington and participate in discussions about the
proposed Yucca Mountain Nuclear Repository and was looking for
input from affected Southeast Inyo County residents. Many of
those in attendance expressed concerns about the ongoing
transport of low-level waste over Highway 127, a two-lane
highway that passes very near Tecopa and right through the towns
of Shoshone and Death Valley Junction.
Corbin Harney, Western Shoshone elder and environmental
spokesman, asked Cervantes to carry a very clear message to
Washington; "I want you to tell them they are liars," Harney
said at the meeting. "I want you to find out if you can get an
answer to who owns the land (Yucca Mountain). They didn't buy it
from nature. We didn't sell it, because we didn't own it. Find
out, why are they destroying the Mother, the only Mother we
have? Tell them to put their stuff in Washington where they can
watch it real close."
Cervantes said he shared some of the views expressed by Harney
and others. "Some of this waste has a half life of 24,000 years.
I think it's a little presumptuous of man to think we could
design something that will last 24,000 years," he said. "It kind
of goes against my grain to take our mess and bury it in the
ground like that."
The other issue of concern was the recent transition of the
management of the Tecopa Hot Springs Park from the county to a
private concessionaire called California Land Management.
Several local residents as well as winter only (or snowbird)
users of the park expressed their dissatisfaction with the new
arrangement, while others defended CLM and commended the clean
up and repair efforts the company has made to date.
Of greatest concern to most was the issue of possibly
transferring management of the park to the local community. Brad
Goans, spokesman for the Friends of Tecopa, outlined his group's
plan to submit a proposal to the Inyo County Board of
Supervisors asking that the contract with CLM be terminated and
the management be put in the hands of the local group. "The
current contract has a 30-day out clause for either the county
or CLM for any reason," Goans said.
"We also have many concerns about the legality of how this was
done." Goans and other members of the Friends of Tecopa will be
circulating petitions in support of their proposal and hope to
present it to the supervisors in a matter of weeks.
Jennifer Viereck, of Hummingbird Family Resources, a group that
contended with CLM for local management of the springs when the
county put out its original request for proposals, said that she
understood the Hummingbird was passed over because "we couldn't
do certain repairs. But then CLM wasn't required to do them
either. We had people standing by with hammers ready to make the
place ADA compliant within the first three months."
Cervantes promised bath users he would look into issues of
noncompliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The
pools, according to local users, were never put into compliance
during the county's term of management and it was understood
that CLM would correct this. So far, users complain, no efforts
have been made in this direction.
Cervantes said he supported the community's right to
self-determination but that "the county is now committed to a
contract with CLM and they don't take that lightly." Any change
in that arrangement, he said, "is going to be difficult."
"The board would seriously consider it if all risks to the
county could be eliminated," he said about the Friends group
proposal. This would include the hot button of liability and
insurance, one of the main reasons the county chose to go with
CLM. "CLM provides insurance, employees, and a great amount of
working capital behind them that the county can rely on. I don't
think (revenue) is the big issue or the county wouldn't have
given it to CLM for $125 a month."
Cervantes also said he was unconvinced that the county's
previous claims that the park was running at a burdensome
financial deficit were accurate. "I met with the county
employee's union representative," Cervantes said, "and he showed
me in black and white where they had padded the records to
justify their desire to hand it off." The previous
administration, said Cervantes, had "ignored it so long they
built up a huge deferred maintenance problem."
Several of those in attendance thanked Cervantes for making the
trip and taking an interest in their views. Cervantes said he
intends to make Tecopa "a regular stop" in order to keep in
touch with the residents in this part of the county.
For comment or questions, please e-mail
webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
[webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com]
Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2005
*****************************************************************
43 Las Vegas SUN: Some 'high-level' nuke waste may not deserve rating
Today: March 02, 2005 at 11:10:08 PST
SUN STAFF AND WIRE
WASHINGTON - Some high-level nuclear waste at Energy Department
sites, likely a small amount, may not be worthy of "high-level"
classification at all -- and should not be shipped to Yucca
Mountain, scientists say.
At issue in a recent study was waste left over from Cold War
bomb-making, now the subject of massive clean-up efforts. Waste
deemed as "high-level" likely would be bound for the planned
national nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain.
But some percentage of that waste might better be left in place
rather than risking human health and inviting environmental
dangers, according to reports released Tuesday from two panels
of National Academies of Science.
The panels urged the Energy Department to revamp its massive
$140 billion cleanup plans for defense nuclear waste with the
goal of transporting less of it to Yucca and the Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant in New Mexico, or WIPP, where lower-level wastes are
buried.
This would allow cleanup activities to be completed sooner and
cost less, the panels said. The current cleanup schedule,
involving dozens of sites in a number of states, envisions most
waste treatment and disposal to be finished in 20 years.
The Energy Department should determine which types of waste and
how much may not require disposal at Yucca, panel member John
Applegate said.
"Potentially there is a consequence for Yucca Mountain,
certainly," Applegate said. "But how much (waste) is hard to
determine."
The panels urged the Energy Department to establish a
"risk-informed" process to determine what waste should be buried
in shallow storage or left in place rather than hauled to Yucca
or WIPP.
"Given the controversy surrounding this issue and the reality
that not all of the waste will or can be recovered and disposed
of off-site, the country needs a structured, well thought-out
way to determine which wastes can stay," said David Daniel,
panel chairman and Engineering College dean at the University of
Illinois in Urbana-Champaign.
The scientists also called for greater involvement outside of
the Energy Department in determining what wastes should be left
in place and what should be transported to Yucca.
The report said the department's credibility on decisions
involving waste disposal is hampered because the department both
proposes and approves waste disposition plans.
"DOE should not attempt to adopt these changes unilaterally,"
said the panel.
*****************************************************************
44 51 Years of Nuclear Testing Fallibility. Bravo?
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 00:35:35 -0600 (CST)
March 1st , 2005 marks the 51st anniversary of the 1954 US "Bravo"
hydrogen bomb test on Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands that
unexpectedly turned out to be the largest US nuclear test ever
conducted. "Bravo" gouged a crater about a mile wide in the reef
of Bikini Atoll. Within seconds of the blast, the fireball was
nearly three miles in diameter. On Rongerik, an island 135 miles
east of the blast, the illumination from "Bravo" was visible for
almost one minute.
Physicist Marshall Rosenbluth, located on a ship about 30 miles
away, stated that the fireball "just kept rising and rising, and
spreading...it looked to me like what you might imagine a diseased
brain, or a brain of some mad man would look like on the surface...and
the air started getting filled with this gray stuff, which I guess
was somewhat radioactive coral."
Human Fallibility
"Bravo" brought to light the consequences of human fallibility with
regards to nuclear weapons. In preparing for the test, Los Alamos
scientists missed an important fusion reaction and grossly
underestimated the size of the explosion. The scientists expected
that the test would yield the equivalent of five million tons of
TNT, but instead "Bravo" yielded 15 megatons - making the destructive
force three times larger than expected and more than 1,000 times
greater than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
Human Consequences
Some 80 miles east of Bikini , a snow-like substance began raining
down on 23 fishermen onboard a Japanese tuna fishing vessel called
the Lucky Dragon. The fishermen had no idea that the ash was fallout
from the hydrogen bomb test. When they returned to their home port
of Yaizu in Shizuoka prefecture on 14 March, all of the fisherman
were suffering from severe radiation sickness. In September 1954,
the radio telegraph operator on the Lucky Dragon died. The incident
raised interest and concern both in Japan and around the world.
Following extended negotiations, the US made a payment of $2 million
to the Japanese government in January 1955, without legal liability,
to compensate for all injuries and damages caused as a result of
the five nuclear tests it had conducted in the Marshall Islands .
Marshall Islanders on Rongelap and Utirik atolls (about 100 miles
east of Bikini ) were also exposed to the fallout. An Islander on
Rongelap recalls, "[There was] a loud explosion and within minutes
the ground began to shake. A few hours later, the radioactive fallout
began to drop on the people, into the drinking water, and on the
food. The children played in the colorful ash-like powder. They did
not know what it was." While 28 US Service Personnel located on
Rongerik (about 135 east of Bikini ) were evacuated within 34 hours
of the test, Rongelap and Utirik islanders exposed to the fallout
were not evacuated for another day. By this time, many of the
Rongelap islanders had severe burns, lesions and were beginning to
lose their hair. The Marshall Islands became a United Nations Trust
Territory of the US after World War II.
While "Bravo" is a well-known test, the US conducted a total of 67
nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands alone from 1946 to 1958. The
total yield of the 67 tests was 108 megatons, equivalent to the
destructive force of more than 7,000 Hiroshima bombs. In 1988, the
Marshall Islands Nuclear Claims Tribunal was established to grant
compensation to Marshall Islanders for personal injury deemed to
have been caused by nuclear testing.
Although some $270 million was provided to victims between 1986 and
2001, half a century later, islanders are still waiting on a stalled
bid for compensation. During a visit to the Marshall Islands in
January 2004, Congressman Richard Pombo (R-CA), who chairs the House
Resources Committee which oversees funding to the Marshall Islands,
admitted that Washington's obligations have not ended. Pombo stated,
"Obviously, the United States has an ongoing liability (for the
nuclear test legacy).
This issue is 50 years old. At some point we need to find closure."
Historical Lesson Lost?
Despite fallibility in the history of US nuclear testing, the Bush
administration is seeking to decrease the amount of time that is
required to prepare the Test Site to conduct a nuclear test. In
2004, Congress authorized $25 million in order to decrease the
preparation time to resume nuclear testing from 36 to 24 months.
For 2005, Congress has authorized $26.8 million for enhanced test
site readiness to ensure that the Nevada Test Site could execute
an underground nuclear weapons test within 18 months of receiving
orders by the President. For 2006, the administration is requesting
$25 million.
While the present US administration insists that it will not end
the worldwide test moratorium that has been in place since 1992,
increased funding for enhanced readiness of the Nevada Test Site
appears to be part of a well-coordinated effort to resume production
of nuclear weapons, including new and untested weapons. Resumption
of US full-scale underground nuclear testing would undoubtedly lead
other countries to resume testing, essentially defeating any chance
for near or long-term US ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty. Neither the US nor the rest of the world can afford the
nuclear arms race that would be caused by the resumption of nuclear
testing.
Take Action
Write a letter to the editor on nuclear priorities in the 2006
Budget!
If you are a US citizen, please click here