*****************************************************************
04/25/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.94
*****************************************************************
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 independent.co.uk: A government at bay over Iraq war legality
2 Guardian Unlimited: Iraq War Dogs Blair As Campaign Winds Down
3 Aljazeera.com: Iran considers policy changes only -
4 independent: US prepares for nuclear stand-off with Pyongyang
5 US: www.GovExec.com - GAO: Energy contracts mismanaged
6 US: Editor and Publisher: Revisionist History on an Atomic Scale
7 Uri Avnery on Vanunu's plight and the nuclear threat
8 [du-list] Boyle's Law
9 independent.co.uk: Expanding nuclear instead of green energy 'could
NUCLEAR REACTORS
10 Meeting On Nuclear Power Plant Safety Ends At UN Atomic Agency
11 Chernobyl: 7 Million In Ex-USSR Believed Suffering Re Chernobyl
12 Chernobyl: Media Truth & Distortions
13 Guardian Unlimited: BE struggles to improve efficiency
14 BBC: Blair 'to debate nuclear power'
15 US: NRC: NRC Staff Schedules Public Meeting for April 28 to Discuss
16 NZ: Scoop: Meeting On Nuclear Power Plant Safety Ends At UN Atomic A
17 US: NRC: NRC to Meet with Southern Nuclear Officials to Discuss Safe
NUCLEAR SECURITY
18 US Takes Brakes Off Nuke Arms Race
19 Moscow Times: Stymied by Nuclear Secrecy
20 AP Wire: U.S. weapons inspector finishes Iraq work
21 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: NYT Smells N.Korea Quarantine Plan
22 BBC: N Korea warned over nuclear test
23 Xinhua: US, S.Korean negotiators discuss strategies on nuclear issue
24 Korea Times: Allies Agree on Best Tactics for N. Korean Nukes
25 Mos News: Pentagon Officials Inspect Russian Site Dismantling Ballis
26 Guardian Unlimited: South Korea Warns North Over Nuclear Test
NUCLEAR SAFETY
27 [du-list] Intelligence EU agencies to tell about the DU issue:
28 [du-list] THE TWO-HEADED SERPENT: Depleted Uranium
29 US: Seattle Times: Hanford downwinders get their day in court
30 US: KCRG.com: Ammo Plant Workers
31 US: Hawk Eye Newspaper: IAAP watchers face next round
32 US: Hawk Eye Newspaper: AEC and DoE workers at IAAP should get their
33 US: Hawk Eye Newspaper: Fuortes honored for efforts
34 US: Hawk Eye Newspaper: Harkin plans meeting to discuss IAAP issue
35 US: NRC: NRC Publishes Regulatory Issue Summary on Fire Protection C
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
36 US: New Mexican: Changes in WIPP operations suggested by DOE
37 US: Times Argus: Legislators turn attention to nuclear waste, crime,
38 Las Vegas SUN: DOE announces new leadership of Yucca nuclear waste p
39 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Moab tailings plan riles landowners in Cresce
40 US: ICT: Navajos ban uranium mining, oppose federal subsidies
41 US: AU ABC: Green groups fight Kakadu uranium mine plan.
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
42 New on TVC's web site: nuke report, more
43 Plutonium at Livermore Lab will double says DOE
44 sacbee.com: Politics - Nuclear lab site plans to grow -
45 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Downwinders' Hanford claim goes to trial
46 ABQJOURNAL: Northrop bids on LANL contract worth up to $44 billion
47 SF Chronicle: Final plan could double plutonium at Lawrence Livermor
48 Tri-Valley Herald: Report details plans for Livermore lab site
49 KRQE News 13: Northrup Grumman to bid on LANL
50 LA TIMES: A Blue Tinge in the West
51 lamonitor.com: Board takes a look at Area G
52 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 independent.co.uk: A government at bay over Iraq war legality
By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor
25 April 2005
The Iraq war was thrust to the top of the election agenda last
night after the Attorney General's advice to the Prime Minister
over the legality of the conflict was leaked.
The leak sparked the most bitter personal attacks on Mr Blair of
the campaign so far with Michael Howard, the Tory leader,
calling the Prime Minister a "liar". Charles Kennedy, the
Liberal Democrat leader, said it would put trust in Mr Blair at
the heart of the election and turn the contest into a referendum
on Mr Blair's integrity.
Sensing that the tide could swing against Mr Blair, the Liberal
Democrats today publish anti-war advertisements depicting Tony
Blair and George Bush smiling together with the message: "Never
again".
Mr Kennedy will call for a fresh Falklands-style public inquiry
into Mr Blair's conduct over the war. "Tony Blair claims his
government has been open and straightforward on Iraq but every
piece of information has been wrung out of them in the face of
stiff resistance," he will say. "It took the death of David
Kelly before we found out the truth behind the dodgy dossier and
the infamous 45-minute claim.
"It is this Labour government which took the decision to send
our troops to Iraq. It is they who must be held accountable."
A Liberal Democrat strategist said today's attack on the
Government over Iraq had been planned. "We delayed the campaign
on Iraq because we didn't want to be seen as a one-trick pony,
but this leak underlines our case that the war was illegal."
The leak revealed that 12 days before Britain went to war, Lord
Goldsmith warned Mr Blair in a 13-page memo of six reasons why
the war could be illegal. In spite of assurances that the
Attorney General had been "unequivocal" in saying that the war
would be legal, Lord Goldsmith said Britain could be challenged
under international law because it was up to the UN, not Mr
Blair, to decide whether Saddam Hussein was in breach of UN
resolutions. He said it would be "safer'' to obtain a second
resolution to justify using military force.
Lord Goldsmith also cast doubt on the earlier UN resolution
secured at the time military action was used against Saddam to
free Kuwait in 1990 of Iraqi forces as the basis for fresh
military action. Ministers have repeatedly insisted that
resolution 678 allowed military action to be used, but doubts
were cast on the legality of such action by Lord Goldsmith.
Lord Goldsmith's hitherto unpublished advice to Mr Blair
appeared to contradict the assurances given to the Cabinet in a
two-page report on 17 March and repeated to Parliament that the
Government's most senior law officer was unequivocal.
The Independent has learnt that the Government is also facing a
potentially explosive challenge over its refusal to disclose the
date on which Mr Blair first sought the Attorney General's
advice on the legality of the war. The challenge came from the
leading human rights lawyer, Lord Lester QC, who said the date
could show that Mr Blair decided to go war much earlier than
previously disclosed, possibly after he returned from President
Bush's Texas ranch in 2002.
Ann Abrahams, the Parliamentary Ombudsman, upheld a complaint
about the Government's refusal to disclose the date, and the
Government's deadline for releasing the information expired on
Friday.
Lord Lester will today apply to the Information Commissioner
Richard Thomas for the release of the date under the Freedom of
Information Act. "It must be pure political embarrassment which
is causing them to defy the Ombudsman's findings," he said. "It
is an extremely rare thing to do and completely unacceptable.
What are they trying to hide?" A senior Labour strategist
dismissed allegations that there had been a cover-up about the
war as "garbage". Mr Blair and Gordon Brown will refocus on the
economy in British cities today.
The former US president Bill Clinton, in a live satellite link
from New York to a Labour rally in London, urged "disillusioned"
Labour voters not to sit back and abstain from voting on 5 May.
©2005 Independent News &Media (UK) Ltd.
*****************************************************************
2 Guardian Unlimited: Iraq War Dogs Blair As Campaign Winds Down
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday April 25, 2005 11:16 PM
AP Photo LON124
By ED JOHNSON
Associated Press Writer
LONDON (AP) - With less than two weeks before national
elections, opposition parties Monday attacked Prime Minister
Tony Blair over the Iraq war and questioned his integrity.
Blair, bolstered by a new poll giving his Labour Party a
10-point lead, shrugged off the criticism.
The Conservatives, who supported the war, accused Blair of lying
to justify the U.S.-led invasion. The Liberal Democrats, who
opposed it, called for an official probe of its legality and
said public trust in the prime minister was fatally wounded.
``They can call me what they like,'' said Blair, whose name is
frequently spelled ``Bliar'' by anti-war campaigners. ``Iraq has
happened. We should look to the future.''
Anger over the war simmered in the background during the first
two weeks of the campaign while the focus was on health care,
education and the economy. But, failing to make progress in the
polls, the opposition is turning up the heat as the May 5
election nears.
Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy questioned whether Blair
could be trusted when he promised there were no plans to attack
Iran over its nuclear program. Kennedy's party placed newspaper
advertisements Monday showing Blair smiling beside President
Bush, under the headline, ``Never Again.''
``Iraq deserves to be a central issue in this election, not only
because of what has happened but of what may yet come to pass,''
he said.
Conservative leader Michael Howard said Blair had overstated
flimsy British intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction.
``This is a man who has taken a stand on just one thing in the
eight years he's been prime minister, on the war in Iraq, and he
hasn't told the truth about that,'' Howard said.
Doubts about the wisdom and legality of the war have dogged
Blair. Several newspapers have suggested Blair's top legal
adviser came under political pressure to rule the war was legal
without a second U.N. resolution.
``You can go on forever trying to prove there was some
conspiracy, some plot. There was not,'' Blair told reporters. He
has repeatedly refused, however, to publish Attorney General
Lord Goldsmith's advice in full.
It appears, though, that the government's strong economic record
and investment in public services outweighs public anger over
the war. According to one opinion poll, only 3 percent of
respondents said Iraq was the most important issue at the ballot
box.
The economy, crime, the National Health Service and education
all loom larger, and according to polls, Labour is more trusted
to deliver on these issues than the opposition parties.
Blair accused his rivals of mounting ``a full-scale assault on
my character'' because they had no credible policies to offer.
``I think I did the right thing,'' he said, defending his
decision to back the war. ``I understand why some people think I
didn't. But for goodness sake, let's stop having this argument
about whether it's my character or my integrity that's at issue
here and understand the decision had to be taken.''
In the new poll released Monday, Labour led the Tories 40
percent to 30 percent. The survey, done by the NOP polling group
for The Independent newspaper, had the Liberal Democrats in
third, with 21 percent.
The pollsters interviewed 959 people between April 22 and 24. No
margin of error was reported.
Last week, the same poll gave Labour a 5 point lead, with
support from 37 percent compared to 32 percent for the
Conservatives.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
3 Aljazeera.com: Iran considers policy changes only -
4/25/2005 1:00:00 PM GMT
Ali Larijani said that Iran will consider policy changes if the
U.S. stops causing trouble
Iran’s presidential candidate Ali Larijani said that Iran will
consider policy changes only if the United States respects the
Islamic republic and abandons its unilateral policies.
“This means that instead of trying to eliminate Iran based on a
win-lose situation, they should pursue relations with the
country on a win-win basis,” Larijani, former head of state
television, said in a press conference.
“By this I do not mean to say that the Iranians should hold an
optimistic viewpoint on establishing ties with the U.S.,
especially after the 9/11 incident and the Americans’ violent
behavior that convinced the Iranian people that the U.S. is
pursuing a policy of adventurism in the region.”
“A powerful Iran can become the foundation for regional
security, and those who think they can increase security in the
region by weakening Iran are making a mistake.” Larijani added.
Asked about the Israeli threats against Iran, the presidential
candidate said that he doesn’t think any of the Israeli or the
American threats are serious, stressing that the Islamic
republic is a very powerful nation that no country dares to
attack.
Regarding Iran’s nuclear program, Larijani said that Tehran
should provide assurances to the Europeans to prove that its
nuclear activities are for civilian purposes.
“We tried to provide a mechanism for confidence-building, but
Europe has taken a hard stance and will soon lose its foothold
in the Middle East if it continues with the current process.
“Nuclear technology is a national demand and is as important to
Iranian public opinion as was the nationalization of the oil
industry. No government is authorized to renounce nuclear
technology, and if they are waiting for such a development in
Iran, they are only wasting their time.”
Larijani also stressed that the nuclear guarantees should be
bilateral, adding that the European Union’s demand for a
complete halt to uranium enrichment is not acceptable “since
uranium enrichment is a technology that the Iranians are keen to
gain access to.”
On Friday, Iran’s major conservative alliance selected Larijani
as its final candidate for the presidential elections.
President Mohamed Khatami is near the end of his second
presidential term and, according to Iran’s law, he can’t run in
the upcoming elections.
Larijani will compete with former president and current
Expediency Council Chairman Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani in the
presidential race.
“If I am elected by all fundamentalist forces, I will respect
their votes and compete with Rafsanjani, despite all the respect
that I have for his personality and the services he has rendered
for the revolution.” Larijani said.
Iranian officials said that Rafsanjani will soon announce
whether he will join the presidential race or not.
Copyright 2005 Al Jazeera Publishing Limited
*****************************************************************
4 independent: US prepares for nuclear stand-off with Pyongyang
By David Usborne in New York
26 April 2005
The United States may soon seek a UN Security Council resolution
to impose a virtual international quarantine on North Korea to
pressure its regime to abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions.
Frustration with North Korea's refusal to return to six-nation
talks and growing alarm at signs that the country may be
preparing to conduct an underground test is giving momentum to
hawkish members of the US administration who want the issue
taken to the council as soon as possible.
There was a bellicose reaction last night from North Korea. A
Foreign Ministry spokesman said: "If the United States wants so
much to drag the nuclear issue to the UN Security Council, it
may do so. But we want to make clear we will regard sanctions as
a declaration of war."
The New York Times says Washington is considering a resolution
to permit foreign countries to intercept shipments of goods to
North Korea that may include nuclear materials. This could
entail boarding ships in international waters and the forcing
down of aircraft bound for the country.
A resolution could, in theory, also help efforts by China to
police movements of goods across its border with North Korea,
considered a sieve for drugs, arms and counterfeit currency. But
it is unclear whether China, a permanent member of the council,
would support such a move.
China and South Korea have been anxious to avoid provoking a
potentially dangerous confrontation with Pyongyang and have
continued to emphasise re-starting the six-country talks that
also involve Russia and the US. The talks have been stalled
since June.
It was not clear last night how close the US administration may
be to circulating a first draft of such a resolution at the UN.
Diplomats in New York said there was no sign of such a text and
nor had the idea been broached by US officials at UN
headquarters with any other nations.
But tensions are rising in the region. Recent intelligence,
mostly gleaned from satellite images, shows North Korea has
closed its only nuclear generating plant, intimating its
scientists may mean to remove materials useful in the making of
nuclear arms. There have also been indications of new activity
at a suspected nuclear weapons site, causing intelligence
officials to speculate that an underground test may not be far
away.
In February, the communist regime flatly asserted that it
possessed nuclear weapons and said it would not attend a planned
fourth round of the six-nation talks.
The South Korean government issued a warning of its own to
Pyongyang yesterday. In language that was uncharacteristically
terse, Foreign Minister Ban Ki Moon said that if "North Korea
takes such reckless actions as conducting a nuclear test, it
will further deepen its isolation and take itself on a road
where its future will not be guaranteed".
If the US were to seek a UN resolution it would be likely at the
same time to continue efforts to breathe new life into the
six-party talks. The senior US envoy to the talks, Assistant
Secretary of State Christopher Hill, is in the region now and
held talks with counterparts in Seoul yesterday.
"What we are focusing on is the diplomatic track and the need to
get the talks going, and more importantly, once they get going,
to achieve progress in the talks," he said, and it was "not
acceptable" for North Korea to refuse talks.
The sea, land and air quarantine being considered would be
unlike a similar fence drawn around Cuba by the former American
president John F Kennedy 43 years ago.
©2005 Independent News &Media (UK) Ltd.
*****************************************************************
5 www.GovExec.com - GAO: Energy contracts mismanaged
(4/25/05)
By Kimberly Palmer kpalmer@govexec.com
The Government Accountability Office has uncovered major problems
with contract administration at the Energy Department, which
spends about 90 percent federal of its $23 billion annual budget
on contracting - more than any other civilian agency.
The report (GAO-05-123), which examined 33 contracts, found
mismanagement of performance-based contracts, dependency on
vendor data for evaluating their performance, and a lack of
training among Energy's acquisition workforce. All of the
contracts were valued at more than $100 million.
The Energy Department embedded performance incentives--financial
rewards for good work--into 15 of the 33 contracts without
including a clause that limited those rewards if the contract
exceeded expected costs. That failure violates the Federal
Acquisition Regulation as well as Energy's own acquisition
rules, GAO said.
Excluding cost limits has the effect of "giving contractors an
incentive to pay limited attention to costs when working toward
meeting technical or performance levels in order to earn a
higher award fee," the report stated.
Energy failed to validate performance data from contractors on
30 of 33 contracts. The report said the department should do so
immediately. "Without such actions, the department is totally
dependent on its contractors' self-reports on their
performance," the report said.
GAO singled out earned value management, a method of contract
evaluation that has been growing in popularity under new
guidance from the Office of Management and Budget, as a possible
solution to Energy's problems.
The auditors urged Energy to train contracting officers in the
technique, which they said "is needed to ensure that
contractors' project management systems are providing accurate
performance data."
In addition, GAO recommended that the department identify its
best contracting practices and lessons learned from previous
experience, and include those in its acquisition guide.
Energy's contracting troubles long have been the focus of media
and watchdog attention. A 2002 GAO report found that projects
frequently doubled in cost, and an internal Energy report that
same year pointed to reliance on uncorroborated contractor data
when evaluating contract progress. Energy contract management
has been on the GAO's high-risk list since 1990.
One of the department's best-known contractors, the University
of California, was fined $5 million earlier this year for
mismanaging Los Alamos National Laboratory, run by Energy's
National Nuclear Security Administration.
While the department generally agreed with GAO's
recommendations, Susan Grant, Energy's chief financial officer,
said the department already had introduced measures to address
the identified problems. She also said that every agency has to
rely on contractors' own data to some degree, but that Energy is
taking steps to validate the information they provide.
Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., who requested the report, said that while
Energy has taken steps toward better management, he still is
concerned about waste and mismanagement.
"Without the assurance of reliable data from these systems and
the validation of cost and technical baselines in advance of
contract awards, DOE cannot save money, ensure good performance
or reward contractors for exceptional performance," he said in a
statement.
*****************************************************************
6 Editor and Publisher: Revisionist History on an Atomic Scale
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Caught Downwind
By Greg Mitchell
Published: May 01, 2005
Last month at E&P Online, I wrote a pair of columns triggered by
a story in The New York Times by, inevitably, Judith Miller, in
which she reviewed the new Atomic Testing Museum in her hometown
of Las Vegas. Somehow I managed to avoid making cheap comments
such as, "Finally, she knew where to look for actual weapons of
mass destruction," or, "She probably didn't need a map from
Chalabi to find it." Still, the columns produced some interesting
reader reaction.
Miller had presented the museum in a favorable light, despite its
downplaying of the many negative aspects of the nuclear era. And
she failed to disclose that her father, who booked entertainment
for and was part owner of a major Vegas hotel, stood to gain
by the hush-hush official policy toward radiation risks in the
1950s. A reporter at her own paper, Edward Rothstein, after his
tour, noted a "crucial flaw" at the museum: its tone of
"justification," and its leaving "many unanswered questions about
the past."
I also pointed out that Miller failed to mention Hiroshima and
Nagasaki, or the museum's treatment of the atomic attacks this
from a reporter who helped pave the way for the war on Iraq by
raising the specter of nuclear annihilation. Museum director
William Johnson subsequently told me that nowhere in the exhibits
is it revealed that anyone actually died at Hiroshima and
Nagasaki, let alone list the actual numbers (upwards of 200,000,
the majority of them women and children).
Those columns drew a lot of e-mail from people who live in the
museum's path, so to speak.
A reader named Eric Moon informed me that he had vigiled outside
the museum in March. He also revealed that a contingent of atomic
bomb survivors, or hibakusha, from Japan would be touring the
museum on April 27. How would you like to be an eye-on-the-wall
for that visit?
Several letters came from so-called "downwinders" residents
caught in the shadow of the radioactive clouds that drifted
across the country after dozens of bomb tests in the 1950s. Many,
especially in Utah, have suffered severe health effects and
cancers. "Judith Miller should know better," Mary Dickson, one
downwinder, informed me.
She attached a letter she had sent to Miller, setting her
straight on some of "the devastating health consequences of
nuclear testing. It hasn't been a particularly sexy story for the
media to tell, largely because we didn't get sick or die all at
once." She told Miller, "tests were conducted only when the winds
were blowing away from Las Vegas and the populated West Coast.
You were likely spared. Those of us downwind were less
fortunate."
Most of the local reporters out there have, like Miller, treated
the museum kindly. But I came across a piece by Dennis Myers,
news editor of the Reno (Nev.) News and Review, who gave the
downwinders their due, so I asked him to send me a few comments
via e-mail.
"I grew up in Reno in the 1950s," Myers told me. "I remember
being awakened by my parents in the middle of the night to watch
the atom bomb tests on KZTV. Our former governor Richard Bryan
says his high school yearbook had a mushroom cloud on the cover.
Those kinds of experiences are not part of the state's collective
memory now only 20 out of every 100 Nevadans were born here.
"In those days in the 1950s and '60s, being against nuclear
testing in the state was not a position anyone took, and it's
important to remember that the state wanted the federal
government to bring the tests here. Our officials told us the
public supported that stance. It's not clear that this was so.
Public bodies did not then hold public hearings, and as documents
have come out from under seal we discover that Nevadans were
sending letters of concern about the atomic testing to our
members of Congress.
"A lot of the change, of course, had to do with the population
growth. People brought their concerns with them to Nevada.
Governing bodies had to hold public hearings. And finally, it was
experience the new knowledge of what had been done to the
downwinders, for instance. All those things together made nuclear
activities as economic development a lot less attractive.
"I think it's essential that the museum reflect the attitudes and
the way they caused the cancers and leukemias and other maladies.
It needs to reflect the evolution of policymaking, including
deception and cover-up, that led to tragedy. Instead, our Nevada
politicians seem to have settled on a mantra: 'The testing helped
win the Cold War, and the museum tells that story.' Well, there
are doubts about that interpretation, and the museum should
reflect both the mantra and the doubters. But more to the point,
that is not the only story or even the most important that
the museum should tell. First and foremost is the human cost, and
that should be central to the museum's exhibits."
Indeed, it would be like telling the history of the Iraq war
without highlighting the civilian death toll.
Greg Mitchell (gmitchell@editorandpublisher.com)
is the editor of E&P.
*****************************************************************
7 Uri Avnery on Vanunu's plight and the nuclear threat
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:37:04 -0700
Free Mordechai Vanunu - Info & Action Alert #62 - April 24, 2005
From the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu
http://www.vanunu.com and
http://www.nonviolence.org/vanunu/
** PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY TO SYMPATHETIC LISTS **
===============
For Whom the Bells Toll
by Uri Avnery
23 April ,2005
Published by GUSH SHALOM - pob 3322, Tel-Aviv 61033
http://www.gush-shalom.org
[As a former Knesset Member, Uri Avnery took part in this week's Knesset
Committee discussion of the Vanunu restrictions, and in this article
reveals some absurd details. He also explains the significance of the
sacrifice of Vanunu, forcing through the nuclear discussion in Israel.]
An Iranian technician called Jalal-a-Din Taheri, who had been working at
the nuclear reactor at Bushehr, managed to defect Europe, where he
disclosed the Ayatollahs' plans for producing nuclear bombs.
Taheri was acclaimed a hero throughout the world. A number of organizations
nominated him for the Nobel Peace Price. President Bush praised his
courage. Ariel Sharon invited him to come and live in Israel, even calling
him one of the Righteous of the Nations. The Ayatollahs denounced him as a
traitor, infidel, Crusader and Zionist.
This is, of course, an entirely fictitious story. But it corresponds
exactly to the story of Mordechai Vanunu, who is considered by almost all
Israelis as a despicable traitor - proving once again that treason, like
pornography, is a matter of geography.
This week I used my privilege as a former Member of the Knesset to attend a
session of the Knesset Committee for "the Constitution, Law and Justice",
in which the Vanunu affair was discussed. In the course of the session,
Knesset members cursed each other in the language of fishmongers (by which
I mean no offense to fishmongers). Two Likud members, Ronie Bar-On (who
once served for several hours as Attorney General before being
ignominiously removed) and Yehiel Hazan shouted that Vanunu had no human
rights, since he was not a human being. It should be mentioned in all
fairness that the chairman of the committee, Michael Eytan, also a Likud
member, strongly condemned these utterances.
Vanunu, who in 1986 disclosed to a British newspaper some of Israel's
nuclear secrets, was kidnapped soon after by the Mossad, smuggled back to
Israel and put on trial. He served his sentence: 18 years in prison. For
most of the time he was held in total isolation. (He told me that, in order
to keep his sanity, he would read the New Testament in English out loud,
over and over again, and in this way improved his command of this language,
which he now insists on using instead of Hebrew.)
On his release, he was placed under severe restrictions: he is forbidden to
go abroad, forbidden to move inside the country without prior notification
of the authorities, forbidden to speak with foreigners, forbidden to give
interviews. The Supreme Court has upheld these constraints. Vanunu has
violated most of them, and some weeks ago he was indicted for these
violations.
The restrictions were initially imposed for one year, which came to an end
this week. The Knesset committee was about to discuss the possibility of
their being extended, but a few hours before the session, the Minister of
the Interior, Ophir Pines (Labor Party) signed an order extending for
another year the prohibition of leaving the country, and the Army Commander
of the Home Front signed an order to extend the other constraints (under
Emergency Regulations).
At the committee meeting, the representative of the Attorney General set
out the government arguments for this extension: (a) Vanunu still "holds in
his head" dangerous secrets, (b) He has a "phenomenal" memory, (c) If given
the opportunity, he will disclose these secrets abroad.
What is the evidence to support this?
(a) In one of the letters he wrote in prison, Vanunu told his correspondent
abroad that he was in possession of many more secrets, which he had not yet
disclosed. He announced his intention of revealing these secrets at the
first opportunity.
(b) Two years before his release - that is to say, 16 years after his work
in the nuclear installation - he drew in his cell, purely from memory,
detailed and amazingly exact blueprints of the production process. These
drawings were found among the more than a thousand documents seized in his
cell.
These facts are more than strange. An inmate who sends letters from prison
knows, of course, that they are censored. Vanunu was bound to know that not
only the prison authorities, but the intelligence services, too, would read
them. When he made the blueprints, he certainly knew they would be seized.
All this indicates that he intended to provoke his tormentors and show them
that he was not broken. It is difficult to take the documents seriously, as
the Supreme Court did, eight months ago, when it confirmed the
restrictions. A person who intends to disclose dreadful secrets does not
announce this in advance to the authorities, and does not prepare
blueprints for his persecutors.
Concerning the matter itself:
(a) Does he "hold in his head" secrets that he has not disclosed in the past?
Unlikely.
First of all, Vanunu's knowledge concerns processes as they were 18 years
ago. Can such knowledge be useful today? Hard to believe. As Knesset Member
Zehava Galon (Yahad) remarked at the session: "It is terrifying to imagine
that nothing has changed in Israel's nuclear techniques for 19 years!"
Secondly, before the British paper published his disclosures, Vanunu was
cross-questioned for two whole days by one of the world's leading nuclear
scientists. It is hard to believe that after that he still had any
undisclosed secrets left.
Thirdly, it borders on paranoia to think that he was so sophisticated as to
decide, 18 years ago, to "hold in his head" secrets in order to publish
them 20 years later.
Fourthly, Vanunu is no scientist. He worked at the reactor as a technician.
Even if he has a "phenomenal" memory, and even if his blueprints are
uncannily exact, it is hard to believe that they have any remaining
significance today.
If this is the case, how to explain the renewal of the restrictions?
The Attorney General's representative insisted that their purpose is not to
punish him for things he has done in the past, which would be illegal
(since he has already been tried and served his full sentence), but to
prevent new crimes (the disclosure of further secrets).
I doubt this. One cannot silence Vanunu. The whole world is interested in
him, and the more he is persecuted, the more this interest will grow.
Vanunu cannot be deterred - he is simple undeterrible (to coin a word).
Quite the contrary. Also, it is impossible to prevent him from coming into
contact with foreigners.
(Some months ago, I was sitting in the evening in the garden of the
fabulous American Colony hotel in East Jerusalem, chatting with the British
actress Vanessa Redgrave, a tireless campaigner for Israeli-Palestinian
peace. Suddenly I noticed Vanunu strolling by. I called him over. Vanessa
Redgrave was very interested in his experiences in prison. How can one
prevent this sort of things happening?)
There remains only one explanation: Revenge. Yehiel Horev, the chief of the
Internal Security Division of the Ministry of Defense, cannot forgive
Vanunu for making a mockery of his security arrangements by wandering
around the parts of the installation in which he had no business to be,
freely taking photos in Israel's most secret installation and smuggling
them abroad. That is indeed infuriating. But vengeance, too, must have its
limits.
The more so as the Attorney General's man, answering a query from Knesset
Member Etti Livni, admitted that the same arguments voiced now will also be
valid in another year's time, as well as in five and ten years. In other
words, the constraints may be lifelong.
As for my personal opinion about the substance of the matter:
Nuclear weapons are a threat to all of us. It is impossible to prevent
indefinitely the acquisition of nuclear weapons by more countries in the
Middle East - with Iran in the lead. Other categories of Weapons of Mass
Destruction (chemical and biological) do already exist in neighboring
countries.
For years, Israel has enjoyed a nuclear monopoly in the region. My friends
and I have warned that this monopoly is temporary, and that we must use the
time to achieve peace. The hubris of our leaders has prevented this.
Now, the aim must be to free the whole region from weapons of mass
destruction, under strict international and mutual inspection, as part of a
comprehensive peace settlement. That is both possible and practical. When
Vanunu rings the bells, he contributes to the public awakening.
His action is also important for another reason: for the first time, he has
drawn the attention of the Israeli public to the real danger inherent in
the old reactor, which is now more than 40 years old. Several former
employees have now sued the government, claiming that they have contracted
cancer (and some have died) because of safety failures. What will happen in
the case of a Chernobyl-like disaster? Or an earthquake, or a missile
strike? Who is thinking about this? Whose responsibility is it? Who
oversees those responsible?
Vanunu rings the bells to call attention to a real danger. The question is
not whether he is a pleasant person, whether his views are popular or what
he thinks about the State of Israel, after 12 years of solitary
confinement. The question is whether he is doing a good job.
I, for one, believe he is.
-end-
Felice Cohen-Joppa
Coordinator
U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu
POB 43384
Tucson, AZ 85733
Phone/Fax 520-323-8697
freevanunu@mindspring.com
www.vanunu.com
*****************************************************************
8 [du-list] Boyle's Law
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:37:31 -0700
A Global Pact Against Depleted Uranium
From Francis Boyle, www.rense.com
April 24, 2005
During September of 2004 I launched an international campaign to
conclude a global pact against depleted uranium (DU) munitions by having
every state in the world officially and publicly take the position that the
Geneva Protocol of 1925 already includes within itself a flat-out
prohibition on the use of DU in wartime, which they have no yet done. So
far the United States is the only government in the world that uses DU
munitions during wartime. In addition to prohibiting "the use of
bacteriological methods of warfare," the 1925 Geneva Protocol also
prohibits "the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of
all analogous liquids, materials, or devices." Clearly DU is "analogous" to
poison gas.[i] But we need every government in the world to legally and
openly take that position. Then the entire world can pressure the United
States to remove DU munitions from its arsenal.
Politically, the easiest way to accomplish that objective is not the
conclusion of a new international treaty prohibiting the use of DU, but
rather simply having every state in the world submit an interpretative
Letter to that effect to the Government of France, which is the official
depositary for the 1925 Geneva Protocol. This latter approach would also
avoid the need to have the respective national legislatures of every state
in the world to approve a new anti-DU treaty and thus complicate and
prolong the process. All that needs to be done is for anti-DU citizens,
activists and NGOs in each country of the world to pressure and convince
their respective Foreign Ministers to sign, date, and then file this model
Letter with the French Foreign Minister as indicated below. That task is
eminently feasible.
As the Land Mines Treaty has already demonstrated, it is possible
for a coalition of determined activists and NGOs, acting in concert with at
least one sympathetic state, such as Canada, to actually bring into being
an international treaty to address humanitarian concerns. This template
Letter is for the use of concerned citizens, activists and NGOs worldwide,
to pursue through universal governmental participation the complete and
final elimination of DU munitions from the face of the earth:
His Excellency Michel Barnier
Foreign Minister
French Republic
37, Quai d'Orsay
75351 Paris
FRANCE
FAX: 33-1-43-17-4275
Dear Excellency:
The Republic of X presents its compliments to the French Republic. I
have the honor to draw to your attention the Protocol for the Prohibition
of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of
Bacteriological Methods of Warfare of 17 June 1925, for which the
Government of the French Republic serves as the depositary. The Geneva
Protocol of 1925 prohibits the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or
other gases, and of all analogous liquids, materials or devices, as well as
the use of bacteriological methods of warfare. The government of X believes
that the Geneva Protocol of 1925 already prohibits the use in war of
depleted uranium, uranium ammunition, uranium armor-plate and all other
uranium weapons. We respectfully request your Excellency to circulate this
communication to the other High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Protocol
of 1925.
Please accept, Excellency, the assurance of our highest consideration.
Foreign Minister
Republic of X
Day, Month, Year
---------------------------
[i] International Action Center, Metal of Dishonor:
Depleted Uranium (2d ed. 1999).
Francis A. Boyle
Law Building
504 E. Pennsylvania Ave.
Champaign, IL 61820 USA
217-333-7954 (voice)
217-244-1478 (fax)
email: fboyle@law.uiuc.edu
(personal comments only)
:: Article nr. 11289 sent on 25-apr-2005 07:13 ECT
:: The address of this page is : www.uruknet.info?p=11289
:: The incoming address of this article is :
www.rense.com/general64/ddi.htm
----------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.2 - Release Date: 4/21/05
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ 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/
*****************************************************************
9 independent.co.uk: Expanding nuclear instead of green energy 'could save billions'
By Michael Harrison, Business Editor
25 April 2005
Building a new generation of nuclear power stations would be a
much cheaper way of meeting the UK's ambitious targets for
cutting greenhouse gas emissions than persisting with an
expansion of renewable energy, according to research published
today.
The analysis, by the economics consultancy Oxera, calculates
that a new nuclear programme would cost the taxpayer just over
£4bn whereas continuing to rely on green energy such as wind
power would require £12bn of public support.
The research comes as Tony Blair prepares to seek backing for
the construction of up to 10 nuclear power stations should he
win the election next week. A consultation document setting out
the case for a new nuclear programme is expected within weeks of
a Labour victory.
The Government has set a target of reducing the UK's carbon
emissions by 60 per cent by 2050 and producing 20 per cent of
the country's electricity from renewable sources by 2020.
However, Oxera calculates that by 2025, the UK will be running
40 to 60 per cent short of its carbon-reduction targets, based
on past economic performance, unless there is a much bigger
shift away from fossil fuel electricity generation than
currently envisaged.
Robin Smale, Oxera's managing consultant, said: "At the moment,
the two options available are increasing the amount of
nuclear-generated energy or increasing renewables at the
taxpayer's expense - neither of which will be popular. From the
point of view of the taxpayer, nuclear energy may be a strong
contender given its costs relative to wind power."
Oxera argues that improvements in energy efficiency and greater
"carbon productivity" will not be enough to achieve a 60 per
cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions based on current
plans for expanding renewable power.
The Government's aim is to generate 20 per cent of the UK's
electricity from renewables by 2020 but Oxera says this would
still be insufficient to meet the greenhouse gas targets,
achieving a carbon reduction of only 1.2 per cent a year against
a required rate of 1.9 per cent.
Expansion of renewable energy will cost £12bn more in net
present value terms than relying on conventional fossil-fuelled
generation, says Mr Smale. If the UK opted instead for a new
nuclear power programme, the equivalent figure would be £4.4bn.
This would be split into a £1.1bn injection of direct public
capital and the provision of publicly backed debt guarantees
worth about £3.3bn. The figure for nuclear does not include the
cost of public liability insurance.
Green consumers urged to back £5m wind farm fund
• Green households will today be asked to put their money where
their environmental credentials are by backing a £5m share issue
to raise funds for new wind farms.
The share offer from Triodos, which styles itself as one of the
world's first "sustainable" banks, is aimed at individuals
rather than City institutions.
The minimum investment is £980 - the amount needed to generate
enough electricity to meet the needs of the average household.
Triodos is promising investors more than just the warm glow they
will get from helping save the planet. It claims the return on
investment will be more than 10 per cent within three years.
Triodos also promises that its wind farms will be "sensitively
and sensibly sited" so as not to offend those environmentalists
opposed to the onward march of the turbines.
Through its Triodos Renewables arm, the bank has financed more
than 150 wind farms such as the one pictured above at Moel
Maelogen in North Wales.
©2005 Independent News &Media (UK) Ltd.
*****************************************************************
10 Meeting On Nuclear Power Plant Safety Ends At UN Atomic Agency
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 12:00:57 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pascal.ctyme.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_ORG,
SP_HAM_SUPER,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.2
X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
MEETING ON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SAFETY ENDS AT UN ATOMIC AGENCY
New York, Apr 25 2005 12:00PM
Nuclear officials from more than 50 countries have wrapped up a <"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/safety_review.html">meeting
at
the Vienna headquarters of the United Nations atomic watchdog
agency to share information and upgrade precautions in a bid
to ensure the safety of nuclear power plants and prevent a repeat
of a Chernobyl-style disaster.
The two-week peer <"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/safety_review.html">review
meeting on the Convention on Nuclear Safety
was a success, the session’s President, Linda Keen, head of the
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, told a news briefing on Friday.
She pointed out that with India’s ratification, all States with
nuclear power plants are now participating.
Under the <"http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Conventions/nukesafety.html">Convention,
which entered into force in 1996 and
of which the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org">IAEA)
is the depositary, parties meet every three years
to “peer review” their national nuclear safety programmes. Countries
submit reports covering, for example, the construction, operation
and regulation of their civilian nuclear power plants.
Among issues discussed at this latest meeting, attended by 51 of
the 56 contracting parties, was the possible role of the convention
with regard to research reactors. Ms. Keen said the session decided
to ask IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei to convene meetings
with Member States to discuss how best to assure the effective
application of the Code of Conduct on the Safety of Research
Reactors.
The catalyst for the Convention was the 1986 Chernobyl accident,
when global implications of nuclear safety were magnified and interest
intensified in internationally binding safety standards.
Nearly 8.4 million people in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia were exposed
to radiation when the Chernobyl plant in Ukraine blew up. Beyond
the cancers and chronic health problems, especially among children,
some 150,000 kilometres – an area half the size of Italy
– were contaminated, while agricultural areas covering nearly 52,000
square kilometres, more than the size of Denmark, were ruined.
2005-04-25 00:00:00.000
________________
For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml
*****************************************************************
11 Chernobyl: 7 Million In Ex-USSR Believed Suffering Re Chernobyl
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:21:24 -0400
``We must now worry about the children of the
children of Chernobyl,'' said Gennady Groushevoy,
head of Children of Chernobyl. ``The health danger
is reaching into a second generation ... but the
government has retreated into a Soviet-era
attitude of silence.''
In all, 7 million people in the former Soviet
republics of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine are
believed to have suffered medical problems as a
result of the April 25, 1986, accident. In
Ukraine, more than 2.32 million people, including
452,000 children, have been treated for
radiation-linked illnesses, including thyroid and
blood cancer and cancerous growths, according to
Ukrainian health officials.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/science/AP-Living-With-Chernobyl.html?oref=login
Activists: Chernobyl Radiation Lingers
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: November 13, 2004
Filed at 8:34 p.m. ET
SVETILOVICHI, Belarus (AP) -- The signs say ``KEEP
OUT'' and warn of radiation contamination, but the
mushroom-pickers trudge right past them carrying
their pails. Eighteen years after the reactor at
Chernobyl in neighboring Ukraine exploded, spewing
a cloud of radiation that blew north and
contaminated 22 percent of this ex-Soviet
republic, activists warn of a new threat facing
Belarusians: the longing to return to normal life.
Advertisement
The government -- and many Belarusians -- are
eager to put the world's worst nuclear accident
behind them. President Alexander Lukashenko,
branded Europe's last dictator, has made it a
priority to repopulate much of the
Chernobyl-infected region beyond the hardest hit
areas.
But opposition parties and advocacy groups such as
the Belarus-based Children of Chernobyl accuse the
government of overriding warnings that radiation
continues to contaminate this region of pine
forests and mud-splattered farming villages.
Belarusians, many of them poor and ill-informed
about radiation, are returning home to villages
that still require permanent monitoring because of
higher than average radiation levels. Tractors
till farmland, cows graze and residents fill their
yards with vegetable gardens. Others are venturing
into the ``exclusion zones'' -- the worst hit
areas -- to forage in the forests for berries and
wild mushrooms, which are then sold throughout the
region.
The critics claim that the government of this
tightly controlled nation of 10 million is
capitalizing on the plight of desperate jobseekers
to repopulate still dangerous areas and boost
agricultural production.
In the last five years, Belarus has struck 1,000
population centers from the danger list. It has
boosted regional farm production by 30 percent,
cut Chernobyl-related welfare funding from 14
percent of the approximately $3 billion annual
budget to 4 percent, and censored health
statistics of rising death and cancer rates, the
opponents say.
``We must now worry about the children of the
children of Chernobyl,'' said Gennady Groushevoy,
head of Children of Chernobyl. ``The health danger
is reaching into a second generation ... but the
government has retreated into a Soviet-era
attitude of silence.''
In all, 7 million people in the former Soviet
republics of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine are
believed to have suffered medical problems as a
result of the April 25, 1986, accident. In
Ukraine, more than 2.32 million people, including
452,000 children, have been treated for
radiation-linked illnesses, including thyroid and
blood cancer and cancerous growths, according to
Ukrainian health officials.
Most villages around the plant remain off-limits
today, though some Ukrainians are moving back
despite government warnings.
Sixty percent of the fallout landed over Belarus,
contaminating a region that was home to more than
1.5 million people. Some 125,000 families were
evacuated, and large swaths of forest and farmland
were declared ``exclusion zones,'' sealed by
checkpoints.
Many of the evacuees still complain bitterly that
household belongings, left behind during their
hurried retreat, later turned up for sale in
regional markets, while they lived in limbo in
shabbily constructed apartment blocks.
Nikolai Nagorny, director of the International
Committee of the Red Cross' Chernobyl program,
said that cases of thyroid cancer -- one of the
few radiation-related illnesses that has been well
studied around Chernobyl -- have skyrocketed among
children in Belarus' affected regions, from just
two cases of thyroid cancer before the accident to
at least 1,000 in the 10 years after.
``I don't feel any danger, and even if I did --
what would it matter?'' said Raisa Stradayeva, 62,
as she and her grandson, Andrusha, trudged home
through the rain in Svetilovichi, a village just
outside the highly contaminated exclusion zone.
``I have to live somewhere and this is my home,''
she said.
Besides, she said, the health risks can't be that
severe because ``People are returning all the
time.''
Not only Belarusians; foreigners are coming too,
mostly from poorer ex-Soviet republics, seeking
jobs and housing.
Yuri Kuzmich, head of Belarus' Chernobyl exclusion
and monitoring zone, rejects accusations that the
government is intentionally sending anyone into
danger. In his office in Gomel, a city of 500,000
that has suffered increased radiation-related
illnesses, Kuzmich said his staff does all it can
to keep people out of the worst-hit areas and
provide information to those living in the
surrounding region.
But, he admits, not everyone is on the same page.
State-run farms ``have plans to fulfill ... and
they want to fulfill these no matter what,'' he
said. Those farms need workers, and farm workers
come.
``The passage of time and economic necessity take
their toll,'' he said, sitting beneath a portrait
of Lukashenko. ``Human memory is short. Eighteen
years might as well be 100.''
Kuzmich's team oversees the exclusion zone,
manning checkpoints, escorting visitors into the
region and collecting scientific and medical data.
Some employees are also assigned to oversee the
villages under radiation monitoring.
However, a reporter visiting recently was never
questioned when entering the exclusion zone,
checkpoints appeared deserted and the mushroom-
and berry-pickers walk through on the main road,
via forest paths or on buses that still pass
through the zone.
Margarita Artemyeva, who moved here from
Kazakhstan, was helping her 25-year-old daughter,
Natasha, wallpaper her new home -- a damp bungalow
identical to its neighbors.
``I don't even think about it. I'm not scared at
all. If there was a real danger, we'd know it,
wouldn't we?'' said Artemyeva, 44. She rejected
the claim that the poor are being used to
repopulate the area.
Critics claim vegetables, milk and meat from
Chernobyl-contaminated regions such as
Svetilovichi are being sold throughout Belarus.
But in a nation where the average monthly salary
is about $150, few have the option of putting
health concerns first and buying imports.
Besides, the berries and wild mushrooms supplement
meager diets and also sell well.
After Artemyeva mentioned she loved mushrooms, one
of Kuzmich's employees took her aside and gently
warned her against collecting them in the
exclusion zone.
*****************************************************************
12 Chernobyl: Media Truth & Distortions
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:39:18 -0400
Today, April 26, 2005 is the 19th anniversary of
the Chernobyl catastrophe.
A few excerpts from article below:
A short review of Chernobyl's fallout pattern
shows how irresponsible the reporting has become.
AP, May 15, 1986: "Airborne radioactivity from the
Chernobyl nuclear accident is now so widespread
that it is likely to fall to the ground wherever
it rains in the United States, the EPA said."
AP, May 14, 1986: "An invisible cloud of
radioactivity spewed over the Soviet Union and
Europe, and has worked its way gradually around
the world."
AP, May 15, 1986: "State authorities in Oregon
have warned residents dependent solely on
rainwater for drinking that they should arrange
other supplies for the time being."
Star Tribune, May 17, 1986: "Since radiation from
the Chernobyl nuclear accident began floating over
Minnesota last week, low levels of radiation have
been discovered in . . . the raw milk from a
Minnesota dairy."
AP, April 4, 1996: "Plutonium and other dangerous
particles released in the accident . . . have now
found their way to Ukraine's major waterways . . .
. 'We have billions of tons of radiated earth that
can't be dumped anywhere, and which will pour
plutonium, cesium and strontium into Europe for
decades,' the chief consultant to the Ukrainian
Parliament's Chernobyl commission said."
The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May 1996:
"radiation contamination was detectable over the
entire Northern Hemisphere."
The pro-nuclear Time magazine reported in 1989
that perhaps "one billion or more" curies were
released, rather than the 50 to 80 million
estimated by Russian authorities.5 One curie is
the amount of radiation equal to the
disintegration of 37 billion atoms ¾ 37 billion
becquerels ¾ per second. It is a very large amount
of radiation.
The U.S. government's Argonne Nat. Lab has said
that 30 percent of the reactor's total
radioactivity ¾ 3 billion of an estimated 9
billion curies ¾ was released.6 And scientists at
the U.S. Lawrence Livermore Nat. Lab suggested
that one-half of the core's radioactivity was
spewed ¾ 4.5 billion curies, according the World
Information Service on Energy, quoting Science,
6-13-86.
Vladimir Chernousenko, the chief scientific
supervisor of the "clean up" team responsible for
a 10-kilometer zone around the exploded reactor,
says that 80 percent of the reactor's
radioactivity escaped, something like seven
billion curies.7 At the Union of Concerned
Scientists, senior energy analyst Kennedy Maize,
concluded that "the core vaporized" ¾ all 190 tons
of fuel, and all 9 billion curies.8
Former Chair of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Joseph Hendrie, concluded likewise,
saying "They have dumped the full inventory of
volatile fission products from a large power
reactor into the environment. You can't do any
worse than that."9
"After all, the IAEA is in the business of
promoting nuclear energy, not discouraging it. For
10 years the agency has attempted to downplay the
consequences of the accident," wrote Alexander R.
Sich in a cover story for the Bulletin of Atomic
Scientists [ see http://www.thebulletin.org ].
The IAEA, still downplaying in 1995, said any
increase in cancer caused by Chernobyl would be
"undetectable."
Nineteen months after the disaster, in Nov. 1987,
the U.S. government
officially doubled its estimate of the
"background" radiation to which we
are exposed every year.11 [Part 2]
Chernobyl at Ten:
Half-lives and Half Truths
(Part one of two)
By John M. LaForgeã
With a heavy dose of half-truth, the commercial
press worked over-time to reduce the results of
the Chernobyl catastrophe to a "nervous disorder"
confined to the C.I.S. and Europe. Understated
reports on the 10th anniversary of the world-wide
radiation disaster help the nuclear reactor
industry hold on against overwhelming opposition,
in spite of what should have been the final insult
from nuclear power.
The latest psychological "clean up" often went
like this. Peter Crane, a lawyer at the U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), said that
"...the explosion... sent a radioactive cloud into
the atmosphere of Eastern Europe." (1) This is a
true statement. It merely neglects to mention the
rest of planet Earth.
Reporter Michael Specter wrote that, "The fire
which burned out of control for five days, spewed
more than 50 tons of radioactive fallout across
Belarus, Ukraine and Western Russia." (2) This
loaded sentence is also literally true. The fact
that the fire burned uncontrolled for two weeks,
after a series of three explosions; that perhaps
190 tons of reactor fuel was catapulted into the
atmosphere; or that the radioactive fallout spread
world-wide ¾ reaching Minnesota's milk for example
¾ doesn't make of Mr. Specter a liar, only a miser
with the truth.
Associated Press (AP) correspondent Dave Carpenter
's description ¾ that "deadly reactor fuel shot
into the atmosphere, contaminating some 10,000
square miles and reaching as far as Western
Europe" (3) is likewise "correct," but Reuters
News Service reported on 28 Nov. 1995 that the
contaminated areas include about 61,780 square
miles.
Carpenter practiced perfect obfuscation in his
dispatch, saying of the reckless nuclearists over
there: "In a big lie, Soviet officials. . . first
hushed up the disaster then played down its
severity." What is it to understate the sum of
irradiated territory by a factor of six? It isn't
the pot calling the kettle black; it's the cesium
calling the strontium a cancer agent.
Carpenter's AP lullaby was published widely and
included the comment that, ". . .those living in
the shadow of Chernobyl will be living with its
deadly health and environmental legacy for years."
(4)
For years? The word centuries would have been more
accurate, if conservative, since radiation's
health affects are multi-generational and not
limited in time. Indeed, some genetic effects
appear to be increasing with each successive
generation.
The AP's Angela Charlson went so far as to say the
reactor sent "a radioactive cloud across parts of
Europe ..." (5) Understatement of the overwhelming
facts was practiced as well by the editors of The
New York Times, who said on April 21 that the
disaster "spewed radiation across much or Europe"
(6) and on the anniversary, that "...a plume of
toxic gases & dust...spread across the western
Soviet Union, Eastern Europe and Scandinavia." (7)
Although the contamination of the rest of the
world was hinted at as lately as 6 Oct. 1995, when
the Times reported that the radiation spread
across western Russia "and beyond," this
uncomfortable fact is nowadays passé.
The Disaster's in Your Head
While the explosions' long-lived carcinogens ¾
primarily cesium, plutonium, strontium and iodine
¾ are well known to be deadly for decades and even
centuries, Soviet officials, the U. N's
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and
U.S. editors have all ridiculed the common sense
fear of Chernobyl's radioactive fallout.
The official Soviet paper Izvestia said in 1988
that doctors in the Ukraine were, ". . .spending
more time on trying to dispel irrational fears
than on treating the effects of radiation." (8)
The IAEA which at first refused to conduct a
post-Chernobyl health study, claiming that all the
accident's effects were confined within Soviet
borders (9), dared to say in a 1991 study that
Chernobyl's health effects were mainly
"psychological." This heavily criticized report
didn't even consider the health of the
"liquidators," or the evacuees from the 18-mile
exclusion zone, 8,000 of whom are now known to
have died from radiation related diseases. (10)
The IAEA study failed to mention the lengthy
latency period for observed cancer incidence. This
cavalier white-wash of the disaster's inevitable
results came from a nominal nuclear watchdog,
which in fact is only the most prestigious booster
of nuclear power. "After all the IAEA is in the
business of promoting nuclear energy not
discouraging it. For ten years the agency has
attempted to downplay the consequences of the
accident," wrote Dr. Alexander R. Sich in a cover
story for the May/June Bulletin of Atomic
Scientists. (11) The IAEA, still sticking in its
vacuum, said in 1995 that any increase in cancer
caused by Chernobyl would be "undetectable."
(11.1)
Editors across the country have embraced the IAEA'
s dismissive attitude, distracting readers with
headlines like, "Area Frozen In Fear," "Citizens
Still Suffering Radiation Phobia," and "The Legacy
of Chernobyl: Fear is the Deeper Wound." A dread
of radiation doesn't appear irrational in view of
last year's report that "A second catastrophic
explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in
Ukraine could happen "at any time," Western
scientists have warned." (12)
Reality Officially Forgotten
A short review of Chernobyl's fallout pattern
shows how irresponsible the late reporting has
become. AP, 15 May 1986: "Airborne radioactivity
from the Chernobyl nuclear accident is now so
widespread that it is likely to fall to the ground
wherever it rains in the United States, the EPA
said." AP, 14 May 1986: "An invisible cloud of
radioactivity spewed over the Soviet Union and
Europe, and has worked its way gradually around
the world." AP, 15 May 1986: "State authorities in
Oregon have warned residents dependent solely on
rainwater for drinking that they should arrange
other supplies for the time being." Minneapolis
Star Tribune, 17 May 1986: "Since radiation from
the Chernobyl nuclear accident began floating over
Minnesota last week, low levels of radiation have
been discovered in... the raw milk from a
Minnesota dairy." AP, 4 April 1996: "Plutonium and
other dangerous particles released in the
accident...have now found their way to Ukraine's
major waterways. ... 'We have billions of tons of
radiated earth that can't be dumped anywhere, and
which will pour plutonium, cesium and strontium
into Europe for decades,' [the chief consultant to
the Ukrainian parliament's Chernobyl commission]
said." Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, May 1996, p.
38: "...radiation contamination was detectable
over the entire northern hemisphere."
With so much disparity among so many figures, we
may never know the true dimensions of Chernobyl's
radiation bomb.
Notes:
(1) NYT, Op-Ed, 5 April 1996.
(2) International Herald Tribune, 2 April 1996.
(3) Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 14 April 1996.
(4) Minneapolis Star Tribune, 21 April 1996.
(5) St. Paul Pioneer, 27 April 1996.
(6) NYT, 21 April 1996, The Week In Review.
(7) NYT, 26 April 1996, signed editorial by Philip
Taubman
(8) Los Angeles Times, 11 Feb. 1988.
(9) In These Times, 22 April 1987.
(10) AP, 23 April 1992; WISE News Communiqué,
(Amsterdam) No. 449, 10 April 1996.
(11) Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, May 1996, p.
38.
(11.1) Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June
1996, p. 8.
(12) The London Observer, 26 March 1995; Milwaukee
Journal, 27 March 1995.
-- John M. LaForge is codirector of Nukewatch, a
peace group based in Wisconsin, and editor of its
quarterly newsletter, the Pathfinder.
© Copyright 2000 Star Tribune. All rights reserved
Half Lives and Half Truths: Chernobyl Ten Years
On-Part 2:
By John M. LaForge ã
(Second of two parts)
The 10th anniversary was no party.
"I have seen the beginning of the end of the
world," is how Michael Mariotte, editor of The
Nuclear Monitor, put it after visiting Chernobyl's
doomed landscape, everything dead or dying for
miles around. "The end of the world begins in
Pripyat, Ukraine, a once-thriving city of 45,000.
Now it sits crumbling, abandoned, a mute but
overwhelming testament to technological arrogance
gone amok."1
Pripyat was the city nearest Chernobyl's Unit 4,
the reactor that exploded on April 26, 1986 and
burned dangerously until October, spewing tons of
cancer-causing isotopes around the world.2
Mr. Mariotte is not known for emotional writing in
The Monitor, but anyone who can stand to
investigate the unfolding human consequences of
the world's worst industrial catastrophe can
understand his choice of words. Izvestia called it
"the greatest technological catastrophe in world h
istory."3
Cancers and other disease caused by Chernobyl's
radioactive poisons are being recorded thousands
of kilometers from the reactor site. The ninety
million people who lived in the path of the very
worst fallout are learning the hard way that
damage done by ionizing radiation is unrelenting,
cumulative and irreversible.
In the first part of this article (Spring 1996
Pathfinder) I compared the recent trivialization
of Chernobyl's consequences to news accounts that
appeared soon after the explosions and fire. For
example, while the commercial press now tell us
that the disaster "spread radiation across parts
of Europe," the fact is that the federal EPA
announced in mid-May 1986 that, "Airborne
radioactivity from the Chernobyl nuclear accident
is now so widespread that it is likely to fall to
the ground wherever it rains in the United
States."4
In this part I look at how much radiation
Chernobyl evidently dumped added to the
"background," at official skewing of the its
inevitable long-term effects, and at recent
reports of its human health consequences.
Answers are Blowin' in the Wind
How much radiation was released? What percentage
of which isotopes were thrown into the atmosphere.
Was it mostly iodine-131? How much of the total
was made up of the far more dangerous cesium-137,
strontium-90 and plutonium?
Piecing together the truth is a dizzying job of
ferreting out bias and vested interest. The
pro-nuclear Time magazine reported in 1989 that
perhaps "one billion or more" curies were
released, rather than the 50 to 80 million
estimated by Russian authorities.5 One curie is
the amount of radiation equal to the
disintegration of 37 billion atoms ¾ 37 billion
becquerels ¾ per second. It is a very large amount
of radiation.
The U.S. government's Argonne Nat. Lab has said
that 30 percent of the reactor's total
radioactivity ¾ 3 billion of an estimated 9
billion curies ¾ was released.6 And scientists at
the U.S. Lawrence Livermore Nat. Lab suggested
that one-half of the core's radioactivity was
spewed ¾ 4.5 billion curies, according the World
Information Service on Energy, quoting Science,
6-13-86.
Vladimir Chernousenko, the chief scientific
supervisor of the "clean up" team responsible for
a 10-kilometer zone around the exploded reactor,
says that 80 percent of the reactor's
radioactivity escaped, something like seven
billion curies.7 At the Union of Concerned
Scientists, senior energy analyst Kennedy Maize,
concluded that "the core vaporized" ¾ all 190 tons
of fuel, and all 9 billion curies.8
Former Chair of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Joseph Hendrie, concluded likewise,
saying "They have dumped the full inventory of
volatile fission products from a large power
reactor into the environment. You can't do any
worse than that."9
The Russians and the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) claimed in a 1986 report, that 50
million curies of radioactive debris, plus another
50 million curies of rare and inert gasses were
discharged. However, the rocketing incidence of
cancers, leukemias and other radiation-induced
illnesses, leads scientists to suspect that the
higher radioactive fallout estimates are likely.
Pandemic numbers of thyroid cancers led even the
cautious Dr. Alexander Sich, in his Chernobyl
cover story for the May 1996 Bulletin of Atomic
Scientists to conclude that the "higher
[radiation] release estimates support the
conclusions drawn by medical experts."
Geneticist Valery N. Soyfer, founder of the former
Soviet Union's first molecular biology laboratory,
analyzed the 1986 report to the IAEA, which has
since been condemned as a cover-up. Dr. Soyfer
says that if only 100 million curies were vented,
then world "background radiation doubled at
once."10 This claim was unsupported by
accompanying evidence, but if "background" was
doubled by 100 million curies, then it was
multiplied 180 times by the release of Chernobyl's
"full inventory." Nineteen months after the
disaster, in Nov. 1987, the U.S. government
officially doubled its estimate of the
"background" radiation to which we are exposed
every year.11
Thyroid Cancers: More, Sooner, Untreatable
Dr. Soyfer further discovered that the Soviets
focused on and publicized the fallout's
radioactive iodine content, but understated the
amounts of other far more dangerous isotopes.
While 10 to 15 percent of the fallout was
iodine-131, the long-lived radionuclides
strontium-90 and cesium-137 made up more than two
thirds of the total contamination.12
Furthermore, the Soviet's 1986 estimate of future
cancer deaths was based only on the impact of
iodine-131, and then only on external doses. As a
result, the IAEA misled the world about Chernobyl'
s cancer threat. People contaminated with
iodine-131 ingested it, first by breathing, then
by drinking contaminated milk for six weeks.
Thyroid cancer is caused by the iodine-131. Its
rates are today ten times higher than the increase
any scientist had anticipated. The U. N. has said
that the number of thyroid cancers among children
in Belarus ¾ where 70 percent of the fallout
landed ¾ are 285 times pre-Chernobyl levels.13
The British Medical Journal reported in 1995 that
the rate of thyroid cancer in the region north of
Chernobyl¾ Ukraine and Belarus¾ is 200 times
higher than normal, and the (British) Imperial
Cancer Research Fund found a 500 percent increase
in thyroid cancers among Ukrainian children
between 1986 and 1993.14
Fear is growing among physicians treating the
young radiation victims, because the thyroid
cancers are appearing sooner than expected and
growing quicker than usual. Dr. Andrei Butenko, at
Kiev Hospital No. 1 in Ukraine, says of his
patients, "Routine chemotherapy seems to have lost
its effectiveness; something has changed in the
immune system."15
Cesium's Genetic Assault: the 300 Years War
Cesium-137 contamination is probably Chernobyl's
most devastating and ominous consequence. The body
can't distinguish cesium from potassium, so it's
taken up by our cells and becomes an internal
source of radiation. Cesium-137 is a gamma emitter
and its half-life of 30 years means that it stays
in the soil, to concentrate in the food chain, for
over 300 years. While iodine-131 remains
radioactive for six weeks, cesium-137 stays in the
body for decades, concentrating in muscle where it
irradiates muscle cells and nearby organs.16
Strontium-90 is also long-lived and, because it
resembles calcium, is permanently incorporated
into bone tissue where it may lead to leukemia.
The Soviet's acknowledged in 1986 that the
influence of cesium-137 on cancer death rates
would be nine times that of iodine-131. They said
that the effects of strontium-90 would "perhaps
have, along with cesium-137, the most important
meaning."17
Early Findings Go from Bad to Worse
Exposure to radiation more often results in
genetic and reproductive damage than cancer. These
hereditary disorders are unlimited in time, since
they pass from generation to generation in the
sperm and ovum. So, as geneticist Soyfer points
out, Chernobyl's enduring biological legacy will
be that of inherited diseases, deformities,
developmental abnormalities, spontaneous abortions
and premature births.
Some recent epidemiological studies confirm the
worst of these inevitable effects. The June 25,
1995 Washington Post reported that birth defects
in the areas most heavily poisoned have doubled
since 1986.
In a long page one story, the Aug. 2, 1995 New
York Times reported that life expectancy has
plummeted in Russia, making it the first nation in
history to ever experience such a public health
status reversal. Male life expectancy is now the
lowest in the world (below even India or Bolivia)
and, at the same time, infant mortality rose 15
percent in both 1993 and 1994, and there are now
epidemic rates of heart disease and cancer. dr.
David Hoel, an epidemiologist at the Medical
University of S. Carolina, is studying whether
Chernobyl's radiation is a major factor in the
spread in cancers and birth defects. "Everyone
assumes the connection," he said.
The journal Nature has published a study of
children born in 1994 to mothers exposed to
Chernobyl's fallout in 1986. Researchers studied
79 families 186 miles from Chernobyl and found
never-before-observed "germ-line" mutations:
changes in DNA of the sperm and ovum. Such
mutations are passed on from generation to
generation.18
Nature has also reported that in Greece, 2,800
kilometers from Chernobyl, where radiation
exposures were far lower than in areas close to
the reactor, leukemia has been diagnosed at rates
2.6 times the norm in young people who were in the
womb when the reactor exploded. The British
epidemiologist Dr. Alice Stewart found long ago
that only one diagnostic X-ray to the pregnant
abdomen increases the risk of leukemia in the
offspring by 40 percent.19 However, the report
from Greece is the first to link Chernobyl's
wreckage to increased leukemia incidence in
children exposed in utero.20 The report has moved
some experts to again warn that the low levels of
radiation to which people are exposed every day
"could contribute to cancer."
Even the stodgy New York Times has reported that
"cancers are now believed to be the result of
smaller [radiation] doses, and the amount of
damage inflicted by a given dose is now believed
to be larger."21
In a related study, two U.S. geneticists analyzing
animals inside Chernobyl's 6-mile radius found
that small rodents known as voles "sustain an
extraordinary amount of genetic damage." The study
found that "the mutation rate in these animals
is...probably thousands of times greater than
normal." Two findings called "ominous" were,
first, that one-third of the mutations that the
scientists expected to see were not even detected
¾ probably because they were lethal. "It could be
that the animals were never born," said Dr. Robert
Becker of Texas Technical Univ. Second, "the vole
mutations were cumulative, increasing with each
succeeding generation." Both researchers doubted
that any species could sustain such a mutation
rate indefinitely.22
Acceptable Whole-Earth Poisoning
The extent of Chernobyl's radioactive, biological
and ecological damage, and the depth its
psychological and economic devastation are
incalculable.
What everyone does know about nuclear reactors is
that they have a record of whole-earth poisoning,
and that their potential for more of the same is
considered acceptable ¾ authorized in advance.
This potential, for unlimited and uncontrollable
radiation "accidents," has been deliberately
developed, promoted, protected, ignored and then
denied, or forgotten.
Sadly, denial and forgetfulness only make another
Chernobyl inevitable.
Notes:
1 The Nuclear Monitor, newsletter of Nuclear
Information Resource Service (NIRS), April 1996.
2 St. Louis Post Dispatch (SLPD), 7-23-90.
3 SLPD, 4-26-90.
4 Associated Press, 5-15-86.
5 Time, 11-13-89.
6 The Chicago Tribune, 6-22-86.
7 "The Truth About Chernobyl," Critical Mass:
Voices for a Nuclear-Free Future, Ruggiero and
Sahulka, Eds., 1996 by Open Media, p. 127.
8 Not Man Apart, the journal of Friends of the
Earth, March 1987.
9 The Minneapolis Star Tribune, 5-19-86.
10 SLPD, 4-24-87.
11 The New York Times, 11-20-87.
12 SLPD, 4-24-87.
13 The New York Times, 11-29-96.
14 The Washington Post, 3-25-95.
15 Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, 12-12-94.
16 Caldicott, H., Nuclear Madness, 1994, Norton,
p. 137.
17 SLPD, 4-24-87.
18 The New York Times, 4-25-96.
19 Caldicott, Ibid., p. 43.
20 St. Paul Pioneer, 7-25-96.
21 The New York Times, 6-23-96.
22 The New York Times, 5-7-96, B6. --end--
(Part One ran in NUKEWATCH The Pathfinder, Summer
1996, part Two in Winter 1996/1997 EDITION; an
edited compilation of both parts is published in
Earth Island Journal, Summer 1997, EIJ, 300
Broadway, No. 28, San Francisco, CA 94133.)
JOHN LaFORGE
___________
Nukewatch
P.O. Box 649
Luck, WI 54853
Phone (715) 472-4185
Fax (715) 472-4184
Web http://www.nukewatch.com
*****************************************************************
13 Guardian Unlimited: BE struggles to improve efficiency
Terry Macalister
Tuesday April 26, 2005
The Guardian
British Energy's nuclear power plants have performed slightly
better than expected during the past 12 months but still
struggled to achieve 82% efficiency during the fourth quarter.
The country's biggest electricity producer narrowly beat
management expectations with output of 59.8 terrawatt hours a
year, ahead of its 59.5TWh target.
The generating company, which recently replaced its chief
executive, reiterated its production guidance for 2005-2006 of
63TWh in a trading update.
City analysts welcomed the operational result but noted that a
third of this year's output was still uncontracted.
Iain Turner, a utility analyst at Deutsche Bank, said the figures
were "largely in line with expectations".
The company said its cash balances stood at £450m as a result of
a massive financial restructuring last year.
It is planning to spend between £230m and £250m on repair and
upgrading work during the 12 months to March 31 2006.
Special report
Graphics
The Mox ships' journey around the world (pdf)
Nuclear map of Britain
US nuclear map
Useful links
British Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace
HSE nuclear glossary
UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board
Friends of the Earth
World Nuclear Association
World Nuclear Transport Institute
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
14 BBC: Blair 'to debate nuclear power'
Last Updated: Monday, 25 April, 2005
[Sellafield]
A public debate on nuclear power could be opened
A re-elected Labour government would put nuclear power back on
the agenda in an effort to meet targets on climate change,
government sources have said.
The sources told BBC News Tony Blair wanted a national debate on
the issue.
He would raise the issue when ministers responded to a climate
change policy review in June or July, they said.
The Tories say there should be new nuclear stations provided they
meet cost and waste concerns but the Lib Dems oppose the idea.
National debate
Mr Blair has said his policy has not changed since the energy
White Paper two years ago, which left nuclear power on the back
burner.
But a senior source told BBC News Mr Blair would raise the issue
in June or July, when the government has to respond to its
climate change policy review.
[Nuclear produces] tonnes radioactive waste that costs billions
to store and will pose a risk to humans for thousands of years
after disposal Norman Baker Lib Dem spokesman
The government says the UK is on course to meet the Kyoto targets
on climate change but has admitted it is slipping behind its own
tougher targets.
BBC News correspondent Roger Harrabin said the review would not
mean a "shoo-in" for nuclear power, but will open a national
debate on the topic.
He said the public and cabinet ministers would have to look at
whether the threat of climate change was so pressing that the
problems of nuclear waste and cost would outweigh the risks.
Options open
Last week, Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett said the White
Paper on the issue two years ago had said closing down nuclear
power was an option.
"But we also said that there is a huge amount we need to do [to
combat climate change], and between 2010 and 2020 we can probably
do about at least half of what we need to through energy
efficiency and renewable energy," she said.
She added that no company was asking the government to let it
build a new nuclear power station.
"In our energy White Paper we said explicitly that if people
began to feel that we would have to go towards nuclear power,
there would be a further examination then, and a further White
Paper," she added.
Conservative shadow environment secretary Tim Yeo said he found
it hard to see how the problem of carbon emissions could be
tackled if existing nuclear power stations were not replaced.
A decision was needed within a year of the election, he said.
"We believe nuclear power can play a role in addressing this
problem providing it is cost-effective and provided it can
satisfy people's concern about waste disposal," he explained.
Lib Dem environment spokesman Norman Baker said relying on
nuclear power to tackle climate change was "like jumping from the
frying pan to the fire".
"Nuclear power may not have the problems associated with carbon
emissions, but it does produce tonnes of radioactive waste that
costs billions to store and will pose a risk to humans for
thousands of years after disposal," he said.
For the Green Party, Darren Johnson said nuclear reactors had an
operational life of between 30 and 40 years but created waste
that lasted "thousands".
"It is barking mad to consider nuclear power as part of a
sustainable energy policy," he said.
*****************************************************************
15 NRC: NRC Staff Schedules Public Meeting for April 28 to Discuss License Renewal Process
for Palisades Nuclear Plant
News Release - Region III - 2005-02
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region III
No. III-05-020 April 25, 2005
CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663
Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a public
meeting on Thursday, April 28, in South Haven, Mich., to discuss
how the agency will review the application from Nuclear
Management Company to renew the operating license for the
Palisades Nuclear Power Plant.
The public information session will describe the NRCs license
renewal process and how the public can participate.
The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. at Lake Michigan College at
South Haven, 125 Veterans Blvd., South Haven.
Nuclear Management Company submitted its application for license
renewal on March 22. The current license for the Palisades plant
expires on Mar. 4, 2011. If approved, the plants NRC license
would be extended for 20 years.
A copy of the licensee renewal application is available for
review on the NRCs web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati
ons/palisades.html.
Last revised Monday, April 25, 2005
*****************************************************************
16 NZ: Scoop: Meeting On Nuclear Power Plant Safety Ends At UN Atomic Agency
New York,
Apr 25 2005 12:00PM
Nuclear officials from more than 50 countries have wrapped up a
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/safety_review.html
">meeting at the Vienna headquarters of the United Nations
atomic watchdog agency to share information and upgrade
precautions in a bid to ensure the safety of nuclear power
plants and prevent a repeat of a Chernobyl-style disaster.
The two-week peer
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/safety_review.html
">review meeting on the Convention on Nuclear Safety was a
success, the session’s President, Linda Keen, head of the
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, told a news briefing on
Friday. She pointed out that with India’s ratification, all
States with nuclear power plants are now participating.
Under the
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Conventions/nukesafety
.html ">Convention, which entered into force in 1996 and of
which the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (
http://www.iaea.org ">IAEA) is the depositary, parties meet
every three years to “peer review” their national nuclear safety
programmes. Countries submit reports covering, for example, the
construction, operation and regulation of their civilian nuclear
power plants.
Among issues discussed at this latest meeting, attended by 51 of
the 56 contracting parties, was the possible role of the
convention with regard to research reactors. Ms. Keen said the
session decided to ask IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei
to convene meetings with Member States to discuss how best to
assure the effective application of the Code of Conduct on the
Safety of Research Reactors.
The catalyst for the Convention was the 1986 Chernobyl accident,
when global implications of nuclear safety were magnified and
interest intensified in internationally binding safety
standards.
Nearly 8.4 million people in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia were
exposed to radiation when the Chernobyl plant in Ukraine blew
up. Beyond the cancers and chronic health problems, especially
among children, some 150,000 kilometres – an area half the size
of Italy – were contaminated, while agricultural areas covering
nearly 52,000 square kilometres, more than the size of Denmark,
were ruined.
ENDS
*****************************************************************
17 NRC: NRC to Meet with Southern Nuclear Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at
Farley Nuclear Power Plant
News Release - Region II - 2005-02 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region II No. II-05-021
April 22, 2005 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D.
Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
Southern Nuclear Operating Company officials on Wednesday, April
27, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety
performance at the Farley nuclear power plant near Dothan, Ala.
The meeting will be held at 4:00 p.m. at the Houston County
Administration Building, 3rd Floor, County Commissioners
Chambers, 462 North Oats Street, in Dothan. The public is
invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be
available before the conclusion of the meeting to answer any
questions.
A letter from the NRC to Southern Nuclear addresses plant safety
performance during the previous year and forms the basis for the
meeting discussions. It says Farley operated safely and that
plant performance was at a level requiring no additional NRC
inspection beyond normal during 2005. The letter is available
from Region II Public Affairs and on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/far_2004q4.pdf [PDF
Icon] .
In addition to the routine inspections, the NRC will conduct
inspections of the reactor vessel head replacement, pressurizer
penetration nozzles and the plants Independent Spent Fuel (Dry
Cask) Storage Installation.
The NRC Region II Administrator, Dr. William Travers, said each
year the NRC staff rates the performance of the Farley plant and
all of the nations other commercial nuclear plants. This gives
us a chance to discuss our assessment with the company, with
local officials and with residents near the plant. Our aim is to
make this information available to the public and answer any
questions people may have about our oversight.
Routine inspections are performed by NRC resident inspectors
assigned to the plant and by specialists from the Region II
office in Atlanta and the agencys headquarters in Rockville, Md.
Current performance indicators for the two units at the Farley
plant are available at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/FAR1/far1_chart.html and
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/FAR2/far2_chart.html.
Last revised Monday, April 25, 2005
*****************************************************************
18 US Takes Brakes Off Nuke Arms Race
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 22:45:28 -0500 (CDT)
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion//index.php?ntid=37398&ntpid=0
Published on Monday, April 25, 2005 by the Capital Times (Madison, Wisconsin)
US Takes Brakes Off Nuke Arms Race
by Dave Zweifel
As hard as it might be to believe, the United States is embarked
on a path that's bound to trigger yet another nuclear arms race.
Yet few in this country seem to be paying attention.
It's as if we were lulled to sleep about nuclear weapons when the
Berlin Wall came tumbling down in 1989. All those Cold War years
of worrying whether the United States and the Soviet Union would
start lobbing bombs at each other were finally over.
They should have been, but, unfortunately, the chances of nuclear
devastation are as strong today as they've ever been.
That's the message that an international organization known as
Mayors for Peace wants us all to get when it stages a rally in New
York City this coming Sunday.
Mayors for Peace was founded by the mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki,
Japan, the only two cities in the world that have experienced the
destruction of an atomic bomb. Their aim was to get cities throughout
the world to work toward a day when all nuclear weapons would be
destroyed so that innocent people, particularly children, would
never again have to suffer the consequences of a nuclear explosion.
Some 750 cities have joined that effort, although far too few from
the United States. It's good to see that Madison's mayor, Dave
Cieslewicz, will go to New York to lend our city's support along
with 21 other U.S. mayors. Several other Madisonians will be there
as well, including representatives of our Physicians for Social
Responsibility chapter.
What has been disturbing is the Bush administration's attitude
toward nuclear weapons. Back in 1969, America was instrumental in
getting most of the rest of the world to sign the much-heralded
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which was aimed at eventually
eliminating nuclear weapons as instruments of war.
But, rather than reducing the numbers, the administration is in the
process of building more, "modernizing" some of the older nukes and
seeking to build new "mini-nukes" and "nuclear bunker busters,"
presumably to work in places like Iraq.
The pity of it all is that if we start building new and better
nuclear weapons, so will other countries with nuclear capabilities
- Russia, China, India, for example. Twenty years from now, nations
will probably be boasting about their bunker busting A-bombs, rather
than celebrating the end of the threat of nuclear annihilation. In
other words, we will have learned nothing from history.
Yet there's a strange silence among members of Congress and in the
media over these alarming developments.
Sunday's rally is aimed at awakening us all to the perils. It is
timed, incidentally, to precede the May 2-27 meetings in New York
among the 189 countries that signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty way back in 1969. They gather every five years to evaluate
the progress of the treaty and to negotiate further reductions in
atomic weapons.
There's a lot of work to be done this year, not the least of which
will be getting the United States back on board.
Dave Zweifel is editor of The Capital Times.
2005 Capital Times
###
*****************************************************************
19 Moscow Times: Stymied by Nuclear Secrecy
Defense Dossier
Tuesday, April 26, 2005. Issue 3154. Page 11.
By Pavel Felgenhauer
During last week's visit to Moscow, U.S. Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice created quite a stir when she told journalists
that progress has been achieved in talks to allow American
inspectors access to Russian nuclear installations. Defense
Minister Sergei Ivanov was quick to deny this: "Visits by U.S.
inspectors to nuclear installations in Russia are not under
consideration. It's not an issue."
During the summit between President Vladimir Putin and U.S.
President George W. Bush in Bratislava, Slovakia this February,
the official Kremlin web site published, apparently by mistake,
a preliminary draft of the Joint Statement on Nuclear Security
that contained a sentence about U.S. inspectors having access to
nuclear installations. The official text of the statement did
not contain this clause.
Since then, there has been much speculation about the issue in
Moscow. Within nationalist circles connected to the military, it
is believed that the Kremlin is in secret negotiations to sell
control over Russia's nuclear deterrent to the Americans.
It is an idea that has been much harped on since the demise of
the Soviet Union. Under the pretext of ensuring nuclear
security, the United States will occupy Russian nuclear bases.
The last Soviet superpower feature it still has will be lost,
and Russia will be under the full control of the secret World
Government. Ivanov was so categorical in his denial because fear
and opposition is rampant.
In fact, the U.S. military has been performing on-site
inspections of Russian nuclear bases regularly since the first
Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty was ratified in 1991. Russia has
provided detailed data about the performance of test flights of
intercontinental ballistic missiles, or ICBMs.
At present, the main problem is access to specific nuclear
industrial installations within so-called "closed nuclear
cities." As the Bratislava Statement put it, "While the security
of nuclear facilities in the United States and Russia meets
current requirements, we stress that these requirements must be
constantly enhanced to counter terrorist threats."
Most experts, Russian and foreign, agree that nuclear warheads
attached to ICBMs are secure: In their concrete silos on land or
in silos on submarines, the warheads are well guarded by
minefields, barbed wire and concrete-fortified machine-gun
positions. During the Cold War, the military believed that U.S.
forces would attempt to take over the Russian nuclear arsenal
before it had the opportunity to fire, which explains the heavy
security. To better guard nuclear weapons from ground attack,
our ICBMs were gathered into regimental positions of 10 missile
silos in one cluster with one command silo and a common defense
perimeter. The United States, in contrast, scattered its ICBM
silo positions to make them less vulnerable to a "disarming"
Russian ICBM attack.
Nuclear materials and parts of fully or partially dismantled
warheads are stockpiled in several of the 10 closed cities of
the nuclear ministry, or Minatom, which later became the Federal
Atomic Energy Agency, or Rosatom. An official paper signed in
November 1997 by Minatom Minister Victor Mikhailov stated that
over 500 tons of arms-grade plutonium and uranium were stored in
Russia in conditions that "do not meet international safety
standards." As the dismantling of the Soviet nuclear arsenal
continued, warhead assembly factories, which did not have
adequate storage facilities, were saturated with nuclear
materials. More than 20,000 nuclear weapons can be made out of
500 tons of arms-grade plutonium and uranium.
The U.S. has over the last decade spent billions of taxpayer
dollars to upgrade nuclear security in Russia and is ready to
help elevate the security of nuclear material storage within
Rosatom. But without inspections and control, the U.S. Congress
is reluctant to provide funding for security upgrades.
Rosatom is not happy to comply, afraid the inspectors will spy
on Russian nuclear secrets, recruit locals in closed cities or
simply discover and make public the embarrassing backwardness of
security procedures. However, a high-ranking U.S. official told
me that officials are indeed close an agreement to gain access
to a large number of previously closed nuclear industrial sites.
It is good news that Moscow and Washington are close to finding
a formula for jointly addressing the vital issue of the vast
stockpiles of arms-grade nuclear materials in Russia. It is bad
that negotiations are being conducted Soviet-style — in almost
complete secret — allowing conspiracy theories to dominate
public debate.
Pavel Felgenhauer is an independent defense analyst based in
Moscow.
© Copyright 2005 The Moscow Times. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
20 AP Wire: U.S. weapons inspector finishes Iraq work
| 04/25/2005 |
KATHERINE SHRADER
Associated Press
WASHINGTON - In his final word, the CIA's top weapons inspector
in Iraq said Monday that the hunt for weapons of mass
destruction has "gone as far as feasible" and has found nothing,
closing an investigation into the purported programs of Saddam
Hussein that were used to justify the 2003 invasion.
"After more than 18 months, the WMD investigation and debriefing
of the WMD-related detainees has been exhausted," wrote Charles
Duelfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group, in an addendum to the
final report he issued last fall.
"As matters now stand, the WMD investigation has gone as far as
feasible."
In 92 pages posted online Monday evening, Duelfer provides a
final look at an investigation that occupied over 1,000 military
and civilian translators, weapons specialists and other experts
at its peak. His latest addenda conclude a roughly 1,500-page
report released last fall.
On Monday, Duelfer said there is no purpose in keeping many of
the detainees who are in custody because of their knowledge on
Iraq's weapons, although he did not provide any details about
the current number. A U.S. official, who spoke on condition of
anonymity, said the ultimate decision on their release will be
made by the Iraqi authorities.
The survey group also provided warnings.
The addenda conclude that Saddam's programs created a pool of
experts now available to develop and produce weapons and many
will be seeking work. While most will probably turn to the
"benign civil sector," the danger remains that "hostile foreign
governments, terrorists or insurgents may seek Iraqi expertise."
"Because a single individual can advance certain WMD activities,
it remains an important concern," one addendum said.
Another addendum also noted that military forces in Iraq may
continue to find small numbers of degraded chemical weapons -
most likely misplaced or improperly destroyed before the 1991
Gulf War. In an insurgent's hands, "the use of a single even
ineffectual chemical weapon would likely cause more terror than
deadlier conventional explosives," another addendum said.
And still another said the survey group found some potential
nuclear-related equipment was "missing from heavily damaged and
looted sites." Yet, because of the deteriorating security
situation in Iraq, the survey group was unable to determine what
happened to the equipment, which also had alternate civilian
uses.
"Some of it probably has been sold for its scrap value. Other
pieces might have been disassembled" and converted into motors
or condensers, an addendum said. "Still others could have been
taken intact to preserve their function."
Leaving the door to the investigation open just a crack, the
U.S. official said a small team still operates under the
U.S.-led multinational force in Iraq, although the survey group
officially disbanded earlier this month. Those staying on
continue to examine documents and follow up on any reports of
weapons of mass destruction.
In a statement accompanying the final installment, Duelfer said
a surprise discovery would most likely be in the biological
weapons area because clues, such as the size of the facilities
used to develop them, would be comparatively small.
Among unanswered questions, Duelfer said a group formed to
investigate whether WMD-related material was shipped out of Iraq
before the invasion wasn't able to reach firm conclusions
because the security situation limited and later halted their
work. Investigators were focusing on transfers from Iraq to
Syria.
No information gleaned from questioning Iraqis supported the
possibility, one addendum said. The Iraq Survey Group believes
"it was unlikely that an official transfer of WMD material from
Iraq to Syria took place. However, ISG was unable to rule out
unofficial movement of limited WMD-related materials."
*****************************************************************
21 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: NYT Smells N.Korea Quarantine Plan
Home> National/Politics Updated Apr.25,2005 19:47 KST
NYT Smells N.Korea Quarantine Plan
WASHINGTON -- The New York Times reported Monday that the U.S.
government considered submitting a UN resolution "empowering all
nations to intercept shipments in or out of the country that may
contain nuclear materials or components." The paper said the
plan was aimed at North Korea, and would allow the U.S. and
other nations to intercept nuclear shipments in the waters off
the Korean Peninsula and force down aircraft for inspection.
The paper cited unnamed officials as saying a plan along these
lines, which would amount to a quarantine of the Stalinist
country, was being pushed by the Defense Department and Vice
President Dick Cheney's staff and attracting interest from
hawkish figures in the administration.
Some officials said any such plan would be loosely modeled on
measures taken by former president John F. Kennedy against Cuba.
But the NYT said the main purpose according to officials was to
give China the political means to police its border with North
Korea, which is a route for shipments of weapons, drugs and
counterfeit money, Pyongyang¡¯s main sources of foreign
exchange.
The paper said it was unclear whether China or South Korea would
support the plan, and all efforts would fail if China was ¡°not
a full partner.¡±
(Heo Yong-beom, heo@chosun.com )
*****************************************************************
22 BBC: N Korea warned over nuclear test
Last Updated: Monday, 25 April, 2005
By Charles Scanlon BBC News, Seoul
[Christopher Hill (r) with South Korean Foreign Minister Ban
Ki-moon, 25 April]
US negotiator Christopher Hill (right) is holding talks in the
region
South Korea has warned North Korea not to conduct a nuclear test,
following fresh warnings that the North is building up a nuclear
arsenal.
Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon said such a test would lead to
further isolation of the communist state.
Mr Ban made his comments shortly after American press reports of
activity at potential North Korean test sites.
Recent North Korean threats have rekindled fears of a dangerous
confrontation over nuclear weapons.
The North Korean army said on Sunday that it would build up its
nuclear arsenal in response to American aggression.
But Mr Ban has warned Pyongyang not to conduct a nuclear test,
saying that exploding a bomb would further isolate the country
and endanger its future.
The chief American negotiator handling the standoff, Christopher
Hill, is back in the region, amid signs that time could soon be
running out for a diplomatic solution.
North Korea is refusing to return to six-party talks, which have
not taken place since June last year.
The US has warned it could go to the UN Security Council to ask
for sanctions if the North continues to hold out.
South Korea and China have opposed such a move, fearing a
potentially violent response from Pyongyang, but Seoul may feel
obliged to acquiesce if North Korea ends the ambiguity of its
capabilities and carries out a nuclear test.
*****************************************************************
23 Xinhua: US, S.Korean negotiators discuss strategies on nuclear issue
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2005-04-25 16:01:07
SEOUL, April 25 (Xinhuanet) -- The top nuclear negotiators
from South Korea and the United States on Monday discussed
strategies for dealing with the nuclear issue on the Korean
peninsula, the South Korean Yonhap news agency reported.
The meeting between US Assistant Secretary of State
Christopher Hill and South Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Song
Min-soon followed recent revelations that Pyongyang has stopped
the operation of a key nuclear reactor in an apparent attempt to
harvest plutonium from spent fuel rods for atomic bombs.
"What is important is not resuming talks, but how to make
substantial progress when the talks reopen. The discussions
focused on this," a South Korean official commented on the
meeting, on condition of anonymity.
"What we're focusing on is the diplomatic track and the need
toget the talks going and, more importantly, once they get
going, to achieve progress in the talks," Hill told reporters.
"Concerned countries have been making joint efforts to
reopen the talks and we will be able to get a firmer judgment in
the near future on whether these efforts would bring about
fruitful results," the South Korean official said.
The official said there have been "various direct and
indirect contacts" between the Democratic People's Republic of
Korea (DPRK)and the other parties to the six-party forum, but he
refused to elaborate. The six-nation nuclear disarmament talks
have been stalled since last June.
After meeting with Song, Hill met with South Korean Foreign
Minister Ban Ki-moon and was to meet with senior National
Security Council official Lee Jong-seok. He plans to visit
Beijing on Tuesday and Tokyo on Wednesday before flying back to
Seoul Thursday for another three-day stay here.
Hill, former US ambassador to Seoul, took up his new job
earlier this month. This is his first trip to the region in his
new capacity. Enditem
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
24 Korea Times: Allies Agree on Best Tactics for N. Korean Nukes
jinryu@koreatimes.co.kr 04-25-2005 17:22
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times
By Ryu Jin Staff Reporter
South Korea and the United States reached an agreement on the
``best tactics¡¯¡¯ to resolve the North Korean nuclear standoff,
top negotiators from the two allied powers said after talks in
Seoul on Monday.
Christopher Hill, U.S. assistant secretary of state on East
Asia-Pacific affairs, said he reached a ``complete agreement¡¯¡¯
with his South Korean counterpart, Deputy Foreign Minister Song
Min-soon, on how to deal with the nuclear-ambitious North amid
the escalating tension.
``I¡¯d say we have a very good understanding of this issue and
very good agreement on the best tactics to bring this issue to
resolution,¡¯¡¯ he told reporters, just before a meeting with
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ban Ki-moon, following his
70-minute talks with Song.
Hill, the former U.S. ambassador to South Korea who was
recently named the point man on the nuclear issue, arrived in
Seoul on Sunday in what many call a ``last-minute effort¡¯¡¯ to
get the stalled six-party process restarted. He is scheduled to
come back to Seoul on Thursday after talking with his
counterparts in Beijing today and in Tokyo tomorrow.
Diplomatic efforts have been high among relevant parties in
recent weeks as tensions have escalated due to North Korea¡¯s
suspension of a key nuclear reactor earlier this month, a move
which experts say might earn the country more plutonium to
bolster its nuclear arsenal.
``The time is coming for us to assess what the result of our
diplomatic efforts are,¡¯¡¯ a high-level diplomat said in a
background briefing on the Song-Hill consultations. ``Whether it
is positive or negative, concrete prospects (for the six-party
talks) will come soon.¡¯¡¯
He added, though the top negotiators discussed a wide variety
of measures, they basically focused on diplomatic options rather
than any punitive steps such as the much-talked-about option of
bringing the case to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).
``I think the press tends to think only about sanctions and
other punitive measures to apply pressure (on the North) when we
say we could discuss `other options,¡¯¡¯¡¯ he said. ``There
could be other `diplomatic¡¯ options as well.¡¯¡¯
Hill also told reporters before meeting with Ban: ``What we¡¯re
focusing on is the diplomatic track and the need to get the
talks going and, more importantly, once they get going, to
achieve progress in the talks.¡¯¡¯
But, sources said, Hill¡¯s three-nation trip will likely be the
last efforts to revive the six-party process, which has been
stalled for about 10 months since the last round of talks in
June.
Hill is expected to urge China once again to play a role to
bring North Korea back to the table. ``We think China has a very
key role to play as a host in this process, a very key role to
make sure everybody comes to the table,¡¯¡¯ he said.
South Korea, which is reluctant to think about other options
that might provoke Pyongyang, could end up being helpless when
the efforts prove to be fruitless. When asked about the
possibility of the five other nations in the six-party talks,
including Russia, convening a session as a way of
``diplomatically pressuring¡¯¡¯ the North.
In what some observers accepted as a strong warning before a
possible policy shift, Seoul urged Pyongyang once again to make
a ``strategic decision¡¯¡¯ of giving up nuclear weapons and take
other incentives in return within the six-party dialogue formula.
``If North Korea takes even the reckless step of conducting a
nuclear test, it would further deepen the North¡¯s own isolation
and would mean moving onto a path where its future is not
guaranteed,¡¯¡¯ Ban, the foreign minister, said at a breakfast
forum earlier in the morning.
``Nuclear arms will never ensure the North¡¯s safety and will
only bring about and deepen its political and economic
isolation,¡¯¡¯ he said. ``It is impossible to have normal
relations with the international community while possessing
nuclear weapons.¡¯¡¯
Hill also met with Lee Jong-seok, deputy head of the National
Security Council (NSC), in the afternoon to discuss the nuclear
issue ahead of his visits to Beijing and Tokyo, according to
officials.
*****************************************************************
25 Mos News: Pentagon Officials Inspect Russian Site Dismantling Ballistic Missiles
- MOSNEWS.COM
Photo: tihiy.fromru.com
Created: 25.04.2005 18:02 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 18:02 MSK
Pentagon officials have inspected a Russian site for dismantling
Topol intercontinental missiles for the first time.
This inspection was held within the framework of the
Russian-U.S. Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic
Offensive Arms (START).
The base is situated in the town of Votkinsk in the Russian
internal republic of Udmurtia, where there is a plant that
produces solid-rocket missiles and dismantles them. According to
the treaty, a group of U.S. observers must be present at
Votkinsk.
So far, Russia has destroyed about 900 nuclear weapon carriers.
Since the beginning of 2005, officials from the Russian Armed
Forces’ National Center of Nuclear Threat Reduction have made
eight inspections at U.S. strategic sites.
According to the treaty that came into force in December 1994,
each side must reduce the quantity of its ground, sea and
air-launched missiles to 1,600 and have no more than 6,000
warheads.
Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM
*****************************************************************
26 Guardian Unlimited: South Korea Warns North Over Nuclear Test
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday April 25, 2005 12:16 PM
AP Photo SEL102
By SOO-JEONG LEE
Associated Press Writer
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - South Korea warned North Korea on
Monday against conducting a nuclear test, saying one would
further isolate the communist state and undermine its security.
The United States called the North's resistance to international
disarmament talks unacceptable.
Concerns that the isolated North is trying to develop a nuclear
arsenal have escalated after it apparently shut down a nuclear
reactor recently - a move that could allow it to harvest
weapons-grade plutonium.
South Korea's foreign minister, Ban Ki-moon, said in a speech on
Monday that North Korea ``cannot have its future guaranteed'' if
it conducts a nuclear test.
``Nuclear weapons can never guarantee North Korea's security and
will only bring about and worsen the isolation of its politics
and economy,'' Ban said, according to South Korea's Yonhap news
agency.
The South Korean warning came after U.S. media reported over the
weekend that Pyongyang might be preparing for its first nuclear
test and North Korea threatened to bolster its ``nuclear
deterrent.''
North Korea, meanwhile, lashed out at Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice for recently saying that Washington was willing
to take the nuclear issue to the United Nations.
``If the United States wants so much to drag the nuclear issue
to the U.N. Security Council, it may do so,'' North Korea's
Foreign Ministry spokesman said, according to the North's
official Korean Central News Agency. ``However, we want to make
clear that we will regard sanctions as a declaration of war.''
North Korea declared in February that it had nuclear weapons and
was boycotting international disarmament talks, which also
involve the United States, China, South Korea and Russia. Since
then, efforts to get the North back to the bargaining table have
floundered.
In the latest diplomatic push, Washington's top envoy on the
North Korean nuclear issue met with South Korean officials
Monday and discussed ways to revive the negotiations.
``What we are focusing on is the diplomatic track and the need
to get the talks going, and more importantly, once they get
going, to achieve progress in the talks,'' Christopher Hill, the
U.S. assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific
Affairs, said following his meeting with his South Korean
counterpart, Song Min-soon.
Washington, however, is reportedly exploring other options in
stopping North Korea from building up its alleged nuclear
arsenal.
The New York Times reported in its Monday editions that the Bush
administration is debating a plan to seek a U.N. resolution
allowing countries to intercept shipments in or out of North
Korea that may contain nuclear materials or components.
The proposed resolution, promoted by a growing number of senior
administration officials, would enable the U.S. and other
nations to intercept shipments in international waters off the
Korean Peninsula, and force down aircraft for inspection, the
Times reported.
The United States has told China and its other negotiating
partners that it has serious concerns about ``recent provocative
statements'' by North Korea on its nuclear weapons intentions.
During three previous rounds of negotiations, North Korea has
claimed to have nuclear capability and the potential to
demonstrate it.
American analysts have said during the past week that they
believe some of the claims are genuine. U.S. intelligence
analysts have estimated in the past that North Korea has
produced at least two nuclear bombs.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
27 [du-list] Intelligence EU agencies to tell about the DU issue:
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:37:09 -0700
All the EU security agencies (declassified December 12, 2004):
AUSTRIA
Informationssicherheitskommission
Bundeskanzleramt
Ballhausplatz 2
A - 1014 Wien
Telephone: + 43/1/531 15 23 96
Fax: + 43/1/531 15 25 08
BELGIUM
Service Public Fédéral des Affaires étrangères,
du Commerce extérieur et de la Coopération au Développement
Autorité Nationale de Sécurité (ANS)
Direction du Protocole et de la Sécurité
Service de la Sécurité P&S 6
Rue des Petits Carmes 15
B - 1000 Bruxelles
Telephone Secretariat: + 32/2/519 05 74
Telephone Presidency: + 32/2/501 82 20; + 32/2/501 87 10
Fax: + 32/2/519 05 96
CYPRUS
ΥΠΟΥΡΓΕΙΟ
ΑΜΥΝΑΣ
ΣΤΡΑΤΙΩΤΙΚΟ
ΕΠΙΤΕΛΕΙΟ ΤΟΥ
ΥΠΟΥΡΓΟΥ
Εθνική Αρχή
Ασφάλειας (ΕΑΑ)
Υπουργείο
Άµυνας
Λεωφόρος
Εµµανουήλ Ροΐδη 4
1432 Λευκωσία,
Κύπρος
Τηλέφωνα:
+ 357/22/80 75 69; + 357/22/80 75 19; + 357/22/80 77 64
Τηλεοµοιότυπο:
+ 357/22/30 23 51
(Ministry of Defence
Minister's Military Staff
National Security Authority (NSA)
4 Emanuel Roidi street
CY - 1432 Nicosia
Telephone: + 357/22/80 75 69; + 357/22/80 75 19; +357 /22/80 77 64
Fax: + 357/22/30 23 51)
CZECH REPUBLIC
Narodni bezpecnostni urad
(National Security Authority)
Na Popelce 2/16
CZ - 150 06 Praha 56
Telephone: + 420/257 28 33 35
Fax: + 420/257 28 31 10
DENMARK
Politiets Efterretningstjeneste
Klawsdalsbrovej 1
DK - 2860 Søborg
Telephone: + 45/33/14 88 88
Fax: + 45/33/43 01 90
ESTONIA
Ministry of Defence, Republic of Estonia, Department of Security
National Security Authority
Sakala 1
EE - 15094 Tallinn
Telephone: + 372/717 00 30; + 372/717 00 31: + 372/717 00 77
Fax: + 372/717 00 01
FINLAND
Ulkoasiainministeriö\Utrikesministeriet
Alivaltiosihteeri (Hallinto)\Understatssekreteraren (Administration)
Laivastokatu 22\Maringatan 22
PL\PB 176
FI - 00161 Helsinki\Helsingfors
Telephone: + 358/9/16 05 53 38
Fax: + 358/9/16 05 53 03
FRANCE
Secrétariat général de la Défense Nationale
Service de Sécurité de Défense (SGDN/SSD)
51 Boulevard de la Tour-Maubourg
F - 75700 Paris 07 SP
Telephone: + 33/1/71 75 81 77
Fax: + 33/1/71 75 82 00
GERMANY
Bundesministerium des Innern
Referat IS 4
Alt-Moabit 101 D
D - 11014 Berlin
Telephone: + 49/1/888 681 15 26
Fax: + 49/1/888 681 558 06
GREECE
Γενικό
Επιτελείο
Εθνικής Άµυνας
(ΓΕΕΘΑ)
Διακλαδική
Διεύθυνση
Στρατιωτικών
Πληροφοριών
(ΔΔΣΠ)
Διεύθυνση
Ασφαλείας και
Αντιπληροφοριών
ΣΤΓ 1020 -Χολαργός
(Αθήνα)
Ελλάδα
Τηλέφωνα: + 30/210/657 20 09
(ώρες γραφείου)
+ 30/210/657 20 10 (ώρες
γραφείου)
Φαξ: + 30/210/642 64 32
+ 30/210/652 76 12
(Hellenic National Defence General Staff (HNDGS)
Military Intelligence Sectoral Directorate
Security Counterintelligence Directorate
GR - STG 1020 Holargos Athens
Telephone: + 30/210/657 20 09 (office hours)
+ 30/210/657 20 10 (office hours)
Fax: + 30/210/642 64 32
+ 30/210/652 76 12
HUNGARY
National Security Authority Republic of Hungary
Pf. 2
HU - 1352 Budapest
Telephone: + 361/346 96 52
Fax: + 361/346 96 58
IRELAND
National Security Authority
Department of Foreign Affairs
80 St. Stephens Green
IRL - Dublin 2
Telephone: + 353/1/478 08 22
Fax: + 353/1/478 14 84
ITALY
Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri
Autorità Nazionale per la Sicurezza
Cesis III Reparto (UCSi)
Via di Santa Susanna, 15
I - 1187 Roma
Telephone: + 39/06/611 742 66
Fax: + 39/06/488 52 73
LATVIA
Constitution Protection Bureau of the Republic of Latvia
Miera Iela 85/A
LV - 1001 Riga
Telephone: + 371/702 54 18
Fax: + 371/702 54 06
LITHUANIA
National Security Authority of the Republic of Lithuania
Gedimino 40/1
LT - 2600 Vilnius
Telephone: + 370/5/266 32 05
Fax: + 370/5/266 32 00
LUXEMBOURG
Autorité Nationale de Sécurité
Ministère d'Etat
Boîte Postale 23 79
L - 1023 Luxembourg
Telephone: + 352/478 22 10 central
+ 352/478 22 35 direct
Fax: + 352/478 22 43
+ 352/478 22 71
MALTA
Ministry of Justice and Home Affairs
P.O. Box 146
MT - Valletta
Telephone: + 356/21 24 98 44
Fax: + 356/21 23 53 00
NETHERLANDS
Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties
Postbus 20010
NL - 2500 EA Den Haag
Telephone: + 31/70/320 44 00
Fax: + 31/70/320 07 33
Ministerie van Defensie
Postbus 20701
NL - 2500 ES Den Haag
Telephone: + 31/70/318 70 60
Fax: + 31/70/318 79 51
POLAND
Wojskowe Służby Informacyjne Military Information Services
National Security Authority Military Sphere
PL - 00-909 Warszawa 60
Telephone: + 48/22/684 61 19
Fax: + 48/22/684 61 72
Internal Security Agency (Agencja Bezpieczeństwa Wewnętrznego ABW)
National Security Authority Civilian Sphere
Department for the Protection of Classified Information
2A Rakowiecka St.
PL - 00-993 Warszawa
Telephone: + 48/22/585 73 60
Fax: + 48/22/585 85 09
PORTUGAL
Presidência do Conselho de Ministros
Autoridade Nacional de Segurança
Avenida Ilha da Madeira, 1
P - 1400-204 Lisboa
Telephone: + 351/21/301 17 10
Fax:+ 351/21/303 17 11
SLOVAKIA
National Security Authority
Budatínska 30
SK - 851 05 Bratislava
Telephone: + 421/2/68 69 95 09
Fax: + 421/2/63 82 40 05
SLOVENIA
Office of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia
For the Protection of Classified Information NSA
Slovenska cesta 05
SVN - 1000 Ljubljana
Telephone: + 386/1/426 91 20
Fax: + 386/1/426 91 21
SPAIN
Autoridad Nacional de Seguridad
Oficina Nacional de Seguridad
Avenida Padre Huidobro s/n
Carretera Nacional Radial VI, km 8,5
E - 28023 Madrid
Telephone: + 34/91/372 57 07
+ 34/91/372 50 27
Fax: + 34/91/372 58 08
SWEDEN
Utrikesdepartementet
SSSB
S - 103 39 Stockholm
Telephone: + 46/8/405 54 44
Fax: + 46/8/723 11 76
UNITED KINGDOM
National Security Authority
The Secretary for T3P/1 PO Box 56 56 GB - London EC1A 1AH
Telephone: + 44/20/78 28 86 88
Fax:+ 44/20/79 31 80 61 (unclassified)
+ 44/20/76 30 14 28 (classified)
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/EA3HyD/3MnJAA/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/
*****************************************************************
28 [du-list] THE TWO-HEADED SERPENT: Depleted Uranium
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:37:17 -0700
1- THE TWO-HEADED SERPENT: Depleted Uranium
2- How Bunker Busters Work
3- Depleted uranium (WHO Fact Sheet)
--
THE TWO-HEADED SERPENT: Depleted Uranium
April 23, 2005 Soldier Tech (Military.com)
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_DU,,00.html
In the race to come up with a projectile with better
penetrating capabilities, depleted uranium is currently in
the lead. But do the properties that make it effective also
make it too dangerous to use?
Over the past 800 years, projectiles have evolved from
hand-carved rocks to forged metal penetrators. The name of
the game: come up with a shell with better penetrating
characteristics, at a reasonable expense.
The latest leader of the pack is depleted uranium (DU),
which has unique, explosive properties, to say the least. A
heavy metal with very high density (1.7 times heavier than
lead), DU has high kinetic energy for its volume. And thanks
to its unique properties, DU actually sustains its own
combustion when ignited, which enables it to literally melt
and "sharpen" as it penetrates armor, increasing its
destructive capabilities.
It's bad enough having to deal with the standard 105mm tank
shell, which we roughly estimate has the energy of 7 Honda
sedans crashing into you at 65 miles per hour -- now imagine
that energy "sharpening" as it penetrates your armor and
takes you out. Seems an almost unfair advantage.
The U.S. military has certainly made the most of this
advantage. The Pentagon estimates that 14,000 shells
containing DU were fired by tanks, and another 940,000 30mm
rounds containing DU were fired by A-10 "Warthog" jets in
support operations, during the 1991 Gulf War alone -- 320
tons total.
So it's clear that DU has been used often, and with
impressive results -- but does its radioactive properties
mean using it comes at a cost of more than dollars?
From Stones to Iron
The road to the "heavy metal" era of depleted uranium began
innocuously enough, with the "rock" age -- rocks and stones,
that is. Because of costs of metalworking in medieval times,
the earliest cannon balls were nothing more than hand-cut
stones originally "built" for use by siege engines. As
metalworking improved, and casting became more commonplace,
the stone balls were coated with lead to improve the gas
seal inside the barrel, which also improved the projectiles'
fortress-penetrating capabilities.
It wasn't until the 15th century that forged iron, which was
twice as dense as stone and did not shatter easily,
completely replaced chiseled stone as the ammunition of
choice. Four hundred years later, rifled, forged steel
cannons were introduced, along with elongated, as opposed to
round, projectiles, which had the effect of increasing not
only the cannon's range and accuracy, but its lethality as well.
Prior to World War I, artillery (both cannon and shell)
development had basically progressed along the lines of
"bigger is better." Improvements in metalworking techniques
enabled manufacturers to build larger (and lighter) cannons
that could throw increasingly larger shells further and
further. Though a number of guns were in the 50mm-80mm range
(bore diameter), most field artillery had progressed to the
105mm-170mm range, and siege artillery could be as large as
420mm. In addition, as guns got larger, they had also become
less mobile, in effect returning to their medieval role of
static siege engines. The introduction of the tank in 1917
changed that.
Enter the Tank -- and Squeeze Guns, Shoe Guns, and Tungsten
The innovation of the tank -- with its improved, thicker
armor -- forced a new line of guns to be developed. To
defeat tank armor, the shells had to be made of materials
that would not shatter on impact (as iron would), and had to
possess sufficient kinetic energy to push through the armor.
However, as the tank was a tracked, offensive weapon, these
new "anti-tank" guns needed to be mobile enough to be able
to track effectively with the enemy tank's movement. Thus,
to be mobile enough to keep up with the tanks they were
trying to destroy, an anti-tank gun could only be so large.
Given this relatively inflexible parameter (at this time
cannons were being made out of forged steel, as stronger,
more exotic metals such as titanium and tungsten were not
readily available), research turned to making harder and
faster projectiles.
During World War II several concepts were introduced to
improve anti-tank performance. One method was to "squeeze"
the round as it passed down the barrel. This was
accomplished by tapering the bore so that it might be 28mm
at the breech, but 21mm at the muzzle (the German sPB-41
28mm AT gun is a good example of this.) Witht this method,
more powder could be used to drive a smaller projectile
faster, and produce more kinetic energy.
Another method was to utilize a small aerodynamic penetrator
surrounded by a large bore collar. These "Sabot" (French for
"shoe") rounds placed far less stress on the cannons firing
them than did the squeeze guns, yet transferred the same
amount of energy to the penetrator (once the projectile
leaves the gun the sabot "petals", as they're called, fall
away and the penetrator continues to the target.) However,
despite improvements in metallurgy (by the end of World War
II, sabot penetrators were made of forged tungsten, at that
point the densest, hardest metal available), advances in
tank automotive performance, which enabled them to carry
more and more armor, had forced anti-tank guns to become so
large that they were either too heavy to keep up (if they
were towed pieces) or carried too few rounds of ammunition
to be efficient in combat (the Soviet built IS-3 heavy tank,
equipped with a 122mm cannon, only carried 10 rounds of
anti-tank ammunition.) Once again, anti-tank weapons had run
up against the non-negotiable size limitation. What was
needed was a better material to make bullets.
The Silver Bullet
In the 1970s the Soviet Union began making anti-tank rounds
out of a material that had been un-available prior to World
War II -- depleted uranium, a by-product of uranium ore
processing. Naturally occurring uranium is composed of three
chemically identical isotopes of the uranium atom;
relatively inert U238 (99.3%), fissile U235 (.71%) and
highly radioactive (18,000 times more so than U238) U234
(.0055%). To be usable in nuclear weapons and power plants,
uranium must be "enriched" by increasing the concentration
of fissile U235. The residue from this enrichment process is
a "depleted" U238 compound that has 70% the radioactivity of
naturally occurring uranium ore.
DU's metallic properties make it ideal for use in armor
penetration applications. First, it is the densest (at 19.3
grams per cubic centimeter, it is 70% denser than lead and
15% denser than tungsten) metal readily available (osmium
and iridium are both harder and denser, but are more
difficult to work with and are not available in large enough
quantities); when alloyed with titanium, it is extremely
resistant to deformation.
Second, unlike tungsten penetrators which "mushroom"
(flatten and spread out on impact, converting kinetic energy
into useless thermal energy) on impact, DU melts and
sharpens as it penetrates, actually improving its
performance as it heats up. In addition, at high
temperatures DU becomes "pyrophoric," which means that
super-heated fragments will sustain combustion, further
increasing the destructive potential of the material.
Finally, not only is DU available in very large quantities
(with a half-life of 4.5 billion years, it is literally "not
going anywhere") but compared with tungsten, DU is easy to
work with, with DU penetrators manufactured for a fraction
of the cost it would take to manufacture a similar tungsten
penetrator. The first combat use of DU occurred during the
1991 Gulf War, in which American M1A1 Abrams tanks used the
120mm M829A1 APFSDS-T (known as the "Silver Bullet" because
of its DU long rod penetrator) while American A-10
Thunderbolt II aircraft used DU cored PGU-14/B API (Armor
Piercing Incendiary) in their 30mm cannon.
Green Salt of Death?
Unfortunately, there are a number of potentially serious
issues concerning the use of DU in military ordnance. Most
notable is that although it is less radioactive than
naturally occurring uranium ore, DU is still, nonetheless,
radioactive. Individuals exposed to DU dust and fragments
run the risk of inhaling it, and exposing their internal
organs to low-level radiation. In addition, DU penetrators
buried in the soil can potentially contaminate ground water
as the penetrator decomposes, potentially exposing large
numbers of people to indirect DU contamination.
Though only slightly radioactive, studies have shown that
prolonged exposure to low level doses of Alpha and Beta type
radiation (which is mostly what DU emits) has a mutagenic
effect (that is, produces mutations) on genetic material,
and could lead to cancer. In addition, as it is a heavy
metal, if you ingest DU, it will migrate towards the kidneys
and large bones, possibly damaging both. On the other hand,
numerous studies conducted to evaluate the long-term effects
of DU exposure have either been inconclusive or have shown
that even prolonged exposure from deeply embedded fragments,
has not resulted in any notable medical problems. Even so,
the use of DU has become a politically charged issue, with
several countries discontinuing its use, and many others
calling for its outright ban. That DU is reshaping the
battlefield (both politically and combatively) cannot be
denied; the question to be answered is, "Is it worth it?"
The answers may have to wait as more research is collected.
Photos:
Small but deadly: The M829 APFSDS (Armoured Piercing
Fin-Stabilised Discarding Sabot) in action, as the "dart" of
depleted uranium detaches from its sabot casing. The 9.41
pound, 1.06" diameter, 24" long, depleted uranium "dart" has
an effective range of about 3000 meters, and has a muzzle
velocity of about 1670 meters/second -- just imagine the
power generated by 7 Honda Accords smashing into you at 65
miles per hour.
http://www.military.com/pics/SoldierTech_DU4.jpg
An evolutionary step: A German 28mm bore gun, which
"squeezes" the round as it fires down the barrel.
http://www.military.com/pics/SoldierTech_DU3.jpg
The sabot: A diagram for the firing of a training mortar
demonstrates how a penetrator "separates" from a sabot (C)
and the sabot falls away (D).
http://www.military.com/pics/SoldierTech_DU4.gif
Cutaway of the composition of an M829A1 projectile, with DU rod.
http://www.military.com/pics/SoldierTech_DU1.jpg
Depleted Uranium: Fast Facts
Depleted uranium is 70% more dense than lead, and 15% more
dense than tungsten (the other metal commonly used for
projectiles) -- this gives it more kinetic energy when
fired. As a comparison, the amount of depleted uranium that
would fill a 12-ounce can of Coke would weigh over 14 pounds.
Depleted uranium burns and melts as it penetrates steel,
becoming 'sharper' rather than blunting, resulting in
increased destructive power.
Projectiles made from depleted uranium are cheaper to
manufacture than those made from tungsten because it can be
cast easily.
Depleted Uranium's Current Uses:
Army
- 120 mm or 105 mm caliber projectiles used by the M1 Abrams
and M60A3 tanks
- 25mm projectiles used by the M242 mounted on the M2
Bradley and the LAV-AT
- Some Abrams tanks have DU rods as reinforcements as part
of its armour plating
Navy
- 20mm CIWS and 25mm Mk38 machine gun
Air Force
- 30mm caliber projectiles used by A-10 Thunderbolt II
Marine Corps
- 25 mm projectiles used by AV-8B Harrier
- 20mm projectiles for electric Gatling gun mounted on AH-1
helicopter gunships
Related Links
How Bunker Busters Work
Includes basic info on depleted uranium.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/bunker-buster.htm/printable
World Health Organization Factsheet
Overview of WHO regulations on depleted uranium.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/print.html
Depleted Uranium Munitions
DoD overview on the military uses of DU.
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2002training/wakayama2.pdf
[Have opinions on this article or equipment? Go to the
Discussion Forum to sound off.]
http://forums.military.com/1/OpenTopic?a=frm&s=78919038&f=3101927042
--------
How Bunker Busters Work
by Marshall Brain, HowStuffWorks, Inc., April 23, 2005
http://science.howstuffworks.com/bunker-buster.htm/printable
There are thousands of military facilities around the world
that defy conventional attack. Caves in Afghanistan burrow
into mountainsides, and immense concrete bunkers lie buried
deep in the sand in Iraq. These hardened facilities house
command centers, ammunition depots and research labs that
are either of strategic importance or vital to waging war.
Because they are underground, they are hard to find and
extremely difficult to strike.
The U.S. military has developed several different weapons to
attack these underground fortresses. Known as bunker
busters, these bombs penetrate deep into the earth or right
through a dozen feet of reinforced concrete before
exploding. These bombs have made it possible to reach and
destroy facilities that would have been impossible to attack
otherwise.
In this article, you will learn about several different
types of bunker buster so you understand how they work and
where the technology is heading.
Conventional Bunker Busters
During the 1991 Gulf war, allied forces knew of several
underground military bunkers in Iraq that were so well
reinforced and so deeply buried that they were out of reach
of existing munitions. The U.S. Air Force started an intense
research and development process to create a new
bunker-busting bomb to reach and destroy these bunkers. In
just a few weeks, a prototype was created. This new bomb had
the following features:
* Its casing consists of an approximately 16-foot
(5-meter) section of artillery barrel that is 14.5 inches
(37 cm) in diameter. Artillery barrels are made of extremely
strong hardened steel so that they can withstand the
repeated blasts of artillery shells when they are fired.
* Inside this steel casing is nearly 650 pounds (295
kg) of tritonal explosive. Tritonal is a mixture of TNT (80
percent) and aluminum powder (20 percent). The aluminum
improves the brisance of the TNT -- the speed at which the
explosive develops its maximum pressure. The addition of
aluminum makes tritonal about 18 percent more powerful than
TNT alone.
* Attached to the front of the barrel is a
laser-guidance assembly. Either a spotter on the ground or
in the bomber illuminates the target with a laser, and the
bomb homes in on the illuminated spot. The guidance assembly
steers the bomb with fins that are part of the assembly.
* Attached to the end of the barrel are stationary fins
that provide stability during flight.
The finished bomb, known as the GBU-28 or the BLU-113, is 19
feet (5.8 meters) long, 14.5 inches (36.8 cm) in diameter
and weighs 4,400 pounds (1,996 kg).
Deep Penetration
From the description in the previous section, you can see
that the concept behind bunker-busting bombs like the GBU-28
is nothing but basic physics. You have:
* An extremely strong tube that is:
o very narrow for its weight
o extremely heavy
The bomb is dropped from an airplane so that this tube
develops a great deal of speed, and therefore kinetic
energy, as it falls.
When the bomb hits the earth, it is like a massive nail shot
from a nail gun. In tests, the GBU-28 has penetrated 100
feet (30.5 meters) of earth or 20 feet (6 meters) of concrete.
In a typical mission, intelligence sources or
aerial/satellite images reveal the location of the bunker. A
GBU-28 is loaded into a B2 Stealth bomber, an F-111 or
similar aircraft.
The bomber flies near the target, the target is illuminated
and the bomb is dropped.
The GBU-28 has in the past been fitted with a delay fuze
(FMU-143) so that it explodes after penetration rather than
on impact. There has also been a good bit of research into
smart fuzes that, using a microprocessor and an
accelerometer, can actually detect what is happening during
penetration and explode at precisely the right time. These
fuses are known as hard target smart fuzes (HTSF). See
GlobalSecurity.org: HTSF for details.
The GBU-27/GBU-24 (aka BLU-109) is nearly identical to the
GBU-28, except that it weighs only 2,000 pounds (900 kg). It
is less expensive to manufacture, and a bomber can carry
more of them on each mission.
Depleted Uranium
To make bunker busters that can go even deeper, designers
have three choices:
* They can make the weapon heavier. More weight gives
the bomb more kinetic energy when it hits the target.
* They can make the weapon smaller in diameter. The
smaller cross-sectional area means that the bomb has to move
less material (earth or concrete) "out of the way" as it
penetrates.
* They can make the bomb faster to increase its kinetic
energy. The only practical way to do this is to add some
sort of large rocket engine that fires right before impact.
One way to make a bunker buster heavier while maintaining a
narrow cross-sectional area is to use a metal that is
heavier than steel. Lead is heavier, but it is so soft that
it is useless in a penetrator -- lead would deform or
disintegrate when the bomb hits the target.
One material that is both extremely strong and extremely
dense is depleted uranium. DU is the material of choice for
penetrating weapons because of these properties. For
example, the M829 is an armor-piercing "dart" fired from the
cannon of an M1 tank. These 10-pound (4.5-kg) darts are 2
feet (61 cm) long, approximately 1 inch (2.5 cm) in diameter
and leave the barrel of the tank's cannon traveling at over
1 mile (1.6 km) per second. The dart has so much kinetic
energy and is so strong that it is able to pierce the
strongest armor plating.
Depleted uranium is a by-product of the nuclear power
industry. Natural uranium from a mine contains two isotopes:
U-235 and U-238. The U-235 is what is needed to produce
nuclear power (see How Nuclear Power Plants Work for
details), so the uranium is refined to extract the U-235 and
create "enriched uranium." The U-238 that is left over is
known as "depleted uranium."
U-238 is a radioactive metal that produces alpha and beta
particles. In its solid form, it is not particularly
dangerous because its half-life is 4.5 billion years,
meaning that the atomic decay is very slow. Depleted uranium
is used, for example, in boats and airplanes as ballast. The
three properties that make depleted uranium useful in
penetrating weapons are its:
* Density - Depleted uranium is 1.7 times heavier than
lead, and 2.4 times heavier than steel.
* Hardness - If you look at a Web site like
WebElements.com, you can see that the Brinell hardness of
U-238 is 2,400, which is just shy of tungsten at 2,570. Iron
is 490. Depleted uranium alloyed with a small amount of
titanium is even harder.
* Incendiary properties - Depleted uranium burns. It is
something like magnesium in this regard. If you heat uranium
up in an oxygen environment (normal air), it will ignite and
burn with an extremely intense flame. Once inside the
target, burning uranium is another part of the bomb's
destructive power.
These three properties make depleted uranium an obvious
choice when creating advanced bunker-busting bombs. With
depleted uranium, it is possible to create extremely heavy,
strong and narrow bombs that have tremendous penetrating force.
The problem with depleted uranium is the fact that it is
radioactive. The United States uses tons on depleted uranium
on the battlefield. At the end of the conflict, this leaves
tons of radioactive material in the environment. For
example, Time magazine: Balkan Dust Storm reports:
NATO aircraft rained more than 30,000 DU shells on
Kosovo during the 11-week air campaign… About 10 tons of the
debris were scattered across Kosovo.
Perhaps 300 tons of DU weapons were used in the first Gulf
war. When it burns, DU forms a uranium-oxide smoke that is
easily inhaled and that settles on the ground miles from the
point of use. Once inhaled or ingested, depleted-uranium
smoke can do a great deal of damage to the human body
because of its radioactivity. See How Nuclear Radiation
Works for details.
Tactical Nuclear Weapons
The Pentagon has developed tactical nuclear weapons to reach
the most heavily fortified and deeply buried bunkers. The
idea is to marry a small nuclear bomb with a penetrating
bomb casing to create a weapon that can penetrate deep into
the ground and then explode with nuclear force. The B61-11,
available since 1997, is the current state of the art in the
area of nuclear bunker busters.
From a practical standpoint, the advantage of a small
nuclear bomb is that it can pack so much explosive force
into such a small space. (See How Nuclear Bombs Work for
details.) The B61-11 can carry a nuclear charge with
anywhere between a 1-kiloton (1,000 tons of TNT) and a
300-kiloton yield. For comparison, the bomb used on
Hiroshima had a yield of approximately 15 kilotons. The
shock wave from such an intense underground explosion would
cause damage deep in the earth and would presumably destroy
even the most well-fortified bunker.
From an environmental and diplomatic standpoint, however,
the use of the B61-11 raises a number of issues. There is no
way for any known penetrating bomb to bury itself deeply
enough to contain a nuclear blast. This means that the
B61-11 would leave an immense crater and eject a huge amount
of radioactive fallout into the air. Diplomatically, the
B61-11 is problematic because it violates the international
desire to eliminate the use of nuclear weapons. See FAS.org:
Low-Yield Earth-Penetrating Nuclear Weapons for details.
For more information on the GBU-28, the B61-11 and depleted
uranium, check out the links on the next page.
Lots More Information
Related HowStuffWorks Articles
* How Nuclear Bombs Work
* How Dirty Bombs Work
* How Smart Bombs Work
* How E-Bombs Work
* How Nuclear Radiation Works
* How Stealth Bombers Work
* How MOAB Works
More Great Links (add your link)
http://science.howstuffworks.com/contact.php?s=hsw&ct=addlink
* FAS.org: Guided Bomb Unit-28 (GBU-28)
* GlobalSecurity.org: Guided Bomb Unit-28 (GBU-28)
* South Florida Sun-Sentinel: Attacking bunkers - good
animation
* csmonitor.com: New push for bunker-buster nuke
* CNN.com: U.S. Air Force seeks deeper penetrating
"bunker-buster" weapon
* CLW.org: GBU-28/B "Bunker Buster"
* Lockheed Martin: BLU-109
* FAS.org: Hard and/or Deeply Buried Target Defeat
Capability (HDBTDC) Program
* DTIC: Fuzing Overview - PDF
* ChicagoTribune.com: Caves can't hold back U.S.
forces, analysts say
* CLW.org: Nuclear Bunker Busters: Unusable, Costly,
and Dangerous
* LASG.org: B61-11 Concerns and Background
* Wired.com: Nuke 'Em from on High
* FAS.org: Low-Yield Earth-Penetrating Nuclear Weapons
* Military use of depleted uranium: Known and suspected
DU weapon systems - PDF
* Wired.com: U.S. stocking Uranium-rich bombs?
* U238 physical properties
* Depleted uranium FAQ
* NATO: Depleted Uranium
* FAS.org: Depleted Uranium
* DOD: Depleted Uranium Information Page
* Dan's History: Laser Guided Bombs LGBs, GBU-27, GBU-28
* Sandia Lab News: How TTR Helped the Air Force Ready a
New Bomb
----
Depleted uranium (WHO Fact Sheet)
World Health Organization Fact sheet N°257
Revised January 2003
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/print.html
Uranium
* Metallic uranium (U) is a silver-white, lustrous,
dense, weakly radioactive element. It is ubiquitous
throughout the natural environment, and is found in varying
but small amounts in rocks, soils, water, air, plants,
animals and in all human beings.
* Natural uranium consists of a mixture of three
radioactive isotopes which are identified by the mass
numbers 238U (99.27% by mass), 235U (0.72%) and 234U (0.0054%).
* On average, approximately 90 µg (micrograms) of
uranium exists in the human body from normal intakes of
water, food and air. About 66% is found in the skeleton, 16%
in the liver, 8% in the kidneys and 10% in other tissues.
* Uranium is used primarily in nuclear power plants.
However, most reactors require uranium in which the 235U
content is enriched from 0.72% to about 1.5-3%.
Depleted uranium
* The uranium remaining after removal of the enriched
fraction contains about 99.8% 238U, 0.2% 235U and 0.001%
234U by mass; this is referred to as depleted uranium or DU.
* The main difference between DU and natural uranium is
that the former contains at least three times less 235U than
the latter.
* DU, consequently, is weakly radioactive and a
radiation dose from it would be about 60% of that from
purified natural uranium with the same mass.
* The behaviour of DU in the body is identical to that
of natural uranium.
* Spent uranium fuel from nuclear reactors is sometimes
reprocessed in plants for natural uranium enrichment. Some
reactor-created radioisotopes can consequently contaminate
the reprocessing equipment and the DU. Under these
conditions another uranium isotope, 236U, may be present in
the DU together with very small amounts of the transuranic
elements plutonium, americium and neptunium and the fission
product technetium-99. However, the additional radiation
dose following intake of DU into the human body from these
isotopes would be less than 1%.
Applications of depleted uranium
* Due to its high density, about twice that of lead,
the main civilian uses of DU include counterweights in
aircraft, radiation shields in medical radiation therapy
machines and containers for the transport of radioactive
materials. The military uses DU for defensive armour plate.
* DU is used in armour penetrating military ordnance
because of its high density, and also because DU can ignite
on impact if the temperature exceeds 600°C.
Exposure to uranium and depleted uranium
* Under most circumstances, use of DU will make a
negligible contribution to the overall natural background
levels of uranium in the environment. Probably the greatest
potential for DU exposure will follow conflict where DU
munitions are used.
* A recent United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
report giving field measurements taken around selected
impact sites in Kosovo (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia)
indicates that contamination by DU in the environment was
localized to a few tens of metres around impact sites.
Contamination by DU dusts of local vegetation and water
supplies was found to be extremely low. Thus, the
probability of significant exposure to local populations was
considered to be very low.
* A UN expert team reported in November 2002 that they
found traces of DU in three locations among 14 sites
investigated in Bosnia following NATO airstrikes in 1995. A
full report is expected to be published by UNEP in March 2003.
* Levels of DU may exceed background levels of uranium
close to DU contaminating events. Over the days and years
following such an event, the contamination normally becomes
dispersed into the wider natural environment by wind and
rain. People living or working in affected areas may inhale
contaminated dusts or consume contaminated food and drinking
water.
* People near an aircraft crash may be exposed to DU
dusts if counterweights are exposed to prolonged intense
heat. Significant exposure would be rare, as large masses of
DU counterweights are unlikely to ignite and would oxidize
only slowly. Exposures of clean-up and emergency workers to
DU following aircraft accidents are possible, but normal
occupational protection measures would prevent any
significant exposure.
Intake of depleted uranium
* Average annual intakes of uranium by adults are
estimated to be about 0.5mg (500 ?g) from ingestion of food
and water and 0.6 ?g from breathing air.
* Ingestion of small amounts of DU contaminated soil by
small children may occur while playing.
* Contact exposure of DU through the skin is normally
very low and unimportant.
* Intake from wound contamination or embedded fragments
in skin tissues may allow DU to enter the systemic circulation.
Absorption of depleted uranium
* About 98% of uranium entering the body via ingestion
is not absorbed, but is eliminated via the faeces. Typical
gut absorption rates for uranium in food and water are about
2% for soluble and about 0.2% for insoluble uranium compounds.
* The fraction of uranium absorbed into the blood is
generally greater following inhalation than following
ingestion of the same chemical form. The fraction will also
depend on the particle size distribution. For some soluble
forms, more than 20% of the inhaled material could be
absorbed into blood.
* Of the uranium that is absorbed into the blood,
approximately 70% will be filtered by the kidney and
excreted in the urine within 24 hours; this amount increases
to 90% within a few days.
Potential health effects of exposure to depleted uranium
* In the kidneys, the proximal tubules (the main
filtering component of the kidney) are considered to be the
main site of potential damage from chemical toxicity of
uranium. There is limited information from human studies
indicating that the severity of effects on kidney function
and the time taken for renal function to return to normal
both increase with the level of uranium exposure.
* In a number of studies on uranium miners, an
increased risk of lung cancer was demonstrated, but this has
been attributed to exposure from radon decay products. Lung
tissue damage is possible leading to a risk of lung cancer
that increases with increasing radiation dose. However,
because DU is only weakly radioactive, very large amounts of
dust (on the order of grams) would have to be inhaled for
the additional risk of lung cancer to be detectable in an
exposed group. Risks for other radiation-induced cancers,
including leukaemia, are considered to be very much lower
than for lung cancer.
* Erythema (superficial inflammation of the skin) or
other effects on the skin are unlikely to occur even if DU
is held against the skin for long periods (weeks).
* No consistent or confirmed adverse chemical effects
of uranium have been reported for the skeleton or liver.
* No reproductive or developmental effects have been
reported in humans.
* Although uranium released from embedded fragments may
accumulate in the central nervous system (CNS) tissue, and
some animal and human studies are suggestive of effects on
CNS function, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions from
the few studies reported.
Maximum radiation exposure limits and their limited
application to uranium and depleted uranium
The International Basic Safety Standards, agreed by all
applicable UN agencies in 1996, provide for radiation dose
limits above normal background exposure levels.
* The general public should not receive a dose of more
than 1 millisievert (mSv) in a year. In special
circumstances, an effective dose of up to 5 mSv in a single
year is permitted provided that the average dose over five
consecutive years does not exceed 1 mSv per year. An
equivalent dose to the skin should not exceed 50 mSv in a year.
* Occupational exposure should not exceed an effective
dose of 20 mSv per year averaged over five consecutive years
or an effective dose of 50 mSv in any single year. An
equivalent dose to the extremities (hands and feet) or the
skin should not surpass 500 mSv in a year.
* In case of uranium or DU intake, the radiation dose
limits are applied to inhaled insoluble uranium-compounds
only. For all other exposure pathways and the soluble
uranium-compounds, chemical toxicity is the factor that
limits exposure.
Guidance on exposure based on chemical toxicity of uranium
WHO has guidelines for determining the values of
health-based exposure limits or tolerable intakes for
chemical substances. The tolerable intakes given below are
applicable to long-term exposure of the general public (as
opposed to workers). For single and short-term exposures,
higher exposure levels may be tolerated without adverse effects.
* The general public's intake via inhalation or
ingestion of soluble DU compounds should be based on a
tolerable intake value of 0.5 µg per kg of body weight per
day. This leads to an air concentration of 1 µg/m3 for
inhalation, and about 11 mg/y for ingestion by the average
adult.
* Insoluble uranium compounds with very low absorption
rate are markedly less toxic to the kidney, and a tolerable
intake via ingestion of 5 µg per kg of body weight per day
is applicable.
* When the solubility characteristics of the uranium
compounds are not known, which is often the case in exposure
to DU, it would be prudent to apply 0.5 µg per kg of body
weight per day for ingestion.
Monitoring and treatment of exposed individuals
* For the general population, neither civilian nor
military use of DU is likely to produce exposures to DU
significantly above normal background levels of uranium.
Therefore, individual exposure assessments for DU will
normally not be required. Exposure assessments based on
environmental measurements may, however, be needed for
public information and reassurance.
* When an individual is suspected of being exposed to
DU at a level significantly above the normal background
level, an assessment of DU exposure may be required. This is
best achieved by analysis of daily urine excretion. Urine
analysis can provide useful information for the prognosis of
kidney pathology from uranium or DU. The proportion of DU in
the urine is determined from the 235U/238U ratio, obtained
using sensitive mass spectrometric techniques.
* Faecal measurement can also give useful information
on DU intake. However, faecal excretion of natural uranium
from the diet is considerable (on average 500 ?g per day,
but very variable) and this needs to be taken into account.
* External radiation measurements over the chest, using
radiation monitors for determining the amount of DU in the
lungs, require special facilities. This technique can
measure about 10 milligrams of DU in the lungs, and (except
for souble compounds) can be useful soon after exposure.
* There are no specific means to decrease the
absorption of uranium from the gastrointestinal tract or
lungs. Following severe internal contamination, treatment in
special hospitals consists of the slow intravenous
transfusion of isotonic 1.4 % sodium bicarbonate to increase
excretion of uranium. DU levels in the human, however, are
not expected to reach a value that would justify intravenous
treatment any more than dialysis.
Recommendations
* Following conflict, levels of DU contamination in
food and drinking water might be detected in affected areas
even after a few years. This should be monitored where it is
considered there is a reasonable possibility of significant
quantities of DU entering the ground water or food chain.
* Where justified and possible, clean-up operations in
impact zones should be undertaken if there are substantial
numbers of radioactive projectiles remaining and where
qualified experts deem contamination levels to be
unacceptable. If high concentrations of DU dust or metal
fragments are present, then areas may need to be cordoned
off until removal can be accomplished. Such impact sites are
likely to contain a variety of hazardous materials, in
particular unexploded ordnance. Due consideration needs to
be given to all hazards, and the potential hazard from DU
kept in perspective.
* Small children could receive greater exposure to DU
when playing in or near DU impact sites. Their typical
hand-to-mouth activity could lead to high DU ingestion from
contaminated soil. Necessary preventative measures should be
taken.
* Disposal of DU should follow appropriate national or
international recommendations.
For more information contact:
WHO Media centre
Telephone: +41 22 791 2222
Email: mediainquiries@who.int
--
Posted for educational and research purposes only,
~ in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 ~
NucNews Links and Expanded Archives - http://nucnews.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a home for your web domain?
We recommend our provider, Hosting Direct
https://support.hostingdirect.net/cgi-bin/affiliates/clickthru.cgi?id=nucnews
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/EA3HyD/3MnJAA/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/
*****************************************************************
29 Seattle Times: Hanford downwinders get their day in court
Monday, April 25, 2005 - Page updated at 11:51 a.m.
By Seattle Times staff reporter
GREG GILBERT / THE SEATTLE TIMES
Steve Stanton, outside his Walla Walla boyhood home, is among six
plaintiffs in the first lawsuit to go to trial by people who say
they were sickened by radiation exposure from the Hanford
nuclear-weapons program decades ago. Stanton was found to have
thyroid cancer in 1996.
HANFORD As a 5-year-old, Steve Stanton never gave a thought
to a place called the Hanford Engineer Works.
The towheaded boy was too busy roaming his Walla Walla
neighborhood, building forts with his younger brother and
picking raspberries from his grandfather's garden.
But on a day in early December 1949, scientists more than 60
miles away at Hanford embarked on a secret experiment that would
touch the lives of Stanton and thousands of others in eastern
Washington and Oregon.
At a massive concrete factory in the desert north of Richland,
built to extract plutonium for the core of nuclear bombs, the
scientists began pouring caustic chemicals onto a ton of
radioactive uranium fresh from a nuclear reactor.
As the scientists expected, the reaction spewed radiation
through a 200-foot smokestack and into the Eastern Washington
sky. The winds carried it as much as 200 miles away.
Beginning today, the legacy of that experiment at the World War
II-era nuclear-weapons factory and countless other radiation
leaks from Hanford will go on trial in a Spokane courtroom.
Stanton is one of six plaintiffs, the first of roughly 2,300
Hanford "downwinders" suing the companies that built and ran
Hanford. They suffer from cancer and other illnesses, some
fatal, that they or their families say stem from radiation
showered on them without their knowledge.
The companies insist there is no evidence despite years of
studies that Hanford radiation sickened, injured or killed its
neighbors.
While the trial starting today will center on scientific
disputes over whether the radiation sickened people, it also
represents a trial of an ambitious program by the federal
government and big corporations that propelled the U.S. into the
nuclear age and left a trail of pollution and secrecy.
"We're really dealing with closing a chapter on one of the
darker stages of our history," said Robert Alvarez, a senior
policy adviser to the Clinton administration's secretary of
energy and a longtime critic of the nuclear-weapons industry.
"There were a lot of people being put at risk without their
knowledge or their consent," he said.
The historic Hanford T Plant started operating in 1944. As part
of a secret experiment in 1949, radioactive iodine was released
into the atmosphere from the 200-foot-tall stack at left.
Stanton was born at Walla Walla General Hospital on Nov. 6,
1944, two months before the first uranium was dissolved at
Hanford to extract tiny amounts of plutonium for the core of a
nuclear bomb. The first big puff of radiation into the sky
followed almost immediately.
At that point, almost nobody knew what was happening in the
desolate, windswept desert near a bend in the Columbia River.
Not most of the roughly 50,000 people who worked there, nor the
people who lived nearby in farm towns like Pasco and Kennewick.
They didn't know that in those vast gray buildings, scientists
were feverishly working to collect plutonium.
War work It was the height of World War II, and the radioactive
metal was a key ingredient for the Manhattan Project, the
top-secret government effort to build an atomic bomb.
Plutonium from Hanford sat at the center of the world's first
nuclear bomb, exploded in a test in New Mexico. Hanford also
produced the plutonium in the bomb dropped on the Japanese city
of Nagasaki.
It wasn't until August 1945, after the atomic bomb exploded over
Hiroshima, that the true purpose of the Hanford factories was
unveiled. "It's Atomic Bombs" read the headline of the local
Richland Villager newspaper.
From the time it became widely known, government and industry
officials from DuPont, and then General Electric issued
statements that the factories posed no health threat. In August
1945, a memo sought to debunk rumors, declaring the site safe
for workers and nearby residents.
"We do not live in a 'City of Pluto,' as certain elements of the
press describe our village. Pluto is safely confined behind
walls or barriers in the Plant. What little of him as does
escape is not going to relegate anyone to purgatory," it stated.
GREG GILBERT / THE SEATTLE TIMES
Stephen Metzger, operations manager at the Hanford T Plant,
shows off one of the original process-operations control panels.
The plant was built six decades ago.
The statement was among the first of a steady stream of
assurances spanning decades.
But within Hanford, radiation concerns surfaced before
construction finished. As early as December 1943, an internal
memo warned that winter weather could trap radioactive gases
close to the ground, particularly radioactive iodine, I-131, as
they come out of the factories' stacks.
"Unless some method of handling the active iodine other than its
passage from the stack as a vapor is developed, it appears that
this will present a grave health problem," the memo stated.
The warning proved prescient.
Up in the air The processing factories initially had no filters,
so whatever went into the factory's exhaust system wound up in
the air.
In spring 1945, I-131 levels near the stacks rose to 100 times
the "permanently tolerable value," according to a DuPont record.
By December of that year, I-131 was found on vegetation in
Richland, Pasco and Kennewick as much as 32 times the safety
level set soon after, in January 1946.
By 1951, an estimated 730,000 curies of I-131 had been released
into the atmosphere. For comparison, the 1986 accident at the
Chernobyl nuclear-power plant in the former Soviet Union
released an estimated 50 million curies of I-131 over 10 days.
Hanford scientists worried that radioactive iodine from the
factories could damage people's thyroids, which help regulate
metabolism.
Hanford officials eventually dealt with the problem by
installing filters and waiting longer to dissolve the uranium.
The iodine, with a half life of eight days, became less of a
problem as the uranium cooled.
The exception was the December 1949 experiment, known as the
"Green Run." It was done in conjunction with the Air Force, for
what appears to be a test of radiation-monitoring equipment.
Memorabilia from the 1940s can be found in several rooms at the
history museum in Richland dedicated to Hanford's story and
impact on the region.
After the test, radiation above the safety threshold established
at the time was found in a region extending from The Dalles in
Oregon to Spokane, and from Yakima to the Blue Mountains,
according to a memo kept secret until 1986.
Other radiation problems continued to reach beyond Hanford's
borders.
Particles and flakes of radioactive material continued to float
periodically out of the factories to nearby towns. Columbia
River water was used to cool the nuclear reactors, then flushed
back into the river still bearing some radiation.
By 1971, when the last of those reactors closed, more than 100
million curies of radiation are thought to have flowed into the
Columbia River. Elevated radiation showed up as far away as in
oysters in the Pacific Ocean near the river's mouth.
Growing up Steve Stanton knew nothing of this. He was a healthy
boy, according to him and his mother. He ate vegetables pulled
from the garden. His mother remembers him drinking milk
delivered from nearby Young's Dairy. Milk is considered a prime
conduit for I-131, when it falls on vegetation eaten by cows.
In 1952 his family moved to Seattle, where his father worked at
a dry-cleaning business near the foot of Queen Anne Hill.
Stanton was a quiet kid with a penchant for numbers. He
graduated from the University of Washington in civil
engineering. He returned to Walla Walla in 1973, bought a house
a few miles from where he grew up and settled into a career with
the county engineering department.
He raised three girls and quietly moved toward middle age. What
he knew about Hanford came from the newspaper.
An old Richland Villager newspaper cartoon is on display at the
Columbia River Exhibition of History, Science and Technology
museum in Richland.
Then, in the spring of 1996, he felt like he was coming down
with a cold or a flu. That's when the doctor found the lump
below his Adam's apple. A few weeks later, his thyroid was cut
out and declared cancerous.
"Cancer," Stanton recalled. "That's kind of a nasty word."
Surfing the Internet to learn about treatments for thyroid
cancer, Stanton came across Web sites for "downwinders" people
who lived near nuclear-weapons factories or testing grounds and
believed they were sickened by radiation.
Convinced that his thyroid cancer came from Hanford, he joined
the downwinder lawsuit.
By then, the lawsuit was well on its way.
In 1986, the Department of Energy and Hanford, under public
pressure, released thousands of pages of documents that spelled
out how much radiation had come from the factories.
The revelations set off a huge controversy. In 1991, the first
downwinder lawsuit was filed.
Since then, the lawsuits, seeking various amounts of money for
damages, have been killed by one federal judge's ruling, only to
be revived by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. They are
now before a second judge, William Nielsen.
The federal government has spent tens of millions of dollars to
defend the companies, because it promised to indemnify them when
they took the contract to run Hanford. It will also have to pay
if the plaintiffs win the case.
The trial starting today represent six "bellwether" plaintiffs
people who will act as test cases. The outcome could influence
the fate of the other cases.
The massive legal case comes down to this deceptively simple
question: Did Hanford make people sick?
The defendant companies, General Electric and DuPont, argue
there is no solid evidence it did.
Despite the private concerns of early Hanford officials, no
study has turned up unusual patterns of disease in nearby
residents that can be traced to Hanford radiation.
"The bottom line is the plaintiffs do not have any epidemiology
to establish that I-131 caused any of these conditions," said
Kevin Van Wart, the lead defense attorney. "You have to have
some science to say there is reason to believe that more likely
than not Hanford caused this thyroid disease."
The Hanford Thyroid Disease Study, the major study of
downwinders by Seattle's Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
and the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
concluded in 2002 that there was no evidence of higher thyroid
disease or thyroid-cancer rates among people exposed to higher
doses of radiation.
It cautioned, however, it couldn't rule out that a particular
person got a disease from the radiation.
Plaintiffs' attorneys, meanwhile, have attacked the Hanford
thyroid study as flawed, and say defendants haven't offered
another scenario for the diseases.
"They have not identified anything that would be an alternative
cause at all, let alone anything that's more likely to be a
cause [than Hanford radiation]," said attorney David Breskin.
Scientists working for the plaintiffs argue the thyroid study
overstates the certainty of its conclusions. It fails to
acknowledge possible statistical errors that could throw off the
results, and doesn't account for all of the radiation that
downwinders might have encountered, they claim.
They also question the study's independence from influence by
the defendants. A recent court filing notes that several people
involved in creating the computer models that estimated Hanford
radiation exposures also worked for the U.S. Department of
Justice or the firm defending companies in the downwinder
lawsuit.
Hanford historian Michele Gerber, author of "On the Home Front:
The Cold War Legacy of the Hanford Nuclear Site," said she hopes
the trial can provide some answers to the question of whether
Hanford harmed any downwinders.
"I don't think you can move forward until you have a
democratically arrived at answer," said Gerber, who works for
Fluor Hanford, the main company running the facility.
But it may never close the chasm separating people over
Hanford's history.
Judith Jurji's father moved the family to Pasco in 1949 to work
as a Hanford pipe fitter. She was 4. She left in 1964 to go to
college.
Tired and forgetful For years, she wrestled with chronic fatigue
and forgetfulness. After the 1986 revelations about Hanford, she
had her thyroid checked and learned it wasn't functioning
properly.
She became a leader in the downwinder movement. Both she and her
sister are plaintiffs in the case, though they aren't one of the
six bellwether cases.
She still goes back to visit her relatives who live near
Hanford.
"I don't like to, but I do," Jurji said. "I think my sister and
I feel the same way. We just felt like there was so many lies.
We were really deceived about the safety of the place."
In Richland, the overriding feeling is one of pride in the role
Hanford played in arming the country. The local high-school team
is called the Bombers, its insignia a mushroom cloud. The Atomic
Ale Brewpub and Eatery serves Plutonium Porter and Half-Life
Hefeweizen.
The local history museum features several rooms dedicated to
Hanford.
But there's no mention of the Green Run, or the downwinders, or
the radiation that reached towns surrounding Hanford.
Roger Rohrbacher feels no anxiety about Hanford's history. He
was a 23-year-old scientist when he arrived in Richland in 1944
to work on a mysterious project. He expressed pride at the role
it played in winning the war.
Now 85 and a docent at the museum, he shows no doubts about what
happened at the plant.
"As far as the safety and the radiation, I don't remember any
problems," he said.
Warren Cornwall: 206-464-2311 or
Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company
*****************************************************************
30 KCRG.com: Ammo Plant Workers
| KCRG TV9 Your 24 Hour News and Weather Source
Monday, April 25, 2005,
By Dave Franzman KCRG-TV9 News
Video
(Cedar Rapids – KCRG) -- Iowa Congressional leaders and former
nuclear weapons workers scolded members of a federal board
Monday.
Until the early 1970's, the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant near
Burlington processed nuclear weapons. And many workers who
worked with those atomic weapons died prematurely, or developed
cancers linked to radiation.
Those workers were in Cedar Rapids looking for a status report
on medical compensation.
Five years ago, Congress approved up to 150-thousand dollars in
payments to workers injured while working at nuclear weapons
sites. And a federal board setting the compensation rules is
meeting in Cedar Rapids this week.
The subcommittee of the National Institute for Occupational
Health came to Cedar Rapids specifically to address the issues
at the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant.
About 400 one-time workers would be eligible for the
compensation payments. Last February, the same board appeared
ready to authorize the payments to Iowa workers. But recently,
the board has backpedaled on the payment rules.
Iowa Senator Tom Harkin was one member of congress to address
the board. Harkin said "the men and women of Burlington were on
the front lines of the cold war and served in total secrecy.
They received no medals, no thank you's...instead they paid a
terrible price."
Harkin urged the board to quickly adopt rules that will issue
the payments to qualified ammunition plant workers...or their
survivors.
Under the law passed by Congress, such victims could be eligible
for payments. That's if they had one of 22 types of cancer that
can be linked to radiation exposure.
But the Iowa group did not use radiation monitors many years
ago. So there's no record of exposure. That's one key issue
holding up payments.
The subcommittee is taking testimony about the issue in Cedar
Rapids and may vote on a recommendation Tuesday.
Copyright CRTV Company [ border=]
©2005 KCRG / Cedar Rapids TV Co.
*****************************************************************
31 Hawk Eye Newspaper: IAAP watchers face next round
Sunday, April 24, 2005
Advisory board set to take second look at former workers'
petition.
By KILEY MILLER
kmiller@thehawkeye.com
Ed Webb has an agenda, and he's not ashamed to admit it.
The Burlington man and his wife will spend Tuesday — their 58th
anniversary — in Cedar Rapids at a meeting of the Advisory Board
on Radiation and Worker Health.
The panel with the cumbersome title is taking a second look at a
petition from former Iowa Army Ammunition Plant workers with
cancer and their families.
Webb is something of a subject matter expert. He spent 25 years
at the plant, all in the atomic weapons program, known then as
Division B. As far as he knows, he's the only guy still living
who was with the program back in 1950.
And he is in chemotherapy for cancer a doctor says may have been
caused by radiation.
But Webb doesn't want to talk about all that. His sole purpose in
heading north is to tell the advisory board members "how stupid"
he thinks it is to hold a meeting about the Middletown ordnance
plant a full two hours from the plant itself.
"Are they hunting for more sophisticated after–hours
entertainment?" Webb asked.
Some folks with an interest in the board's discussion, among them
plant employees, are too ill to make the trip to Cedar Rapids, he
said. And those who can handle the trip physically could be put
off by the standard $135 rate for a double room at the Crowne
Plaza Five Seasons Center where the meeting runs from Monday to
Wednesday.
The board's last meeting on the ammunition plant took place even
further away, at a swank hotel in St. Louis.
It's enough to rouse the suspicions of an already suspicious
fellow.
"Maybe they don't want input," Webb said.
Justice deserved
Webb is hardly alone in having a personal issue to address at the
meeting. For every group, there's a motive.
The plant workers who filed the petition want the government to
pay $150,000 to all energy employees with cancer and their
families.
University of Iowa health professionals, the ones behind the
Burlington Atomic Energy Commission Plant — Former Worker
Program, want to provide scientific data supporting the workers.
The advisory board members want to regain credibility lost
earlier this year when they recommended approval of the petition,
only to have that recommendation get stuck in transit.
And Iowa's congressional delegation wants to be seen working on
constituents' behalf.
In announcing he would be in Cedar Rapids, Democratic Sen. Tom
Harkin said "it is time, at long last, for the board to give
closure, justice and immediate compensation" to the plant
workers.
The advisory board will discuss IAAP Monday afternoon and Tuesday
morning.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R–Iowa, will join Harkin at the meeting at
11 a.m. Monday. Rep. Jim Leach, R–Iowa, also is expected to
attend.
"I plan to make a strong statement to the workers, the advisory
board and officials from the Health and Human Services that a
decision regarding compensation must be made, and made soon,"
Grassley said. "I think the fact that this meeting is being held
is progress and I am truly hopeful that the meeting will lead to
these deserving workers getting the benefits they deserve."
Automatic compensation
So, what's this confab along the Cedar River about, really?
The Atomic Energy Commission and its replacement, the Department
of Energy, assembled nuclear weapons components at the 19,000
acre plant from the 1940s to the 1970s.
A major part of the Cold War effort to deter aggression by the
communist Eastern bloc, the work first came to public attention
five years ago when a former security officer at the plant wrote
a letter to Harkin about cancer ravaging his co–workers.
Money entered the discussion in 2000 when Congress passed the
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act,
which permits one–time $150,000 payments for job–related cancers.
Additional cash is distributed for other health problems.
Workers from some weapons facilities are automatically paid under
the program, but IAAP is not on that list. To date, not a single
claim from the plant has been approved.
Some workers blame the Silas Mason Co., which managed the plant,
and say the federal government did a poor job monitoring
radiation levels and an even poorer job keeping tabs on the few
records they had.
"The only monitor we had was a Geiger counter in the assembly
area," said Webb, who had a kidney removed in 2002 and will
endure his last treatment for prostate cancer this May. "Each
morning you went in and hit the button. If it didn't respond
somebody brought out another one."
In their petition, a group of energy workers argued the paucity
of information makes it impossible for the government to assess
radiation levels at the plant. They had help from physician
Laurence Fuortes at the University of Iowa College of Public
Health, who has been screening plant workers since 2000 for
occupational illnesses.
The petitioners want any Division B employee who put in at least
250 days on Line 1, site of the nuclear weapons work, included in
a Special Exposure Cohort, a grouping that allows automatic
compensation without a determination of radiation exposure.
The cohort would be limited to people with 22 specific cancers.
The advisory board has an integral if somewhat obscure role in
the compensation process.
Members range from physicians to energy plant workers. The
chairman, Paul Ziemer, is professor emeritus of the School of
Health Sciences at Purdue University.
The board advises the National Institute of Occupational Safety
and Health on the technical aspects of the energy compensation
program.
NIOSH, in turn, conducts a dose reconstruction for each claim, a
complex estimate of a worker's radiation exposure based on
documented evidence and scientific induction.
When it comes to Special Exposure Cohort petitions, the advisory
board evaluates the evidence and passes a yea–or–nay
recommendation to the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Back in February, the board said yea. The lack of radiation
monitoring so bothersome to the workers, coupled with classified
information problems concerning NIOSH, led board members to
decide dose reconstructions were not viable for IAAP.
NIOSH officials initially appeared to support the special
exposure cohort.
But a month after the board meeting, the agency released a
revised technical basis document for the plant describing
activities and radiation protection practices in the nuclear
weapons program.
NIOSH scientists now believe they can proceed with dose
reconstructions, and they've brought the SEC petition back for a
second review.
In a prepared statement issued Friday, Harkin said NIOSH
officials "reneged" on their own recommendation and that of their
advisory board.
"This week in Cedar Rapids, NIOSH and its advisory board can end
this injustice," Harkin said. "It is time, at long last, for the
board to give closure, justice, and immediate compensation to
former IAAP workers."
Ironically, the revised technical basis document — frequently
referred to as a site profile, although the former is actually a
component of the latter — is based in large part on town hall
meetings held at Harkin's behest in which plant employees shared
their stories with NIOSH representatives.
The technical basis document was ready before the last board
meeting but had not been cleared for release by the Department of
Energy.
And it is the technical basis document the advisory board members
will consider Monday afternoon.
Come Tuesday, they will take up the special exposure cohort.
Should they support the workers, as they did in February, their
recommendation would go to Health and Human Services Secretary
Michael Leavitt. He would get 30 days to review the petition
before writing his own assessment for Congress.
Lawmakers then get their own review before the special exposure
cohort takes effect.
Many former workers and survivors who traveled to the last
advisory board meeting shed joyful tears afterward, believing
they were within two months of finally winning their five–year
fight.
They are more cautious now.
Ed Webb didn't go to the last meeting, and he hardly expects a
miracle this time around.
The other day he ran into an old co–worker at the grocery store.
As it often does when folks from Division B get together, talk
eventually turned to the plant, cancer and compensation.
"I told her, if any money ever comes out of the government for
that place, I'll get lunch," Webb said.
He figures it's a safe bet.
The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461
· 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · webmaster@thehawkeye.com
*****************************************************************
32 Hawk Eye Newspaper: AEC and DoE workers at IAAP should get their SEC ASAP.
Sunday, April 24, 2005 Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST
Defining the discussion
With all the acronyms and bureaucratic mumbo–jumbo, talking
about the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant can seem tougher than
standing on your head and drinking a cup of coffee while
reciting the Pledge of Allegiance — in Spanish.
An understanding of certain basic phrases and organizations can
be a big boost for anyone following the story. But for those
folks traveling Monday to the radiation advisory board meeting
in Cedar Rapids, a solid grasp of the lingo could well be the
difference between moderate comprehension and total confusion.
With that in mind, here is a glossary of eight terms likely to
be heard over and over... and over... and over.
Iowa Army Ammunition Plant (IAAP) — Previously called the Iowa
Ordnance Plant, a 19,000 acre facility in Middletown where the
United States Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and Department of
Energy (DOE) built and tested components for nuclear weapons
during the Cold War. At one point, the plant was one of only two
in the country involved in the final assembly of atomic weapons.
Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act
(EEOICPA) — Legislation approved by Congress in 2002 providing
$150,000 or more to former AEC and DOEworkers for job–related
illnesses. While some IAAP workers have been compensated for
beryllium exposure, all cancer claims have thus far been denied.
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) — A
federal agency that, among many jobs, trains occupational health
and safety professionals and conducts research on health and
safety concerns.
Office of Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS) — Subordinate
office within NIOSH that assists claimants and supports the role
of the Secretary of Health and Human Services under EEOICPA.
Dose reconstruction — Estimate on the radiation dose a person
has endured based on information about the individual's past
exposure and general knowledge about the behavior of radioactive
materials. NIOSH conducts dose reconstructions to determine if a
former energy worker may have cancer caused by radiation.
Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) — According to NIOSH, "membership
allows eligible employees with any of 22 'specified cancers' to
be compensated without determination of radiation dose and cause
— they are presumptively compensated through EEOICPA based on
their employment at the site." In simpler terms, an SEC is a
group of energy workers who get automatic compensation because
record keeping and radiation monitoring at the plant where they
worked was insufficient for accurate dose reconstructions.
Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health — Panel of experts
advising NIOSH and the Department of Health and Human Services
on dose reconstructions and special exposure cohort petitions.
The board will review an SEC petition from Iowa workers Monday
and Tuesday in Cedar Rapids.
Burlington Atomic Energy Commission Plant–Former Worker Program
(BAECP–FWP) — An effort begun in 2000 by the University of Iowa
College of Public Health to screen former IAAP nuclear weapons
workers for occupational illnesses. More than 600 workers have
been screened so far. Laurence Fuortes, the project director,
will present some of his findings to the advisory board.
— Kiley Miller
The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601
319-754-8461 · 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 ·
*****************************************************************
33 Hawk Eye Newspaper: Fuortes honored for efforts
Sunday, April 24, 2005
A University of Iowa physician studying the maladies plaguing
former Iowa Army Ammunition Plant workers was honored Tuesday
for his work.
Laurence Fuortes is the first recipient of the Award for Faculty
Achievement in Community Engagement established this year by the
Board of Advisors for the university's College of Public Health.
The award recognizes faculty members "for application of theory,
research and practice to address public health challenges at the
community level," according to a release issued by the
University of Iowa.
Fuortes, a professor of occupational and environmental health,
leads several programs with community service components,
including efforts on pesticide toxicology and traumatic head and
spinal cord injury.
He is best known in southeast Iowa for heading the Burlington
Atomic Energy Commission Plant — Former Worker Program.
Funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, the program has
provided free medical screenings to more than 600 former IAAP
nuclear weapons workers since 2000. The screenings are intended
to identify occupational illnesses potentially caused by work at
the plant, which between 1947 and 1975 was one of only two U.S.
facilities involved in the final assembly of atomic weapons.
In her nominating letter, project coordinator Kristina Venzke
identified Fuortes's dedication, energy and personal commitment
to serving the former nuclear workers.
"Dr. Fuortes is one of those rare individuals whose actions are
as strong as his words," Venzke wrote. "His dedication to social
justice is as important in his professional life as it is in his
personal life."
Fuortes also has been active in several programs in the Iowa
City area, including the Iowa City Free Medical Clinic, the Iowa
City Crisis Center and Foodbank, the Johnson County Coalition
Against Tobacco Addiction Among Youth and the Salvation Army.
He received a Fulbright Award in 2002 to lecture medical
students in community health at the University of Natal in South
Africa and conduct tuberculosis research.
"This award is a fitting tribute to Dr. Fuortes for his
extraordinary efforts over many years to reach out and be of
service to communities across Iowa and beyond," said Stephen
Ummel, chairman of the Board of Advisors. "His work is
representative of the College of Public Health faculty's deep
commitment to community engagement."
— The Hawk Eye
The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461
· 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · webmaster@thehawkeye.com
*****************************************************************
34 Hawk Eye Newspaper: Harkin plans meeting to discuss IAAP issue
Sunday, April 24, 2005
A June meeting in Burlington will bring Iowa Army Ammunition
Plant workers together with members of Sen. Tom Harkin's staff
and representatives from the National Institute of Occupational
Safety and Health and the Department of Labor.
The meeting is set for 6 p.m., June 14 at Pzazz, 3001 Winegard
Drive.
Many former employees at the Middletown plant have claims
pending with the Labor Department for cancer resulting from
radiation exposure on the job.
"IAAP workers deserve guidance on their compensation claims,"
Harkin said Friday in a release announcing the meeting. "Many of
them have been waiting years to be compensated for work–related
illnesses."
A similar meeting, held recently in Buffalo, N.Y., helped former
nuclear plant workers there understand the claims process
better, the Iowa Democrat said.
At the meeting, IAAP workers will present a petition to NIOSH to
be added to the category of former nuclear weapons workers
automatically eligible to compensation.
— The Hawk Eye
The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461
· 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · webmaster@thehawkeye.com
*****************************************************************
35 NRC: NRC Publishes Regulatory Issue Summary on Fire Protection Compensatory Measures
News Release - 2005-07
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov No. 05-071 April 22, 2005
The NRC is informing nuclear power plant operators, through a
Regulatory Issue Summary (RIS), about the proper method for
altering their fire protection program to use alternate
compensatory measures.
If a plant discovers degraded fire protection features, it can
apply compensatory measures to meet NRC regulations until the
condition is fixed. Fire watches are a commonly used measure,
but many others (e.g., temporary fire barriers, operator
briefings to raise awareness of and clarify actions to be taken)
can appropriately be used.
The RIS reminds plant operators that a documented evaluation of
the condition will help determine the most effective way to
compensate for a given degraded feature. These evaluations must
show that the measures taken will continue to assure the reactor
could shut down safely following a fire. The evaluations should
take into account factors such as the location, quantity and
type of combustible material near the degraded fire protection
feature, possible ignition sources, and automatic fire
suppression and detection systems in the area.
The RIS is available on the agencys web site, by entering
accession number ML042360547 at this address:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html. Questions
should be directed to Alex Klein (phone 301-415-4114 or
ark1@nrc.gov) or Phil Qualls (phone 301-415-1849 or
pmg@nrc.gov).
Last revised Monday, April 25, 2005
*****************************************************************
36 New Mexican: Changes in WIPP operations suggested by DOE
Mon Apr 25, 2005 11:19 pm
The Associated Press
CARLSBAD Changes ranging from the level of waste radioactivity
going to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant to a reduction in the
number of tests the waste undergoes will be sought by the
Department of Energy.
The DOE plans to submit a permit application, which is about 500
pages long, to the state Environment Department on Friday.
The changes could also bring as many as 250 jobs to WIPP by
consolidating work currently done at numerous sites across the
country, an official said.
While DOE officials say the proposed changes would make WIPPs
operations more efficient, critics complain they would weaken
the rigorous testing needed to keep the underground storage
facility safe.
WIPP is dug into a 2,150-foot-deep salt mine to permanently
enclose the radioactive waste from nuclear weapons work.
Under current regulations , the labs or factories that generate
the waste must conduct extensive tests on each drum of waste
before it is shipped.
In the permit application, the DOE will attempt to reduce the
number of tests required. Records kept when the drums of waste
were originally packed are often sufficient in providing an
accounting of whats inside, said WIPP project chief Ines Triay.
In those cases, the DOE wants the option of bypassing much of
the costly tests.
The DOE also wants to consolidate most of the testing to a
single location in order to save money. This would allow for
some of the tests done at the lab and factory before shipping to
be moved to WIPP.
A DOE study determined that hundreds of millions of dollars
could be saved by centralizing test equipment at WIPP.
The proposed changes would also allow waste with higher levels
of radioactivity to be stored at WIPP.
Since it opened in 1999, WIPP has only received what is known as
contact handled waste with radiation levels low enough that
workers can handle drums without any special protection .
As the drums are unpacked from shipping containers at WIPP, they
are checked for leaks and then lowered into the ground for
storage.
Now, the DOE hopes to bring what is called remote handled
waste to WIPP. The waste would be kept in special containers to
protect workers and disposed of in narrow horizontal shafts
drilled into the mines salt walls. The shafts would then be
capped.
As many as 250 jobs could be created to perform the testing at
WIPP, WIPP chief scientist Roger Nelson said during an April 19
meeting with state regulators.
But all of the tests that would be performed at WIPP could be
done without opening the waste drums, Triay said.
Don Hancock of the Southwest Research and Information Center,
was critical of the proposals saying they would gut the testing
requirements.
As part of the deal worked out by Congress to allow WIPP to
open, New Mexicos Environment Department was given regulatory
authority over hazardous chemicals going to WIPP.
James Bearzi, head of the states Hazardous Waste Bureau, points
out that New Mexico should have the final say because the waste
becomes its permanent resident .
Copyright 2004 Santa Fe New Mexican
*****************************************************************
37 Times Argus: Legislators turn attention to nuclear waste, crime, Medicaid
April 25, 2005
By Ross Sneyd Associated Press
MONTPELIER — Lawmakers' attention is turning to a host of
unfinished business as the legislative leadership tries to map
out a course leading to adjournment in just a month.
The list of incomplete priorities is long enough that it is
difficult for many around the Statehouse to see how the session
can be wrapped up by the middle of May, but House Speaker Gaye
Symington said that is her goal.
Senate committees are finalizing their versions of the
transportation spending plan and the 2006 budget, both of which
should be presented to the full Senate later this week or early
next. But the House only last week sent its comprehensive health
reform measure and two Senate committees are trying to find a
response to it that would be acceptable to Gov. James Douglas,
who is strongly opposed.
"It's a clear track toward a government-run, $2 billion tax
increase-funded system," Douglas said of the House plan.
Senate President Pro Tem Peter Welch said he was working with
Senate committees on a health care cost-control bill that could
bridge the vast differences between the governor and the House,
but he did not offer any specific provisions that he thinks
would be included.
The House will be spending this week on a couple of
crime-related measures and also on a plan to deal with
accumulate nuclear waste at Vermont Yankee in Vernon.
The Judiciary committee is trying to finish its work on
Senate-passed reform measures for the state's prison system. One
of the big potential stumbling blocks is over the Senate's
attempt to revise the system under which prisoners' sentences
are reduced for good behavior.
Some critics, including those in the administration, say the
Senate approach would give too much credit to inmates, although
senators respond that they're attempting to standardize the
procedures for calculating so-called good time.
An even higher-profile initiative that the House Judiciary
Committee is considering is what the House leadership refers to
as "safe communities" legislation. Douglas calls it the omnibus
crime bill.
In neither case is there a bill drafted that contains the
various elements in one package. Douglas wants to be able to
commit through civil courts violent offenders and violent sexual
offenders to treatment after their prison sentences are up.
But lawmakers are skeptical, arguing that the administration is
seeking to continue holding one convicted murderer in particular
who is due to be released next month.
"They've had 20years to plan for this," said Judiciary Committee
Chairman William Lippert, D-Hinesburg. "I don't think that's a
responsible way to approach this by turning attention to the
Legislature to resolve this. Having said that, we're taking a
look at it."
The administration also wants to expand the sexual offender
registry and tighten other crime laws.
Symington is critical of the administration for turning
attention on the crime issues three months into the session, but
she said she had instructed Lippert's attention to examine them.
"We are trying to move and do the right thing (with) realistic
policies making sure our communities are safe," she said.
Another issue that may put the administration and the House at
odds is how to deal with spent fuel at the Vermont Yankee
nuclear plant. It runs out of space to store the fuel in about
three years and wants permission to put it into dry cask storage
on plant grounds.
The Legislature is inclined to permit that through the 2012
expiration of its current license, but it is planning to impose
a fee for the right.
"Allowing dry cask storage within the borders of Vermont is not
something that was envisioned when we as a state went through
the process of establishing nuclear power" in the 1970s,
Symington said. "Because of that, it changes the balance and we
feel we need to look at the tradeoff."
One draft of a bill being considered in the House would impose a
charge of between $4 million and $5 million, depending on
whether the federal government allows Yankee to boost the amount
of power it generates.
Douglas said he believes charging for the right to store spent
fuel in dry casks is bad policy.
"To impose an additional tax on a company for the privilege of
storing its waste seems inappropriate to me," he said.
© 2005 Times Argus
*****************************************************************
38 Las Vegas SUN: DOE announces new leadership of Yucca nuclear waste program
By ERICA WERNER ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) - Management of the troubled Yucca Mountain
nuclear waste dump project is changing hands for the second time
in several months, the Energy Department announced Monday.
Theodore Garrish, who has been in charge of Yucca since
February, is retiring May 13, the department said in a press
release. He will be replaced by Paul Golan, who is currently
principal deputy assistant secretary for environmental
management at the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste
Management, the DOE office that handles Yucca.
Garrish's retirement is unrelated to recent problems with the
government's plans for the underground nuclear waste dump in
Nevada, including criminal investigations of whether workers on
the project falsified data, said Energy Department spokeswoman
Anne Womack Kolton.
"This is a long-plannd retirement and we are sorry to be losing
him," Womack Kolton said.
Garrish has been acting director of the Office of Civilian
Radioactive Waste Management since Margaret Chu resigned in
February. The department is still looking for a permanent
replacement, Womack Kolton said.
Golan will assume management of the Yucca project and Garrish's
title of deputy director for strategy and program development
but has not been named acting director, Womack Kolton said.
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said in a statement that
Garrish's "dedication to DOE and his leadership on the Yucca
Mountain project will be greatly missed."
Also Monday, several state officials, nuclear industry groups
and others that support Yucca Mountain announced formation of a
new task force to promote the project.
They said they would push for more funding and remind leaders in
the 39 states where nuclear waste and spent fuel now sits at
defense sites and commercial reactors that if it doesn't go to
Nevada, it will stay in their backyards.
"It's been a one-sided conversation as of recent weeks, months,"
said Charles P. Pray, co-chairman of the new task force and
Maine's appointed nuclear safety adviser. "I don't think there's
really been an overall discussion about the alternatives. Nobody
seems to put that out for general discussion among the public."
Members of the new Yucca Mountain Task Force said at a press
conference that the formation of their group was unrelated to
the DOE's disclosure last month of e-mails suggesting workers on
the project falsified data.
The problems at Yucca - also including a court decision that's
forcing a rewrite of radiation safety standards for the site 90
miles northwest of Las Vegas - have forced DOE to abandon a
planned 2010 completion date without setting a new one.
"It almost looks like it's coming back to a standstill," said
Martez Norris, executive director of the Nuclear Waste Strategy
Coalition, a task force member. After recent meetings with
administration and congressional officials, "it was very
apparent that we need to do a grass-roots effort really to move
things forward," she said.
---
On the Net:
Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov
--
*****************************************************************
39 Salt Lake Tribune: Moab tailings plan riles landowners in Crescent
Junction
Article Last Updated: 04/25/2005 12:37:53 AM
By Lisa Church Special to The Tribune
Lani and Rodney Asay, in the driveway of their home at
Crescent Junction, are concerned about the Energy Department's
plan to relocate 1.9 million tons of radioactive material from a
site near Moab to a disposal cell at the base of the Book
Cliffs, visible behind them, just a few miles from their
property. The railroad line that will carry the waste passes
within 1,000 feet of the couple's back door. (Lisa Church)
MOAB - Bobbe Kidrick and Bette Lange recall a bucolic childhood
growing up in the 1930s in the remote desert community of
Crescent Junction, in northern Grand County.
"Our first year there we lived in a tent," said the
71-year-old Kidrick. "We had to haul water. We didn't have
electricity at first. But it was a fun life. An interesting
life."
Now, the sisters, whose grandfather and great aunts were
among the last settlers to acquire Grand County land under the
federal government's 1862 Homestead Act, are worried that about
200 acres of family-owned property will be rendered worthless.
The Department of Energy has decided to relocate to a
disposal cell, just a few miles from their land, 11.9 million
tons of radioactive waste now perched north of Moab, on the
banks of the Colorado River.
"I was really concerned. I thought it would just trash the
area," Kidrick said. "The north end of the county has been
overlooked for the past 50 years or so. I want to know that [the
county and DOE] recognize this is valuable commercial land."
Lange reacted angrily to the news.
"I was livid," she said. "I've calmed down a little now. But
[the family is in its sixth generation of] owning that land. We
don't know how this will affect us."
Kidrick and Lange are also uneasy about how the DOE's plan
to transport the toxic waste by rail will affect Lange's
daughter, Lani Asay, and her husband. The existing rail line
runs through the center of the family's 200 acres, and passes
about 1,000 feet from Asay's back door.
After the DOE announced the decision earlier this month,
Asay contacted county officials to voice the family's fears.
Aside from suspicions that property values would plummet, Asay's
main worry was that toxic waste would leak from the rail cars or
become airborne, posing a health threat to her family.
She met with County Councilwoman Joette Langianese, who
promised to address Asay's concerns during upcoming meetings
with the DOE. The family also will be invited to meet with the
DOE sometime in the near future, Asay said.
And the federal agency plans to host public meetings in
Grand County to allay citizens' fears.
"I'm feeling a little bit better about it, but I still don't
like it," Asay said. "They didn't even talk to any of us about
it. We're hoping that the county now will keep us better
informed."
Neither the county nor the DOE contacted Crescent Junction
property owners, but the possibility that the tailings could be
moved to the northern reaches of the county has been well
publicized and under consideration for at least two years,
Langianese said.
The DOE's draft environmental-impact statement (EIS),
released in November, listed three alternatives for off-site
disposal of the Cold War-era uranium mill waste
- White Mesa Mill near Blanding, Klondike Flats, about 25 miles
north of Moab, and Crescent Junction, about 32 miles north of
town.
The EIS also included the option of capping the tailings in
place, a choice assailed by residents of Moab and by downstream
communities in Arizona, Nevada and California where more than 25
million residents rely on the Colorado as their main source of
drinking water.
"It's not that we didn't care about Crescent Junction. But
since we didn't hear from them, we never thought it was going to
be a problem," Langianese said. "People get anxious about
things. And this is going to be right in their back yard.
"But they're not going to be the sacrifice. I have
confidence that the DOE will do this safely."
The DOE received more than 1,500 comments on the proposals
from concerned citizens, but none of those came from Crescent
Junction property owners, according to Don MetzÂler, Moab
site project manager.
"They have reasonable concerns, and the DOE will make sure
we're there to answer all of their questions," Metzler said.
"That's my challenge."
Metzler's team is still exploring options for safely
transferring the nuclear waste from the pile to the nearby rail
line, then transporting it to the Crescent Junction site where
it will be buried in a lined disposal cell and covered with
rock.
It will take months to determine the safest alternative, but
Metzler said he is hoping to use specially built, sealed, lined,
110-ton containers that were originally designed and used in a
DOE cleanup project in Ohio. Those containers are leak-proof and
covered to prevent toxic dust from becoming airborne during
transport, he said. Borrowing the containers will also help keep
down the cost of cleaning up the 130-acre site, currently
estimated at $330 to $400 million.
"We will do it safely," Metzler promised.
In other communities where the DOE has completed similar
projects, the influx of workers to the area has actually
increased property values and boosted the economy, he said.
But Crescent Junction property owners remain skeptical.
"People in Moab don't want to live next to [the tailings,]"
said Keven Lange, Asay's sister. "Is anybody else going to want
to live next to it?"
lchurch@citlink.net
© Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
40 ICT: Navajos ban uranium mining, oppose federal subsidies
[2005/04/25]
by: Brenda Norrell / Indian Country Today
Corporate welfare: Congressmen Tom Udall joins Navajos
opposing $30 million in federal uranium subsidies
WINDOW ROCK, Ariz. - The Navajo Nation Council passed a new law
banning the mining and processing of uranium on the Navajo
Nation, which if signed by President Joe Shirley Jr. will bring
an end to the legacy of uranium mining death for Navajos.
Navajos have been the unknowing victims of government uranium
mining since the time of the Cold War and now face new threats
of uranium mining in the eastern portion of the Navajo Nation.
Aneth, Utah, Councilman Mark Maryboy told the council, ''It's
very simple: uranium kills.''
Navajos celebrated the council's passage of the Dine Natural
Resources Protection Act of 2005, which became law by a vote of
69 - 13. Then, Navajos immediately began intensifying their
opposition to federal energy bill provisions that would
subsidize uranium corporations with $30 million in incentives.
Anishinaabe activist Winona LaDuke applauded the effort.
''People worldwide are eternally grateful to the Navajo Nation
for protecting future generations from more nuclear
contamination, whether they are communities with nuclear
reactors, or Native communities like Skull Valley Goshutes and
Western Shoshone where nuclear waste dumps are planned.
''It is time for Native people to be part of the next energy
era - wind and solar - those sources are in keeping with our
relationship to Mother Earth and our responsibilities for future
generation,'' LaDuke told Indian Country Today.
''Wind is the fastest growing energy source.''
Eastern Navajo Dineh Against Uranium Mining (ENDAUM), a group
founded by local Navajos, urged other Navajos to call their
congressmen and oppose the subsidies. ENDAUM said the $30
million could be funneled to Hydro Resources Inc., which is
proposing in situ leach uranium mining which could poison
Navajos' water supply in the Church Rock and Crownpoint, N.M.
communities.
Even with uranium mining banned on the Navajo Nation, the
company could carry out in situ leach mining on adjacent land
already identified by the company and poison the aquifer and
Navajo drinking water.
Citing the threat to Navajos' water supply, ENDAUM and the
Southwest Research Information Center have challenged in court
the license issued to HRI for in situ leach mining by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Navajos in Church Rock and Crownpoint have already been the
victims of the nation's worst radioactive uranium spill in 1979
when a liquid uranium tailings dam was breached and 100 million
gallons of radioactive liquid spilled into Navajo waterways.
U.S. Congressman Tom Udall, D-N.M., is among those opposing the
uranium subsidies in the energy bill.
Udall said he is offering an amendment to House Bill 6 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 to strike Section 631. He called the
subsidies ''an unnecessary $30 million handout for the domestic
uranium industry.''
Section 631 authorizes the appropriations of a $10 million
subsidy for the next three fiscal years to ''identify, test and
develop improved in situ leaching mining technologies, including
low-cost environmental restoration technologies.''
''This corporate subsidy is both unnecessary and potentially
environmentally dangerous,'' Udall said in a letter to fellow
congressmen, urging their support and vote. ''This corporate
welfare also will have a severe impact on the Southwest's
environment and on the public health of the Native American
communities I represent.''
Udall said the in situ leach mining procedure can cause
radioactive uranium and other toxic chemicals to leach into
groundwater and is a threat to public health. He said in a
''time of skyrocketing federal deficits,'' Congress should not
give away $30 million to the uranium industry.
''We need a comprehensive national energy policy that safely
provides new energy sources without drastically harming the
environment and causing potential harm to thousands,'' Udall
said.
ENDAUM co-founder Mitchell Capitan told the United Nations that
Navajos with little means have maintained the costly struggle of
opposition to new uranium mining because of their deep belief in
the sanctity of water.
'''Water is life' is not just a political slogan - it's a
description of some of the fundamental principles we live by
every day. Water is used in our religious ceremonies, just like
it is used in the ceremonies of the Christian, Hindu, Jewish and
Muslim faiths. It is essential to our survival in an arid
climate,'' Capitan told the United Nations' 57th Annual
Department of Public Information Conference in September 2004.
Capitan said the community's water is pure and sweet and comes
from the Westwater Canyon Aquifer beneath Church Rock and
Crownpoint.
Further, Navajos were used by the federal government to mine
uranium during the Cold War without protective clothing or
masks, and were never told of the dangers of radioactivity. In
communities such as Cove, Ariz., it is suspected that at least
one member of every Navajo family died from lung cancer and
other diseases resulting from uranium mining. Although the
federal Radiation Exposure Compensation Act was designed to
financially compensate victims, many Navajo miners died before
funds were released.
''Of course they used us as guinea pigs, all in the name of
national defense,'' Gilbert Badoni told Indian Country Today. As
a child, Badoni lived in a uranium mining camp where his father
worked in southwestern Colorado.
Badoni's father died of cancer and his mother, brothers and
sister all developed cancer. Now, radioactive rocks remain in
Badoni's backyard in Cudeii near Shiprock, N.M. among the rocks
and tailings left behind by a uranium industry that never
cleaned up after the Cold War.
Meanwhile, Taxpayers for Common Sense Action joined ENDAUM and
Udall in opposition to the corporate uranium subsidies.
''The 50-year-old nuclear industry has benefited from
cradle-to-grave subsidization for too long,'' cofounder Jill
Lancelot said in a statement.
''These subsidies distort price signals and undermine the
natural market forces of the energy industry. This $89 billion
energy bill is ballooning in cost, and at a time of
unprecedented deficits it is the taxpayers of the next
generation that will foot the bill.''
© 1998 - 2005 Indian Country Today. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
41 AU ABC: Green groups fight Kakadu uranium mine plan.
26/04/2005. ABC News Online
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Environmental groups have stepped up their campaign to stop the
development of another uranium mine in Kakadu National Park in
the Northern Territory.
French mining giant Areva wants to open a uranium mine at
Koongarra, 30 kilometres south of the Ranger mine in Kakadu.
For the past five years a moratorium has prevented the company
negotiating the mineral lease with the area's traditional
Aboriginal owners, but today that ban expires.
The Environment Centre of the Northern Territory fears a
renewed push to approve the project, which it says could damage
wetlands and a key Aboriginal art site and tourist destination.
It is one of five groups that have signed a joint letter to the
French ambassador, urging France to abandon the project.
The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) say laws should be
changed to stop mining companies re-approaching traditional
Aboriginal owners after they have already rejected mining
proposals.
The ACF says the Land Rights Act allows companies to broach new
negotiations every five years.
The foundation's Dave Sweeney says traditional owners rejected
the proposal in 2000 and at some point the issue needs to be put
to rest.
"People have been trying to get Koongarra up since the 1970s,"
he said.
"We're now at 2005, it's still not up, it should not get up and
I'd strongly say that it won't get up.
"But there should just be a time when we say we draw a line
under Koongarra and under uranium mining in Kakadu, and that
time is now."
The Australian Government has previously said it supports the
development of the mining industry within state and federal
guidelines.
*****************************************************************
42 New on TVC's web site: nuke report, more
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:37:19 -0700
Dear friends and colleagues:
Please find the following new resources on Tri-Valley CAREs' web site at
www.trivalleycares.org.
1. Tri-Valley CAREs has just released a new report written by Dr.
Robert Civiak, a former Budget Examiner for DOE nuclear weapons programs in
the White House Office of Management and Budget. The report is titled,
"America's One-Nation Arms Race: An Analysis of the Department of Energy's
Fiscal Year 2006 Budget Request for Nuclear Weapons Activities."
This analysis describes a decade long upsurge in funding for nuclear
weapons that supports a vast research and manufacturing enterprise focused
on upgrading existing U.S. nuclear weapons and designing new ones. Dr.
Civiak notes that the U.S. emphasis on upgrading its nuclear weapons
capabilities directly contradicts the U.S. Administration's efforts to
convince potential nuclear weapons proliferators that there is nothing to
be gained from developing nuclear weapons. The report is in PDF for easy
downloading and printing.
2. Tri-Valley CAREs' April 2005 newsletter, Citizen's Watch, is now
posted on the web. In it, you will find articles on unsafe storage of
plutonium in paint cans and food pack cans at Livermore Lab, Tri-Valley
CAREs' recent activities in Washington, DC, an upcoming May 1st solidarity
vigil in Livermore to support the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, an
update on the plutonium-contaminated sludge given away to unsuspecting
Livermore residents to use as a soil amendment - and more.
http://www.trivalleycares.org/newsletters/cwapr05.asp
3. You will also find a link near the top of our web site to a sign
and send letter to the Department of Energy and elected officials asking
that plutonium activities at Livermore Lab be terminated permanently.
Please click on and then edit the letter as you like and send it directly
from the web. It's that easy - and important.
4. In the very near future, we will post information on the final Site
Wide Environmental Impact Statement for Livermore Lab - officially due to
be released next Friday but actually out now. Please look for our email
notice soon.
Peace,
Marylia
Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551
- is our web site address. Please visit us
there!
(925) 443-7148 - is our phone
(925) 443-0177 - is our fax
*****************************************************************
43 Plutonium at Livermore Lab will double says DOE
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 14:37:21 -0700
Dear friends and colleagues --
This is an article from the Oakland Tribune on the final Site Wide
Environmental Impact Statement (SWEIS) for Livermore Lab. The final SWEIS
is being officially released next week, but it is actually out. So, DOE
called a hasty press conference late Friday afternoon -- and then bussed
the reporters inside the fence instead of holding it in the empty press
room (which is in an open area) so I couldn't get to it, though I did go
out to the Lab.
Note the admission by DOE at the end of the article that we were able to
generate 9,000 COMMENTS AGAINST the proposed ramp up of nuclear weapons
activities. Phenominal number -- many thanks to all of you who sent in
comments. And we are not giving up, by any means. Read on, and stay tuned.
--Marylia
Plutonium may have big future at Livermore lab
Feds' plans to increase nuclear weapons work could double inventory
By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER
Inside Bay Area/Oakland Tribune
April 25, 2005
While eliminating a controversial plutonium separation project, federal
officials are proposing an expansion of nuclear weapons work at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, including experiments on casting the cores
of H-bombs.
If approved by the nation's chief weapons executive, over the next decade
the lab could as much as double its plutonium inventory to 1.5 tons, enough
in theory to make hundreds of nuclear weapons.
The lab also plans to double the plutonium that workers in a single room
may handle to more than 80 pounds so scientists can proceed with multiple
projects simultaneously.
According to a new study of Livermore's environmental impacts for the next
decade, to be officially released next week, amajor reason for enlarging
plutonium storage at Livermore is building an experimental production line
for casting plutonium pits. These hollow, usually oblong shells about the
size of a softball, when wrapped in high explosive and plugged with
detonators, serve as the miniature A-bombs that touch off modern
thermonuclear weapons.
Arms-control and environmental activists portrayed the added plutonium work
as risky for the health and security of the San Francisco Bay Area.
In a worst-case accident of a fire sweeping through an entire room fully
stocked with plutonium at Livermore's Superblock, the government's
calculations predict one chance in 10 that a single person out of the Bay's
7 million population would get cancer attributable to the fire.
Marylia Kelley, head of the Livermore-based watchdog group Tri-Valley
CAREs, suspects that's an understatement of the risk from a plutonium
increase, including that posed by terrorists and nearby earthquake faults.
"Where they've chosen to work the bugs out of the technology for a bomb
factory is a highly populated area riddled with earthquake faults. It's
crazy. If you tried, you could not find a more inappropriate location."
Arms-control groups and good-government watchdogs have pressed two U.S.
energy secretaries to empty Livermore of its plutonium, arguing among other
things that the close proximity of homes makes it impossible for security
forces to use heavy weapons in defending the lab.
"We believe plutonium cannot be made safe at Livermore," Kelley said. But
she praised the National Nuclear Security Administration for scrapping
plans to use exotic lasers to separate plutonium.
NNSA officials studied the proposal more closely and found it was
unnecessary in light of a glut of plutonium in the U.S. nuclear weapons
complex.
By eliminating laser isotopic separation, the NNSA cut by a third the
amount of plutonium that workers might handle at any given time and cut the
cancer risk from an accident at the Superblock facility almost in half.
"We have a lower waste projection and a lower radiological risk to
workers," said Tom Grim, NNSA's leader for the study.
More than 9,000 people commented on the government's proposals, most of
them highly critical of the plans in its 18-pound, four-volume study.
"I think the general public understands that the NNSA is looking after
homeland security and is improving security not only for them and their
families but also the world," he said.
The study will be available by the end of next week at the Livermore and
Tracy public libraries, in the lab reading room off Greenville Road and on
the Web at www-envirinfo.llnl.gov.
Contact Ian Hoffman at ihoffman@angnewspapers.com
Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551
- is our web site address. Please visit us
there!
(925) 443-7148 - is our phone
(925) 443-0177 - is our fax
*****************************************************************
44 sacbee.com: Politics - Nuclear lab site plans to grow -
Environmentalists cite safety issues at complex near Tracy.
By Michael Doyle -- Bee Washington Bureau
Published 2:15 am PDT Monday, April 25, 2005
A3--> WASHINGTON - Nightmare scenarios unfold in the rolling
hills west of Tracy.
Bombs tick away, behind the fences of the area known as Site
300.
Time can be short, the price of failure high. And with Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory scientists watching closely,
Defense Department bomb squad members simulate what a new report
calls "field-implemented weapon disarmament."
Training drills, in other words, run with the help of the
nation's nuclear weapons experts.
"The exercises," the new report notes, "would use a number of
Site 300 facilities."
The ongoing and future "emergency response exercises" aren't
the only developments in store for Site 300. The 7,000-acre
high-explosives test site off Corral Hollow Road, south of the
Altamont Pass, is now bound for a face-lift even as proposed new
housing developments press closer.
Usually, secrecy and discretion cloak Site 300 and Lawrence
Livermore, home to some of the nation's most renowned nuclear
weapons designers. The lab, managed by the University of
California, is also where approximately 2,100 northern San
Joaquin Valley residents draw their paychecks.
But in a massive, five-volume environmental study that's being
formally released this week, the Energy Department spells out
some of the nuts and bolts of Site 300 and the Lawrence
Livermore facility.
For instance, plans call for doubling to 3,080 pounds the
amount of plutonium that can be stored at Lawrence Livermore.
Though this is 220 pounds less than had originally been
proposed, environmentalists say it's still too much.
"There are very severe, systemic safety problems in the
plutonium facility," said Marylia Kelley, executive director of
Tri-Valley CARES. "The Department of Energy is going in
absolutely the wrong direction."
At Site 300, a new High Explosives Development Center will add
23,000 square feet of buildings to modernize chemistry and
materials science facilities constructed decades ago, the study
notes. An additional 40,000-square-foot Energetic Materials
Processing Center will also be built, to include magazines for
the storage of explosives with names like HMX, PETN, RDX and, of
course, TNT.
"Facilities must be rehabilitated or replaced to keep pace with
the future work envisioned for mission-critical activities," the
final Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Operation of
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory states.
Lawrence Livermore's mission, like its sister lab at Los Alamos
in New Mexico, includes researching new weapons and ensuring the
reliability of the existing U.S. nuclear stockpile. The Site 300
complex has been part of this work since 1955.
It can be messy, as past contamination led to Site 300 being
named to the Superfund list of seriously polluted locations.
Though environmental controls are considerably stricter now, the
new report shows the range of chemicals still in use.
Site 300 stores an average of 10,000 pounds of high explosives,
with the stockpile sometimes as big as 100,000 pounds, according
to the new report. The site's other chemicals range from the
banal, like the 110 gallons of floor wax, to the combustible,
like the 1,500 cubic feet of methane, to the dicey, like the
radioactive tritium measured in milligrams.
"We should be spending all the money we can (to) clean up; then
we can talk about bringing in new shipments of nuclear material
and new testing," Tracy businessman Bob Sarvey testified last
year, according to a transcript included as part of the
five-volume report.
While constructing the new Site 300 buildings over the course
of about two years, Lawrence Livermore officials also plan to
shut down, clean up and, in some cases, demolish facilities
spanning 129,535 square feet.
"The existing character of the site would remain unaltered,"
the report promises.
Still, the lab's work will bring other changes to the region,
including, the study estimates, an additional 292 residents of
San Joaquin County.
Once formally published this week, the lab plans spelled out in
the new study will become locked in place with a "record of
decision" to be made final within a month.
About the writer:
+ The Bee's Michael Doyle can be reached at (202) 383-0006 or
mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com.
[The Sacramento Bee] - Get the whole story every day -
*****************************************************************
45 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Downwinders' Hanford claim goes to trial
[seattlepi.com]
Monday, April 25, 2005
Jury to decide whether radiation caused illness
By JOHN K. WILEY THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
SPOKANE -- Harriet Fugitt spent an idyllic childhood at her
family's dairy farm in the Benton City area, south of the
Hanford Nuclear Reservation, where her father worked helping to
make plutonium for the nation's Cold War weapons.
"We swam in the river. We played outdoors. But what worries me
most is we lived on a dairy and drank the milk," she said. "We
just had what we thought was a terrific life. We never knew it
was killing us."
At a trial that starts today, a U.S. District Court jury will be
asked to decide whether those everyday activities exposed Fugitt
and her neighbors to radioactive contamination from Hanford
plutonium factories, adversely affecting their health.
Fugitt, 66, who with her husband, Warren, now lives north of
Spokane, takes medication for a thyroid that does not function.
She blames Hanford environmental releases for "a whole salad
bowl" of ailments, including fibromyalgia, fatigue, headaches,
joint and muscle pain, and sensitivity to chemicals and some
foods.
She is one of nearly 2,300 people, called the Hanford
downwinders, who have sued major contractors who ran the federal
nuclear reservation for the government after it started making
plutonium in 1944.
Starting today, the first six "bellwether" cases will be tried
together to determine whether the contractors' operations caused
the downwinders' health problems.
The five-week trial is the culmination of more than 14 years of
legal wrangling between lawyers for the downwinders and the some
of the country's largest corporations.
Barring a last-minute settlement, a jury will decide whether the
government, which indemnified the contractors under the
Price-Anderson Act, must pay damages. Any awards would be
determined by jurors, but could amount to tens of millions of
dollars.
Earlier efforts to mediate a settlement were unsuccessful.
Lawyers declined to say whether settlement talks are continuing.
U.S. District Judge Frem Nielsen has ruled that jurors will not
be allowed to hear that it is the government, not the
contractors, who would pay if the plaintiffs prevail. The
government also is paying for their defense.
The contractors operated reactors, chemical separation plants,
waste storage tanks and other activities that historical
documents say resulted in intentional and accidental releases of
toxic chemicals and radiation into the environment.
The downwinder cases are largely based on the release of
iodine-131, a radioactive byproduct of nuclear weapons
production.
Iodine-131 concentrates in the thyroid gland, which regulates
the body's metabolism.
The bellwether plaintiffs have thyroid conditions -- such as
cancer, hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism -- that represent
ailments of the other plaintiffs in the larger case.
To succeed, the plaintiffs must prove that they were "more
likely than not" harmed by radioactive iodine gases released
from Hanford operations.
Both sides have said they will call scientific and medical
experts with differing opinions of those studies.
Lawyers for the contractors contend that it is not possible to
link their clients' activities to the downwinders' health.
"The bottom line is, the best scientific studies available have
shown that Hanford did not cause any health effects," said Kevin
Van Wart, whose Chicago law firm is representing General
Electric Co., E.I. DuPont de Nemours Co. and UNC Nuclear Inc.
"Those studies vindicate what the contractors believed; that the
plants did not pose a hazard."
Lawyers representing the plaintiffs argue that the studies are
flawed.
"What we intend to prove is, Hanford operations in the '40s and
'50s released radioactive iodine up the stacks and out over
Eastern Washington, essentially contaminating vegetation, the
water and air," Spokane lawyer Dick Eymann said. "That wound up
getting into the food chain, especially the milk pathway, and
concentrating in the thyroid glands of young children.
"From that point forward, it set up a time bomb in some people
that would later turn into thyroid disease or thyroid cancer."
Despite spending more than $46 million on studies of radiation
doses and possible links to thyroid diseases, a dispute still
rages on the effects of Hanford releases.
After documents were declassified in 1986, the government spent
$27 million to reconstruct the radiation dose people downwind
from Hanford would have received, based on their lifestyles and
proximity to the plants. The study concluded that the exposures
were substantial and chronic.
But a later 13-year, $19.5 million study by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer
Research Center in Seattle found no conclusive link between
Hanford releases and thyroid diseases.
Each side plans to use or refute the study findings to buttress
their cases, court documents say.
Nielsen took over the case in 2003 after the original trial
judge, Alan McDonald, stepped down because of his purchase of an
orchard near Hanford in 1999.
Fugitt said she plans to attend the bellwether trial every day
her health allows.
"You waited all these years and now here it is," she said. "It
seems like a dream."
[Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA
98119 (206) 448-8000
Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com
©1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer
*****************************************************************
46 ABQJOURNAL: Northrop bids on LANL contract worth up to $44 billion
the Albuquerque Journal newspaper.
Monday, April 25, 2005
Albuquerque Journal-->
Associated Press
McLEAN, Va. — Northrop Grumman Corp. plans to bid on a
seven-year contract to manage northern New Mexico's Los Alamos
National Laboratory, a Department of Energy facility managed by
the University of California.
The contract has extension options that could add 13 years
to the deal, putting the total value at about $44 billion over a
20-year period, the Los Angeles-based aerospace and defense
company said Monday.
Northrop, with $29.85 billion in sales for 2005, said it has
experience with many of the scientific areas under research at
Los Alamos. It cited experience in managing large-scale
operations such as the Joint Base Operations and Support
Contract for the Cape Canaveral Spaceport, the U.S. Missile
Defense Agency's Joint National Integration Center and the Joint
Forces Command's Cyber Warfare Integration Network.
The DOE decided to put the contract up for bid after a
series of management and security lapses at Los Alamos in recent
years. A security breach last year may have cost as much as $367
million.
The lab, a center for nuclear weapons research, essentially
was shut down last July after reports that two classified
computer disks had disappeared. An investigation revealed the
disks never existed, but some work at the lab didn't resume
until February.
The University of California has managed the lab since its
inception in 1943 as a top-secret World War II project. Its
current contract expires in September.
UC's regents have not announced whether the school will
compete for the contract, but ordered officials to continue to
prepare as if it will. A final decision will be made once the
final request for proposals has been released.
Chris Harrington, a Washington, D.C.-based spokesman for the
university, said Monday that UC officials hope the request for
proposals "will have a strong emphasis on scientific and
technological research, which we think is critical to the lab
and its mission.''
Draft specifications for the contract also indicated a
change in the pension structure that raised concerns. At a
meeting in March, UC regents Chairman Gerald Parsky said that
issue will have to be resolved to the school's satisfaction.
Lockheed Martin Corp., which manages Sandia National
Laboratories in Albuquerque for the DOE, has announced it will
bid on the contract. C. Paul Robinson, who has headed Sandia
since August 1995, will step down Friday to help Lockheed Martin
prepare its bid.
If Lockheed Martin wins the contract, Robinson would become
Los Alamos' director. He spent 18 years at Los Alamos after
college, including six years running nuclear weapons programs.
The University of Texas, which voted in February to withdraw
from the bidding, also may reconsider.
Since it withdrew, the DOE has doubled the potential
performance-based management fee to $60 million annually.
According to a list compiled by the DOE's National Nuclear
Security Administration, other potential bidders include
Bechtel, Computer Services Corporation, CH2M Hill, Washington
Group BWTX Operating Services, Titan Corporation, Teledyne Brown
Engineering and Shaw Environmental &Infrastructure.
Copyright Albuquerque Journal
Steve@abqjournal.com
*****************************************************************
47 SF Chronicle: Final plan could double plutonium at Lawrence Livermore Lab
Sunday, April 24, 2005
(04-24) 22:32 PDT Livermore, Calif. (AP) --
Federal officials have moved a step closer to doubling the amount
of plutonium and increasing weapons work at Lawrence Livermore
Lab with the completion of a new environmental plan for the
facility.
The plan would allow the amount of plutonium stored at the lab to
be increased from 1,540 to 3,000 pounds over the next decade
enough to make hundreds of nuclear weapons.
If the plan is approved, the lab could also double the amount of
plutonium that workers in a single room could handle so
scientists could do multiple projects simultaneously.
The changes are detailed in an environmental impact statement
conducted by the National Nuclear Society Administration to be
released Friday.
They're aimed in part at creating an experimental production line
for casting plutonium pits, or nuclear bomb cores.
When these pits small, hollow shells are wrapped in explosive
and plugged with detonators, they serve as the miniature A-bombs
that touch off thermonuclear weapons.
"Where they've chosen to work the bugs out of the technology for
a bomb factory is a highly populated area riddled with earthquake
faults," complained Marylia Kelley, head of the Livermore-based
watchdog group Tri-Valley CAREs. "It's crazy. If you tried, you
could not find a more inappropriate location."
More than 9,000 people commented on the government's draft
proposals, most of them critical.
"I think the general public understands that the NNSA is looking
after homeland security and is improving security not only for
them and their families but also the world," said Tom Grim, who
managed the study for the NNSA.
*****************************************************************
48 Tri-Valley Herald: Report details plans for Livermore lab site
Article Last Updated: 04/25/2005 08:30:19 AM
By Michael Doyle, MODESTO BEE
WASHINGTON — Nightmare scenarios unfold in the rolling hills west
of Tracy.
Bombs tick away, behind the fences of the area known as Site 300.
Time can be short, the price of failure high. And with Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory scientists watching closely,
Defense Department bomb squad members simulate what a new report
calls "field-implemented weapon disarmament."
Training drills, in other words, run with the help of the
nation's nuclear weapons experts.
"The exercises," the new report notes, "would use a number of
Site 300 facilities."
The ongoing and future "emergency response exercises" aren't the
only developments in store for Site 300.The 7,000-acre
high-explosives test site off Corral Hollow Road, south of the
Altamont Pass, is now bound for a facelift even as proposed new
housing developments press closer.
Usually, secrecy and discretion cloak Site 300 and Lawrence
Livermore, home to some of the nation's most renowned nuclear
weapons designers. The lab, managed by the University of
California, is also where approximately 2,100 Valley residents
draw their paychecks.
But in a massive, five-volume environmental study that's being
formally released next week, the Energy Department spells out
some of the nuts and bolts of Site 300 and the larger Lawrence
Livermore facility.
For instance, plans call for doubling to 1,400 kilograms from 700
kilograms the amount of plutonium that can be stored at Lawrence
Livermore. Though this is 100 kilograms less than had
originally been proposed, environmentalists say it's still too
much.
"There are very severe, systemic safety problems in the plutonium
facility," said Marylia Kelley, executive director of Tri-Valley
CARES. "The Department of Energy is going in absolutely the wrong
direction."
At Site 300, a new High Explosives Development Center will add
23,000 square feet of buildings to modernize chemistry and
materials science facilities constructed decades ago, the study
notes. An additional 40,000-square-foot Energetic Materials
Processing Center will also be built, to include magazines for
the storage of explosives with names like HMX, PETN, RDX and, of
course, TNT.
"Facilities must be rehabilitated or replaced to keep pace with
the future work envisioned for mission-critical
Impact Statement for Continued Operation of Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory states.
Lawrence Livermore's mission, like its sister lab at Los Alamos
in New Mexico, includes researching new weapons and ensuring the
reliability of the existing U.S. nuclear stockpile. The Site 300
complex has been part of this work since 1955.
It can be messy, as past contamination led to Site 300 being
named to the Superfund list of seriously polluted locations.
Though environmental controls are considerably stricter now, the
new report shows the range of chemicals still in use.
Site 300 stores an average of 10,000 pounds of high explosives,
with the stockpile sometimes rising as high as 100,000 pounds,
according to the new report. The site's other chemicals range
from the banal, like the 110 gallons of floor wax, to the
combustible, like the 1,500 cubic feet of methane, to the dicey,
like the radioactive tritium measured in milligrams.
"We should be spending all the money we can (to) clean up, then
we can talk about bringing in new shipments of nuclear material
and new testing," Tracy businessman Bob Sarvey testified last
year, according to a transcript included as part of the
five-volume report.
While constructing the new Site 300 buildings over the course of
about two years, Lawrence Livermore officials also plan to shut
down, clean up and, in some cases, demolish facilities spanning
129,535 square feet.
"The existing character of the
site would remain unaltered," the
report promises.
Still, the lab's work will bring other changes to the region;
including, the study estimates, an additional 292 residents of
San Joaquin County.
Once formally published next week, the lab plans spelled out in
the new study will become locked in place with a "record of
decision" to made final within a month.
© 2005 ANG Newspapers
*****************************************************************
49 KRQE News 13: Northrup Grumman to bid on LANL
Posted: 4/25/2005 5:27:00 PM
Source: Dow Jones/AP
MCLEAN, Va. -- Northrup Grumman Corporation plans to bid on a
federal contract to manage Los Alamos National Laboratory.
The company says the seven-year contract would be worth about
$2.2 billion dollars a year.
The Los Alamos lab has been operated by the University of
California since the lab was established in 1943.
But a series of security, safety and financial problems in recent
years led the U-S Department of Energy to put the contract up for
bid.
Lockheed Martin Corporation has decided to bid on the contract.
Lockheed Martin manages Sandia National Laboratories for the DOE.
The University of Texas System also has renewed interest in
management of the Los Alamos lab.
KREZtv.com -
*****************************************************************
50 LA TIMES: A Blue Tinge in the West
[Los Angeles Times - latimes.com]
April 25, 2005 E-mail story Print Most E-Mailed
Just as Americans have come to accept the idea of a gulf between
red and blue states, a grass-roots (or tumbleweed) shift has
begun to blur the colors in the Rockies and the Southwest.
The trend is evolutionary, not revolutionary. The GOP remains
entrenched in Idaho and Utah. Most state legislatures are
Republican and the presidential vote was solid crimson. But
statehouse shifts of the last several years are signals of a
changing Western political identity and independence. The social
conservatism that keeps the South red may not be enough for the
West. Old-fashioned individual liberty and Democratic populism
are getting a hearing. The national Democratic Party seems
interested, but unsure how to get to the new rodeo.
Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico and Arizona have elected Democratic
governors, as have the swing states of Oregon and Washington.
Democrats picked up a House seat and a Senate seat in Colorado
and won both houses of the Legislature. Democrats took the
Montana Legislature to go along with their new chief executive.
Even in the presidential contest, Democrat John Kerry had
strong showings in New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado. If they had
gone to Kerry instead of George W. Bush, Kerry would have won,
as noted in a Times report this month by Mark Z. Barabak.
The West, once ignored for its paltry populations, has bulked up
as the blue states of the Northeast and Midwest lose residents.
Latinos with potential Democratic loyalties are moving in. So
are retirees from Democratic states, especially California.
The political factors are many. Nevada is at war with the
federal government over the proposed nuclear repository at Yucca
Mountain. Environmentalism, once sneered at in the spacious,
resource-rich West, is gaining a foothold as tourism and
adventure sports gain economic importance. Winning candidates
have brought fiscal conservatism, pragmatism and workable ideas
to the job, generally leaving ideological baggage behind.
Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal, a native farm boy and former
U.S. attorney who took office in 2003, persuaded an initially
balky Republican Legislature to spend some of this year's
$1-billion budget surplus from mineral and energy industry tax
revenues instead of socking it all away. The state boosted
spending on highways, a wildlife habitat trust fund, bonuses for
teachers and community college scholarships.
Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico has won tax cuts, incentives
for new jobs and rapport with business interests. Richardson,
whose mother is Mexican, appointed two Republicans to his
Cabinet along with Indians and Latinos. Arizona Gov. Janet
Napolitano is strong enough that top Republicans are declining
to run against her next year.
These Democrats all appeal more to the broad middle of the
political spectrum than the far right or far left.
Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, the new Democratic Party
chairman, has been advising Democrats nationwide to cool their
rhetoric, if not their beliefs, on hot-button social issues such
as abortion.
But what's needed is less a retreat than a recasting of privacy
issues (Terri Schiavo's ordeal, for instance) that will resonate
with the hands-off individualism of the mountains and deserts.
If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at
latimes.com/archives.
Copyright 2005 Los Angeles Times
*****************************************************************
51 lamonitor.com: Board takes a look at Area G
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor
Santa Fe - Fashioning a blockbuster attraction out of a
hazardous dump may be a tall order, but that's what the Northern
New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board wants to do on May 3.
The group that formally advises the Department of Energy on
environmental cleanup at Los Alamos National Laboratory has
prepared what it hopes will be a major educational forum,
featuring controversial Area G, the lab's largest radioactive
landfill area.
The Low-Level Radioactive Solid Waste Storage and Disposal Area,
as it is also known, opened in 1957. The landfill began as a
five-acre site, then grew to 37 acres in 1976.
It is now 66 acres, according to LANL, but may well be expanded
again before it is eventually cleaned up and closed down.
In recent years it has been a sore point within the laboratory,
attracting the scrutiny of regulators and the scorn of
environmentalists.
"When will we know enough of what we need to know to prevent
permanent and irrevocable damage to our environment?" asked Jim
Brannon, NNMCAB vice chair during a press conference last week.
Although low levels of radioactive and hazardous wastes have
been detected in the regional aquifer below Los Alamos, the true
extent of the contamination is not yet known.
The lab's most recent environmental surveillance document for
2003 identified high levels of tritium in the south portion of
Area G, near the shafts where radioactive tritium is stored,
with levels "increasing over time."
The highest concentrations of plutonium isotopes were found in
the northern and northeastern portions of the site.
At its inception Area G was a step forward, an attempt by the
laboratory to consolidate radioactive and chemical waste
treatment and storage in a central location rather than leaving
them up to individual facilities to manage, lab records show.
More than 10 million cubic feet of hazardous waste has flowed
into Area G over the years, much of it buried in unlined pits,
but not enough has flowed out to reduce the load placed on the
high mesa environment.
Shipments going from LANL to the Waste Isolation Pilot Project
near Carlsbad, were suspended in October 2003, until testing
procedures could be improved at the DOE sites where the waste
originated. Eighteen months later, and well behind schedule,
shipments from LANL resumed on April 22.
Area G is located on Mesita del Buey, between Pajarito Canyon
and Canada del Buey in the east-central part of the laboratory
in Technical Area 54, north of Pajarito Road.
It has been the target of several environmental campaigns
against the laboratory.
Some 189 New Mexico businesses, including 117 in Santa Fe have
joined Los Alamos Study Group's call for an end to disposal at
Area G, said Greg Mello, the group's executive director.
Joni Arends of Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety will
participate in one of the panels.
Board spokespersons said more than 1200 invitations have been
sent out. Public service announcements are going out to radio
stations and ads will be running in the local papers. The
governor and the state's congressional delegation have been
invited but not yet confirmed.
There will be presentations by all the major players, the lab,
University of California, National Nuclear Security
Administration, Department of Energy, Environmental Protection
Agency, and the New Mexico Environment Department.
Brannon said that the poster session, panel discussions and
public comment scheduled for the seminar were intended to inform
and educate the public and to enable the board to take their
opinions into account for recommendations on cleaning up and
eventually closing out the waste at Area G.
"We think the public needs to know everything that's going on
regarding that closure," said Jim Brannon, NNMCAB vice chair.
"We'd like to hear what the public has to say and what the
regulators have to say about that."
He and his colleagues on the board believe that putting Area G
on the map and in the minds of area residents are the best ways
to make sure the clean up is handled with an informed public's
interests in mind.
The NNMCAB is a federally chartered Site Specific Advisory
Board, with an annual budget, staff, and offices in Santa Fe.
The CAB's recommendations relate to waste management, community
involvement and environmental monitoring, surveillance and
remediation at the laboratory.
The high profile forum reflects a special emphasis that the
board has placed on public information and community
participation lately.
The forum will take place on Tuesday, May 3, from 4 to 9 p.m. in
the main administrative building at Santa Fe Community College
in Santa Fe.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
52 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern
FR Doc 05-8199
[Federal Register: April 25, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 78)]
[Notices] [Page 21196-21197] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr25ap05-37]
New Mexico AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of open meeting and retreat.
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Northern New
Mexico. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463,
86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be
announced in the Federal Register.
DATES: Friday, May 20, 2005, 8 a.m.-5 p.m.; Saturday, May 21,
2005, 9 a.m.-12 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Sagebrush Inn and Conference Center, 1508 Paseo Del
Pueblo Sur, Taos, New Mexico 87571.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Menice Manzanares, Northern New
Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board, 1660 Old Pecos Trail, Suite B,
Santa Fe, NM 87505. Phone (505) 995-0393; Fax (505) 989-1752 or
e-mail: mmanzanares@doeal.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of
environmental restoration, waste management, and related
activities.
Tentative Agenda for Retreat Friday, May 20, 2005 8
a.m.--Background and History of the Los Alamos National
Laboratory and View The Manhattan Project.
10 a.m.--Break. 10:15 a.m.--Round Robin--Board Member Ice
Breaker. 11 a.m.--Interaction with Ex-Officio Agencies--Issues
for Consideration in FY 2006.
12 p.m.--Lunch. 1:30 p.m.--Break-out Sessions by Committee. A.
Review FY 2005 Work Plan Accomplishments. B. Begin FY 2006 Work
Plan. 3 p.m.--Break. 3:15 p.m.--Complete FY 2006 Work Plans and
present to full Board. 5 p.m.--Adjourn. Tentative Agenda for Open
Meeting Saturday, May 21, 2005 9 a.m.--Call to Order by Ted
Taylor, Deputy Designated Federal Officer (DDFO).
Establishment of a Quorum.
Welcome and Introductions by Chairman, Tim DeLong.
Approval of Agenda.
Approval of Minutes of March 30, 2005 Meeting.
9:15 a.m.--Board Business. A. Report from Chairman, Tim DeLong.
Site-Specific Advisory Board (SSAB) Chairs' Meeting at Savannah
River Site.
B. Report from Department of Energy, Ted Taylor, DDFO. C. Report
from Executive Director, Menice S. Manzanares. D. New Business.
10 a.m.--Public Comment. 10:15 a.m.--Reports. A. Waste Management
Committee, Jim Brannon. Report on Area G Forum.
B. Environmental Monitoring, Surveillance and Remediation
Committee, Chris Timm.
C. Community Involvement Committee, Grace Perez. D. Comments from
Ex-Officio Members. 11 a.m.--Break. 11:15 a.m.--Consideration and
Action on Recommendation 2005-5, EPA National Air and Radiation
Environmental Laboratory Plans for a National Monitoring System,
Chris Timm.
Consideration and Action on Recommendation 2005-6, Regarding the
Los Alamos National Laboratory's Environmental Surveillance
Report (Executive Summary), Grace Perez.
11:45 a.m.--``Thank You'' to Retiring Board Members. 11:50
a.m.--Comments from Board Members and Ex-Officio Members. 11:55
a.m.--Recap of Meeting: Issuance of Press Releases, Editorials,
etc.
12 p.m.--Adjourn This agenda is subject to change at least one
day in advance of the meeting.
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements
pertaining to agenda items should contact Menice Manzanares at
the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be
received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision
will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The
Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the
meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of
business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be
provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
Minutes: Minutes of this meeting will be available for public
review and copying at the Freedom of Information Public Reading
Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday,
except Federal holidays. Minutes will also be available at the
Public Reading Room located at the Board's office at 1660 Old
Pecos Trail, Suite B, Santa Fe, NM. Hours of operation for the
Public Reading Room are 9 a.m.-4 p.m. on Monday through Friday.
Minutes will also be made available by writing or calling Menice
Manzanares at the Board's office address or telephone number
listed above. Minutes and other Board documents are on the
Internet at: http://www.nnmcab.org.
[[Page 21197]] Issued at Washington, DC on April 19, 2005.
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-8199 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6405-01-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:
*****************************************************************