*****************************************************************
05/01/01 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 9.105
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************

                    NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS
 
 1  Cancers blamed on nuclear power plant
 2  The Times vs. nuclear, other items on May Day, whatever one 
 3  Perry Power Plant shuts down unexpectedly
 4  YUCCA MOUNTAIN: State, federal scientists in hot water debate
 5  No penalty for nuclear plant error 
 6  Atomic power is logical
 7  Nuclear Power Making a Comeback
 8  Envirosafe Services Renamed US Ecology Idaho
 9  NRDC Hits Cheney Speech On Energy
10  U.S. gung-ho on more oil, coal, nuclear use
11  BNFL in Mox deal with Eon
12  What will give the north a new source of power for its economy?
13  Finance - Scot Power puts Scotland nuclear pricing in dispute
14  years on, Chernobyl still sparks protests.*
15  Long-term effects of nuclear “disaster” debated                                 
16  Letter: DOE refuses to be objective on Yucca site
17  Editorial: Uranium cleanup is sorry start
18  Cheney Pushes for Energy Development
19  Nuclear mix-up | April 30, 2001 | Ralph Nader
20  Quiet arrival for nuclear shipment - 
21  Nuclear fuel shipment sparks protest in Poland 
22  Polish Activists Block Szczecin Harbor Due to Temelin Fuel
23  *EGYPT, RUSSIA AGREE ON NUCLEAR COOPERATION 
24  DEVELOPMENT OF LAND IS NEW FOCUS AT NUCLEAR SITE 
25  Progress joins N-power caravan 
26  Cheap, Clean Nuclear Power Is the Answer 
27  USEC Inc. 
28  Power station: Cancer link claim
29  DOE's progress at Yucca to be revealed in report

                    NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS
 
 1  Bush to look at Hanford budget
 2  HAMMER takes blow in DOE's '02 budget
 3  DOE safe site report called vague 
 4  Is energy agency like the serpent that tempted Eve? 
 5  Computer found empty 
 6  Public input still sought on K-25 water investigation 
 7  Bush plans transformation of nuclear arms controls
 8  Navy Bombing Exercises Begin Anew
 9  DOE declassifies nuclear test yields 
10  U.S. inspectors to look for Russian nukes
11  Russian nuclear submarine towed to port 
12  Mayak plant to increase Cobalt-60 export
13  No time to waste on FFTF reprieve
14  DOE sets expanded nuke job for the lab
15  Iraq seeks Gulf war uranium check
16  Bringing private sector into ORNL development gets positive reaction
17  Pressure builds for radiation medicine
18  Turner's Anti-Nuke Group Seeks to Make Clear That Threat Exists

*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                     NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES
*****************************************************************
 1 Cancers blamed on nuclear power plant

   Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | 

 	 	 
James Meikle, health correspondent
Monday April 30, 2001
The Guardian 		
 		
An apparent cluster of childhood cancers near a nuclear power 
station on the river Severn has been blamed on radiation from the 
plant. Chris Busby, a scientist, said he had uncovered evidence 
of significant levels of leukaemia among children under four 
years old living near the ageing Oldbury reactor. 

He believed cancer statistics for an area in and around nearby 
Chepstow, south Wales, between 1974 and 1990 revealed excessive 
numbers of myeloid leukaemia, a condition usually linked to older 
people, and sometimes involving exposure to radiation. 

Three cases were recorded when there might have been expected to 
have been either one or none. 

In all there had been seven cancers among under fours, 
one-and-a-half times the national average. This mirrored a 
previously accepted leukaemia cluster at Seascale, near the 
Sellafield nuclear plant in Cumbria, where there were four deaths 
of children under 14 from 1950 to 1983. 

Dr Busby, a member of the campaign group Green Audit, and adviser 
to the European parliament's green group, said: "This is the 
discovery of a new nuclear site child leukaemia cluster. The high 
level of myeloid leukaemia suggests that radiation is the cause." 

He believed older people living downstream from Oldbury were also 
more likely to suffer cancers. Defenders of the nuclear industry 
accept the existence of clusters but point out these also occur 
in areas where there are no plants. British Nuclear Fuels said no 
one knew the cause of the Seascale cluster, but Dr Busby's work 
was never peer reviewed, and if his previous work was anything to 
go by, the study could be discounted. 

             Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 
2001
*****************************************************************
 2  The Times vs. nuclear, other items on May Day, whatever one 
perceives it to be 

Oak Ridger Online --> 

Story last updated at 1:05 p.m. on Tuesday, May 1, 2001

Editor's License Dick Smyser
 
Dick Smyser 

Noted in relative brevity on May Day, a date for sharply 
contrasting observances:

 In 1889 the Second Socialist International designated May 1 the 
holiday for labor and thus, among socialists and communists, an 
occasion for demonstrations, parades and speeches, like 
especially shows of military might in Moscow's Red Square.

 But May 1, in the English tradition most of all, is a day for 
dancers with ribbons to weave intricate patterns around the 
Maypole while little girls in puffy white dresses hang baskets of 
spring flowers on doors.
 
 Thanks to Reid MacCluggage, editor and publisher of The Day in 
New London, Conn., and a newspaper convention friend for years, I 
have discovered Smartertimes.com, a Web site that daily critiques 
The New York Times, if with a decidedly right-wing point of view. 
But media criticism of whatever shade is healthy and surely The 
Times, as one of the most influential newspapers in the world, is 
fair game.

 In comment on the recent Times page one story about growing 
interest in "Atomic Tourism," Smartertimes accuses The Times of 
taking "a markedly hostile view toward nuclear weaponry." 
Example, this paragraph from that story: "Nations traditionally 
make monuments of their grandest and most glorious places. The 
campaign (to preserve) B Reactor, which opened (at Hanford, 
Wash.) in 1944 under the supervision of the physicist Enrico 
Fermi, reflects a growing willingness to also protect historic 
sites that evoke unpleasant and painful memories, and in some 
cases are actually hazardous."

 Says Smartertimes, "Those two sentences seem to be the Times 
news department asserting its opinion that the development of the 
atom bomb was not a grand or glorious achievement of American 
science in the war for freedom against fascism, but rather 
'unpleasant' and 'painful.' Surely, the use of nuclear weapons 
and some aspects of the development of them were unpleasant and 
painful, but probably less so than the alternative, which might 
have been an American defeat in World War II or at very least 
more extensive American casualties in conventional warfare. Or 
consider what might have happened had America not developed the 
atom bomb, and instead waited for the Soviet Union to do so."

 Smartertimes really hit the ceiling in reaction to a quote in 
the Times piece from U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, Democrat of 
Washington, who said that, in this planned museum at Hanford, she 
envisions a place "kind of like the Holocaust Museum." 
Smartertimes' reaction: "a stunning example of moral 
equivalency." Smartertimes, in this critic's view, is too severe 
in ascribing anti-nuclear bias, but one quite valid point is 
made: That, in listing notable memorials to the Manhattan 
Project, The Times was remiss in failing to mention the Henry 
Moore sculpture at University of Chicago in remembrance of the 
first controlled sustained nuclear chain reaction achieved there 
by Fermi and his team on Dec. 2, 1942.
 
 Nancy Ingram Carson warms my heart in a letter telling of 
clippings from The Oak Ridger, including this column, sent to her 
regularly by her mother, Mrs. R.G. Ingram. Some of them, Nancy 
writes, have traveled around the country with her since first she 
left home to attend nursing school and most recently in a move 
from Wisconsin to Kingsport.

 The clippings "have meant a lot to me (trips down memory lane)," 
Nancy writes, "but they have also meant a lot to her (mother). I 
know where she is in her life by the clippings I receive from 
her."

 The Ingrams have lived on Pomona Road since Nancy's childhood in 
Oak Ridge's earliest years. A special memory, she recalls, was 
listening to the Oak Ridge Symphony practice at the home of the 
late Waldo Cohn, the symphony's founder, close by on Plymouth 
Circle.

 "They would sometimes practice outside on warm evenings," Nancy 
writes. "It was wonderful to listen to the music and look at the 
stars. They often ended practice with 'Charmaine' as I recall. It 
was one of my favorites."

 "Charmaine," song featured in "What Price Glory," the 1926 
silent movie about World War I, was an appropriate symphony 
rehearsal finale given that Charmian Cohn was Waldo's wife -- the 
spelling and pronunciation of her name slightly different but 
still a melodic thanks for her tolerance of yet another rehearsal 
in her yard.

 Add, things of which I am suddenly very tired:

 Panel hosts, after members of their panel have just expressed 
themselves in the strongest possible language, commenting coyly, 
"Maybe in response to my next question you could be a little more 
direct, ha ha, ha."

 Things at a, like most often theater, "near you."

 The first 100 days.
 

 Some more recent additions to my trendy speak, vogue word, tired 
talk files:

 Spotted by Joanne Gailar: "English teacher from hell," Newsweek, 
April 9;

"Compulsive shopper from hell," Ann Landers, The Oak Ridger, 
April 3.

 Spotted by myself, headline on a Pop Review in the April 14 New 
York Times, "Slouching Toward Stardom: Rough Beasts From 
England," the 15th such variation on the Yeats line ( "And what 
rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward 
Bethlehem to be born") sighted in only casual observation in just 
the past three years.
 
 Sighting of Oak Ridge associations in national contexts occur 
with seemingly increasing regularity, two of the more recent 
being:
 
* Sighted by Dr. Reece Wilson, a page one piece in the March 30 
Wall Street Journal headlined "In the New Military, Technology 
May Alter Chain of Command," with this quote about recent 
maneuvers testing some of that new technology: "'We are on the 
cusp of fundamental change in the way armies will fight in the 
future,' says Army Major Gen. B.B. Bell, the general who 
commanded the manuevers."

 Gen. Bell was a graduate of Oak Ridge High School in 1965 and 
University of Chattanooga in 1969.
 
* Sighted by Herman Postma, a brief mention by Betsy Pickel in 
her Knoxville News-Sentinel review of the movie "The Mexican" 
that the director, Gore Verbinsky, has Oak Ridge roots, further 
checking showing that he was the son of Victor V. and Laurette 
Verbinski who lived on LaSalle Road in the middle 1960s when 
Gore, now 36, would have been a small child. Victor Verbinski was 
a physicist at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. -- RDS
 
*Richard D. Smyser is founding editor of The Oak Ridger. You can 
reach him by e-mail at rdsandmps@aol.com* All Contents 
©Copyright* The Oak Ridger *
*****************************************************************
 3  Perry Power Plant shuts down unexpectedly

The News-Herald 

  By Dino DiSanto

News-Herald Staff Writer
     May 01, 2001   


  The Perry Nuclear Power Plant was shut down unexpectedly Sunday 
almost a month after powering down for routine maintenance and 
refueling.   

Plant officials expect the largest boiling water reactor in the 
United States will be back producing 1,320 megawatts of power per 
hour later this week. Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp., which owns 
the North Perry Village plant, says the shutdown won't affect 
customers.

The shutdown occurred in a matter a seconds early Sunday morning 
and was the first time the plant had been shut down that fast 
since 1998.

The problem that caused the shutdown started at 8:01 p.m. 
Saturday when operators realized there was a leak in the 
nonradioactive water system used to cool the generator.

As a result, a short started to develop in the circuitry of the 
plant's generators that actually makes electricity.

Because the generators are an expensive item, plant officials 
decided to slowly power down the plant to make sure further 
damage was avoided.

However, when the plant was being brought off-line, a turbine 
lost power, and the plant started to lose condenser vacuum 
pressure. This pressure helps to cool steam from the turbine, and 
it also is used to maintain reactor pressure. This second problem 
caused operators to shut down the plant immediately. So within a 
matter of seconds, the plant, at 12:50 a.m. on Sunday, stopped 
producing power.

Todd M. Schneider, spokesman for the plant, said an investigation 
was under way to identify the root of the problem and to figure 
out when everything would be fixed.

The unscheduled power outage comes just about a month after the 
plant was shut down for 34 days in February and March.

During that outage, the plant spent about $10 million to increase 
power by 5 percent, which made Perry the largest water-boiling 
reactor in the United States.

The upgrade pushed Perry power to 1,320 megawatts from 1,250 
megawatts. This was equivalent to being able to serve 77,000 more 
households.

Besides the of upgrade, the plant also had about 40 percent of 
its fuel rods replaced. The rods help to power the plant.

Plant officials are trying to figure out if the latest problem 
was related to work completed during the outage, Schneider said.

During the past three years, the plant has been operating at peak 
performance levels indicative of the record power production days 
the plant set two years ago.

This is a far cry from when the plant first opened. Many industry 
personnel labeled the plant in the 1980s a "lemon."

The reversal of fortune at Perry the last couple of years has 
made the plant one of the most efficient in the country, 
according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

This latest unscheduled outage was the first of its kind since 
June, when the plant was shut down to replace leaking fuel rods.
  
  *©The News-Herald 2001*   
*****************************************************************
 4  YUCCA MOUNTAIN: State, federal scientists in hot water debate

  [Las Vegas Review-Journal] 
  
Tuesday, May 01, 2001
 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal 
 
CLARIFICATION: A story in Tuesday's Review-Journal about the U.S. 
Energy Department declassifying nuclear weapons testing data 
should have stated that the once-secret information was the total 
units of radioactivity for fission yields, or nuclear byproducts 
left or produced in the detonation cavities at the Nevada Test 
Site. 

Nevada researcher says geothermal flows could hit nuclear waste 
at proposed site 

By KEITH ROGERS 
REVIEW-JOURNAL 

As the U.S. energy secretary waits to receive a report on the 
proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump, a scientist for 
Nevada said Monday it's clear that thermal water rose upward in 
the distant past and could do so again, a sign the site should be 
disqualified. 

But a team of federal scientists for the U.S. Geological Survey 
said they are equally convinced that's not the case. They say the 
minerals formed slowly as the mountain cooled after it was formed 
by volcanic ash showering down 13 million years ago. 

The federal team's finding is expected to weigh heavily in final 
scientific reports that Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham will use 
later this year to recommend whether the mountain, 100 miles 
northwest of Las Vegas, is suitable for safely entombing 77,000 
tons of highly radioactive waste for at least 10,000 years. 

Despite the federal team's conclusion, Nevada consultant Yuri 
Dublyansky, of the Russian Academy of Sciences Siberian Branch, 
told colleagues at an international nuclear waste conference that 
the process he claims formed the mineral features -- hot water 
rising upward -- should be considered as a possible disqualifying 
factor in the Yucca Mountain performance assessment. 

"This has to be called thermal," he said about evidence of 
relatively high temperatures locked in tiny bubbles held by the 
calcite minerals. 

"They have to carry heat from somewhere. I am taking very strong 
issue with that," he said, referring to the federal scientists' 
belief that rainwater percolated downward from the mountain's 
surface and slowly formed mineral crystals over millions of 
years. 

If the water shot upward before, chances are it could happen 
again and flood the area where the waste is stored, carrying off 
its potentially deadly radioactive contaminants into the 
environment, according to state scientists. If the water 
percolated downward from the surface, it would be far less likely 
to disperse the waste because of the low amount of rainfall 
involved, they said. 

Nick Wilson, a University of Nevada, Las Vegas researcher who 
made a presentation Monday at the Ninth International High-Level 
Radioactive Waste Management Conference, said results of a UNLV 
study into the minerals are consistent with the conclusions of 
the federal team. The conference was held at the Alexis Park 
Hotel. 

Joseph Whelan, a geochemist from the U.S. Geological Survey's 
Denver office, said there is strong evidence that mineral 
crystals were formed in the presence of films from water that 
trickled downward through the mountain, and not by upwelling 
flooding that filled cavities in the mineral features. 

"There is no evidence to support flooding of the unsaturated 
zone," he told the session attended by three dozen scientists.
 
This story is located at: 
http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/May-01-Tue-2001/news/15993155.html
*****************************************************************
 5  No penalty for nuclear plant error 
The Associated Press 

        The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will take no action 
against the Nebraska Public Power District for a mishap at its 
nuclear plant near Brownville. 

        The federal agency said Monday that the utility's own 
actions against the crew that operated the Cooper Nuclear Station 
that day were sufficient and no further action is necessary. 

        Water in the plant reactor's cooling system fell to 
unusually low levels March 3. 

        "There was no significant risk, but there were some 
weaknesses in operator performance that need to be addressed," 
said Charles Marschall, a nuclear commission spokesman. 

        NPPD spokesman Dave Simon said all of the plant's control 
room operators "are going through a super refresher course that 
will include 100 hours of high-intensity training. 

        "The rationale is that everyone is up to speed of all 
facets of operating the plant," he said. "We're recognizing we 
need to get everyone this additional training." 

        Water inside the plant's cooling system dropped for 45 
minutes, during which time one pump failed and another pump 
failed to operate properly. Operators finally used a third pump 
to restore the water levels. 

        Water levels in the plant are given numerical values 
ranging from 1 to 8, with 8 being the highest. The water level 
never fell below Level 3 during the incident. Level 2 is when a 
backup cooling system kicks in. 

        If water levels fall too low, damage could occur to the 
fuel rods in the reactor, Marschall said. 

        "Emergency is not the word I would use, but it certainly 
was at a point were you are getting concerned about having enough 
water to cover the fuel," he said. 

        After that, it would take an extraordinary series of 
events to result in the release of radioactivity, he said. 

        "That's not really very likely," Marschall said. "The 
thing that we were concerned about was the operator performance. 

        "In different circumstances, if they make mistakes, if 
they don't know what they are doing, if they don't take the right 
action - it might lead to problems," he said. 

        NPPD has operated the Cooper plant, the state's largest 
power generator, for 26 years. 

        The plant was closed from April 18, 2000, to May 26, 
2000, while the insulation on thousands of electrical splices was 
replaced. 

        While the Cooper plant was shut down for refueling, 
inspectors and plant workers found that as many as 2,000 
electrical connections in the plant were improperly insulated. 
The connections must be able to withstand the extreme conditions 
that could occur during a serious accident. 

        The state's only other nuclear plant is operated near 
Fort Calhoun by the Omaha Public Power District. 

        The two plants were among 13 in the nation found to have 
no significant performance problems in a federal report in 
December. 

        Both plants' licenses are set to expire in 2013, but both 
utilities are considering applying for 20-year extensions. 
	 
         Copyright © 2001, Lincoln Journal Star. All rights 
*****************************************************************
 6  Atomic power is logical
 
[deseretnews.com] 

May 01, 2001

      I am very concerned about the power crisis in California, 
which may well spread across the rest of the United States. With 
our fast-growing population needing more and more power to meet 
increasing daily demands, I am surprised that both the federal 
and state governments have allowed us to fall so far behind.

       From what I have read, atomic power plants are the logical 
answer. They are safer to run and do not emit pollutants into the 
air, unlike fossil fuel (oil, gas and coal) fired plants. Running 
costs would be less, and the production of electricity would be 
less expensive, thus making us less dependent upon foreign oil. 
Currently about 20 percent of our electrical power is generated 
atomically, whereas up to 80 percent is generated in some 
European countries.

       I do remember some time ago the fear-mongering of Ralph 
Nader and "Hanoi Jane" and others who jumped on the bandwagon 
after the accident at the poorly constructed plant at Chernobyl 
in Ukraine and whose claims were proven to be totally unfounded 
by no less a person than Edward Teller, the father of the atomic 
bomb. Now 20 years later, our accumulated knowledge on the 
subject is such that the threat from nuclear waste, plutonium 
buildup and radiation has been almost completely eliminated.

       Incidentally, let us not forget that the technology was 
invented and developed here in the United States.

 Philip R. David Bountiful
 
 © 2001 Deseret News Publishing Company 
*****************************************************************
 7  The San Francisco Examiner
 		 
Thursday, May 3, 2001

By H. Josef Hebert 
Associated Press 

WASHINGTON -- Nuclear power is making a comeback two decades 
after the Three Mile Island reactor accident. 

Soaring natural gas prices, concerns about climate change and 
fear that California blackouts will spread have made electricity 
from the atom more attractive, though critics still worry about 
safety and what to do with radioactive waste. 

For the first time in decades, there is serious talk about 
building a new nuclear power plant in the United States. At least 
one utility has suggested it may submit a license application to 
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission within a few years. 

This stirring of interest for a new reactor "would have been 
unthinkable even a year ago," says the commission chairman, 
Richard Meserve, who has directed a task force to examine how to 
handle a new license application. 

Not since 1973 has an American utility sought to license and gone 
on to open a new nuclear power plant. Only a few years ago, 
industry analysts predicted scores of electric power reactors 
would be shuttered under the economic pressures of electricity 
deregulation.

Safety has improved 

Instead, the country's 103 commercial reactors are churning out 
power at unprecedented efficiency, safety indictors have improved 
steadily, reactors put up for sale are attracting eager bidders, 
and the line of applications for 20-year license renewals is 
growing. Owners of nearly half of the operating plants already 
have said they will seek extensions when their permits expire. So 
far, two extensions have been granted. 

Nuclear power was stunned almost into submission 22 years ago by 
the partial meltdown of the Three Mile Island reactor near 
Harrisburg, Pa., and was pummeled further a few years later by 
the Russian disaster at Chernobyl. Since then, it has struggled 
to keep itself on life-support while designers worked on what 
they maintain are safer reactor designs. Now it has caught the 
attention of the Bush administration as the White House maps out 
a broad energy blueprint to present to Congress. 

Vice President Dick Cheney, who heads the president's energy task 
force, has been touting nuclear power as essential to America's 
energy needs. At least some of the 65 new power plants that need 
to be built annually to meet future electricity demand "ought to 
be nuclear," he told an interviewer recently. "It's the only way 
to deal with the question of global warming," Cheney argues, a 
theme pushed by the nuclear industry for several years. 

Without a serious accident in years, nuclear power also is 
gaining acceptance at the grass roots. Half the people queried in 
a new Associated Press poll support using reactors to produce 
electricity, compared with 45 percent just two years ago. And 56 
percent of the supporters say they would not mind a nuclear plant 
within 10 miles of their home. Three in 10 opposed nuclear power; 
the remainder said they were unsure.

Behind the turnaround 

What's behind the turnaround? 

A combination of factors, energy analysts, regulators and utility 
executives say, including: 

-- The environment. Growing concerns about climate change and the 
cost of reducing air pollution from coal-burning power plants 
have made nuclear more attractive to utilities. Reactors emit 
neither greenhouse gasses nor smog-causing chemicals. 

-- Economics. Reactors have increased their electricity 
production by 25 percent over the past decade through improved 
efficiencies. Operating costs have steadily declined to where 
nuclear-generated electricity is competitive with power from 
natural gas-fired plants and is not far behind coal in costs. 

-- Safety. While long-term uncertainties about nuclear waste 
remain, reactors have been free of major accidents and the number 
of safety-related power plant disruptions has dropped 
dramatically. 

In addition, power woes in the West have highlighted the need for 
new generating plants, even prompting some in the Northwest and 
California to take a new look at mothballed and unfinished 
plants. 

The owners of the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant have suddenly been 
besieged by companies wanting to buy their 27-year-old reactor. 
At least nine reactors have been sold in the past two years, many 
at prices much higher than earlier fire sales. 

"We are aggressively competing for additional nuclear units 
wherever they are for sale," says Randy Hutchinson, senior vice 
president at Entergy Nuclear Inc., a subsidiary of New 
Orleans-based Entergy Corp., which has bought three reactors in 
the Northeast and is closing deals on two more. 

At the same time the industry is consolidating. The number of 
companies owning nuclear plants has been reduced by half to about 
two dozen. Eventually there may be fewer than eight, says 
Hutchinson. 

Still, industry critics and even some utility executives remain 
wary.

Unacceptable threat 

"Nuclear power poses an unacceptable threat to humans and the 
environment," says Anna Aurilio of the U.S. Public Interest 
Research Group. She argues that older reactors are deteriorating 
and that no clear solution has been found for disposing reactor 
wastes that remain dangerous to health and the environment for 
tens of thousands of years. 

Any long-term revival will depend on resolving lingering 
uncertainties, says John Holdren, a Harvard professor of 
environmental science and former chairman of the White House 
science and technology advisory panel in the Clinton 
administration. 

"Basically the issues are cost, safety, radioactive waste and 
nuclear proliferation," says Holdren. If any one of those factors 
shifts against the industry, nuclear power may again be doomed, 
he says. 

On the Net: Nuclear Regulatory Commission: www.nrc.gov Nuclear 
Energy Institute:www.nei.org

© 2001 The San Francisco Examiner ExIn, LLC
*****************************************************************
 8  Envirosafe Services Renamed US Ecology Idaho
                                       
Tuesday May 1, 6:02 am Eastern Time
Press Release

Grand View Hazardous and PCB Waste Handler Gets New Name
 
BOISE, Idaho--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 1, 2001--Jack Lemley, 
Chairman, President, and CEO of Boise, Idaho based American 
Ecology Corporation (Nasdaq: - news), today announced 
recently-acquired Envirosafe Services of Idaho, Inc. would be 
renamed US Ecology Idaho, Inc. effective May 1, 2001. 

Acquired on February 1, 2001 and located in the southwestern 
Idaho desert, US Ecology Idaho provides hazardous and PCB waste 
treatment, storage and disposal services including a patented, 
U.S. EPA-approved technology to treat certain hazardous wastes 
generated by steel mills. Use of this technology allows 
economical disposal of this steel mill waste as non-hazardous 
industrial waste. The Grand View, Idaho site also accepts 
naturally occurring radioactive material under a five-year 
renewable contract with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 

Stephen Romano, Vice President for Corporate Development with 
American Ecology also serves as President of the company's Idaho 
waste operation. ``Transition activities are proceeding 
smoothly,'' Romano stated, adding, ``Today's name change 
continues our efforts to fully integrate this well established 
waste treatment, storage and disposal business into the American 
Ecology family of companies.'' 

A wholly-owned subsidiary of American Ecology Corporation, US 
Ecology Idaho, Inc. is expected to contribute annual revenue of 
approximately $12 million and make a significant, accretive 
contribution to the Company's consolidated earnings. 

American Ecology Corporation, through its subsidiaries, provides 
a variety of radioactive, PCB, hazardous and non-hazardous waste 
services to commercial and government customers throughout the 
United States, such as nuclear power plants, medical and academic 
institutions and petro-chemical facilities.

Headquartered in Boise, Idaho, the Company is one of the oldest 
radioactive and hazardous waste service Companies in the United 
States. 

This press release contains forward-looking statements that are 
based on our current expectations, beliefs, and assumptions about 
the industry and markets in which American Ecology Corporation 
and its subsidiaries operate. Actual results may differ 
materially from what is expressed herein and no assurance can be 
given that the acquired assets can achieve the revenue or 
earnings discussed herein or that the Company will generate 
future earnings. For information on factors that could cause 
actual results to differ from expectations, please refer to 
American Ecology Corporation's Report on Form 10-K filed with the 
Securities and Exchange Commission and the Company's most 
recently filed Quarterly Report filed on Form 10-Q with the 
Securities and Exchange Commission. 

*Contact:* For American Ecology Corporation Stephen Romano, 
208/331-8400

  More Quotes and News:    American Ecology Corp (NasdaqNM: - 
news)  

  Copyright © 2001 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy 
*****************************************************************
 9  NRDC Hits Cheney Speech On Energy

Environmental News Network - ENN Direct
 
From Natural Resources Defense Council
Monday, April 30, 2001

WASHINGTON — Today's speech by Vice President Cheney offered more 
of the same, misguided arguments about U.S. energy policy, 
according to experts at the Natural Resources Defense Council. 
Not surprisingly, Mr. Cheney emphasized the need for more 
domestic oil, gas and coal supply, but gave short shrift to 
dampening demand through energy efficiency or increasing our 
reliance on renewable energy sources. 

"His solution to increase America's reliance on fossil fuels is 
the pollution solution," said David Doniger, an NRDC senior 
attorney and former head of the Environmental Protection Agency's 
office on climate change. "The fact is we can meet our energy 
needs -- and save consumers money -- without despoiling pristine 
wilderness areas or rolling back environmental protections."
 
For example, NRDC's report &quot;A Responsible Energy Policy for 
the 21st Century&quot;found that increasing average fuel economy 
for cars and light trucks to 39 miles per gallon would save at 
least 15 times more oil that could be economically recovered from 
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge coastal plain over the 
50-year lifespan of the oil fields there. It would also save 
drivers billions of dollars a year at the gas pump.
 
Cheney talked about subsidizing "clean coal" technology. "When it 
comes to global warming, clean coal is a contradiction in terms," 
said Doniger. "There is no technology today to clean up the 
carbon dioxide emissions from burning coal, so increasing our 
dependence on coal means making the global warming problem 
worse."
 
Nuclear power is not the answer to our energy needs, either, said 
NRDC. Cheney complained that the "government has not granted a 
single new nuclear power permit in more than 20 years." That's 
because no utility has requested a permit to build a nuclear 
plant over that time. Why? Nuclear power does not make economic 
sense. It is not cost-effective, and Cheney did not address the 
problem of nuclear waste, among other major issues that make 
nuclear power an unattractive option.
 
Finally, Cheney warned that, without a "clear, coherent energy 
strategy," California's electricity woes may foreshadow the 
future for the rest of the country. In fact, the problems in 
California are a product of its uniquely flawed deregulation 
scheme. They are not due to clean air regulations, as utility 
executives have testified, or the lack of domestic oil, given 
that less than 1 percent of the electricity generated for 
California comes from oil-fired power plants.
 
"Scaremongering about California is not a responsible way to talk 
about U.S. energy needs," said Doniger. "We can meet our energy 
needs and protect the environment at the same time, but not with 
what Mr. Cheney proposes."
 
The Natural Resources Defense Councilis a national, nonprofit 
organization of scientists, lawyers and environmental specialists 
dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. 
Founded in 1970, NRDC has more than 400,000 members nationwide, 
served from offices in New York, Washington, Los Angeles and San 
Francisco.

For more information, contact: Elliott Negin Natural Resources 
Defense Council 202-289-2405

*****************************************************************
 10  U.S. gung-ho on more oil, coal, nuclear use

  [Thestar.com]   
  May. 1, 03:20 EDT   
  Cheney view horrifies `greens'  
  
Rob Ferguson
  
  DICK LOEK/TORONTO STAR  

  DICK CHENEY: U.S. vice-president says his country must adopt a 
``realistic'' energy program.  

Canada's oil patch was pleased and environmentalists were aghast 
yesterday as U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney offered his most 
detailed glimpse yet of a new American energy strategy that 
relies heavily on fossil fuels.

 Cheney told a newspaper industry convention in Toronto that 
asking Americans to conserve energy or place faith in alternative 
fuels will take a back seat to old standbys like oil, natural 
gas, coal and more nuclear power.

 He warned more U.S. states could face the rolling electricity 
blackouts that have hit California unless the country adopts a 
``realistic'' energy program to meet its needs.

 ``Years down the road, alternative fuels may become a great deal 
more plentiful,'' Cheney told the annual meeting of The 
Associated Press, held during a joint convention of the Canadian 
Newspaper Association and Newspaper Association of America at the 
Royal York Hotel.

 ``But we are not yet in any position to stake our economy and 
our own way of life on that possibility.''

 The remarks from Cheney - a former oil executive who is just 
weeks away from presenting his energy strategy to President 
George W. Bush - quickly raised alarm bells among 
environmentalists, who fear more pollution and dangerous 
greenhouse gas emissions on both sides of the border.

 ``He's just declared war on the environment,'' said John Bennett 
of the Sierra Club of Canada in Ottawa. ``Every energy battle for 
the last 20 years has just been reopened.''

 Cheney risks creating a backlash that could reawaken the ``green 
revolution'' that swept North America a decade ago, Bennett 
added.

 ``I think it's going to boomerang on him.''

 Environmentalists in the U.S. have accused the Bush-Cheney 
administration of being in the pockets of the energy industry, 
which was a heavy contributor to the Bush campaign and the 
Republican Party.

 Bush has already cut funding for alternative fuel research and 
broken a campaign promise to limit carbon dioxide emissions from 
power plants.

 But in the oil and gas industry of Western Canada, the Cheney 
strategy means that record levels of drilling should continue, 
said Roger Soucy, president of the Petroleum Services Association 
of Canada in Calgary.

 ``We're at all-time highs right now. It's been the busiest 
winter season we've ever had.''

 The industry is on track this year to beat its previous record 
of 16,500 new wells, with Soucy projecting 18,200 will be drilled 
by the end of 2001.

 However, an energy-hungry America might have trouble getting a 
lot more fossil fuels from Canada, already the top foreign source 
of natural gas and hydroelectricity to the U.S. Americans also 
burn 20 million barrels of Canadian oil a day, 8 per cent of 
their annual supply.

 The problem is a shortage of workers in the oil patch, said 
Soucy, whose association is about to descend upon high schools 
with career information in hopes of luring more people into the 
business.

 ``Drilling programs have been delayed or dragged out because of 
a shortage of people and equipment.''

 Cheney called the U.S. energy situation a ``potential crisis'' 
because of the electricity shortage in California and soaring 
prices for gasoline and home-heating oil and gasoline.

 He noted 56 per cent of the country's oil now comes from other 
countries compared with 36 per cent during the Arab oil embargo 
of the early 1970s that forced Americans into long line-ups and 
high prices at gas stations.

 Cheney proposed more oil refineries, another 60,000 kilometres 
in natural gas pipelines, upgraded and expanded 
electricity-transmission grids, new technology to burn coal more 
cleanly and drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife 
Reserve - a proposal that has already sparked much controversy.

 ``Conservation is an important part of the total effort, but to 
speak exclusively of conservation is to duck the tough issues,'' 
he said.

 He added the Arctic plan could be executed with very little 
disruption to the natural habitat since oil production would only 
affect 800 hectares of the refuge's approximately 7.6-million 
hectares.

 Meeting the projected demand for electricity alone will require 
1,300 to 1,900 new power plants over 20 years - an average of one 
new plant every week.

 Nuclear power plants, which now supply 20 per cent of U.S. 
electricity and do not contribute to greenhouse gases like fossil 
fuels, also remain an option even though no new plants have been 
licensed in 20 years, Cheney said.

 ``If we're serious about environmental protection, then we must 
seriously question the wisdom of backing away from what is . . . 
a safe, clean and very plentiful energy source.''

 Bennett of the Sierra Club said that remark flies in the face of 
the near meltdown at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania 
and the disaster at Chernobyl, plus the fact nuclear plants 
routinely release radioactivity into the environment.

 No new nuclear plants have been built in the last two decades 
because they're expensive and prone to problems, he added.

 ``The reason Ontario Hydro is$35 billion in debt is because most 
of the money went into nuclear plants that broke down before 
their time,'' he said.

 The Bush administration has already talked about a plan to pool 
North American energy to meet America's growing needs.

 In Ottawa yesterday, federal Natural Resources Minister Ralph 
Goodale denied entering into a new energy pact with the United 
States would mean that Washington would determine how much 
Canadian energy flows south, The Star's Les Whittington reports.

 ``The United States will obviously be in the marketplace for 
sources of supply, and it will be up to Canadians to decide the 
extent to which we wish to respond to what is a market 
opportunity,'' Goodale told reporters after the Commons daily 
question period.

 ``Obviously, it is the United States that is saying it has a 
problem,'' he said. ``From the Canadian point of view, we do not 
have an energy supply crisis.''

 Prime Minister Jean ChrŽtien has expressed a willingness to 
enter into a trilateral energy agreement with the U.S. and 
Mexico. The pact could spur development of Canadian energy 
supplies and provide new sales opportunities in the U.S., 
ChrŽtien has said.  

written permission of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. For information please
contact us or send email to Webmaster@thestar.com.
*****************************************************************
 11  BNFL in Mox deal with Eon

FT.com | News and Analysis | World Article

 By Matthew Jones in London
 Published: May 1 2001 11:33GMT | Last Updated: May 2 2001 14:44GMT
   
British Nuclear Fuels, the UK atomic services group, has received 
a fillip to plans to open a controversial plutonium recycling 
plant at its Sellafield site after striking a preliminary supply 
agreement with Eon, the German utility giant.

A BNFL official said it had signed heads of agreement to convert 
all plutonium separated from Eon's spent fuel at Sellafield into 
mixed plutonium-uranium oxide fuel for re-use in Germany. 

The deal would be the largest single Mox contract for BNFL to 
date, lifting the total amount of contracted or reserved business 
from 22 per cent of capacity to 36 per cent. 

BNFL's £460m ($658m) Sellafield Mox Plant was completed in 1996 
but is still awaiting government authorisation to start 
operations. Michael Meacher, the environment minister, last month 
launched a fourth public consultation into the plant following 
protests from environmentalists that it was uneconomic. 

Contracts for the plant have been hit by a quality control 
scandal in 1999 in which BNFL admitted its workers had falsified 
records for mox fuel sent to Japan, its leading customer. The 
plant is understood to require at least 40 per cent of its 
capacity to be contracted in order to break even. 

Potential Japanese customers have continued to express doubt 
about the use of mox fuel due to increasing public pressure 
against the re-use of plutonium. However, Norman Askew, BNFL 
chief executive, said the agreement with Eon demonstrated that 
nuclear operators wanted the fuel. 

"We must continue this work and push to meet our customers' 
requirements. The message that our customers support bringing SMP 
into operation is now crystal clear," he added. 

Eon's spent nuclear fuel is first transported to Sellafield's 
Thorp plant, where plutonium is separated out from other waste. 
Transports from Germany resumed earlier this month for the first 
time in three years following concerns that radioactive material 
was "sweating" from nuclear containers. 

Anti-nuclear campaigners said they would continue to campaign 
against the SMP. They argue that reprocessing spent nuclear fuel 
presents an unacceptable risk to society because it perpetuates 
the manufacture of plutonium, which is used in nuclear warheads. 

UK: Financial Times
*****************************************************************
 12  What will give the north a new source of power for its economy?

Scottish Provident to pay £1.6bn in bonuses                     

   The Scotsman Online - Scotland's best selling quality national newspaper
 	 	 	 	
The ball-shaped reactor could be the only reminder of the plant. 
Could alternative energy sources such as wind and waves be part 
of Dounreay’s legacy?
                                                                                                                                                                                OTHER NEWS                                              
 												 						
John Ross 						 					 				 						

The day environmentalists and anti-nuclear campaigners thought 
they may never see arrived last October when the UK Atomic Energy 
Authority’s site restoration plan presented a post-nuclear vision 
of life at Dounreay in 60 years’ time. 

The picture painted was one of green fields by the sea, with the 
listed, golf ball-shaped Dounreay fast reactor the only legacy of 
nearly 50 years of nuclear activity in the north of Scotland. 

But now the question turns to what will happen after the UKAEA 
has gone. The £4.5 billion decommissioning programme will 
maintain about 2,000 jobs for the next 20 years, but then what? 
What will replace the activity which has dominated the north 
coastline for the past half-century, bringing controversy, but 
also highly skilled and highly-paid work with it? 

Neil Money, the chief executive of Caithness and Sutherland 
Enterprise, who is midway through a six-month project examining 
the economic benefit of the decommissioning, as well as the 
Highlands and Islands Enterprise response to it, recently told 
businesses that the aim is to ensure the existing and short-term 
jobs are followed by longer-term and equally highly-skilled 
employment. 

His vision is of a nuclear complex succeeded by an international 
centre of excellence for decommissioning other industrial sites 
worldwide. Alongside it could be another innovative centre 
researching and developing renewable energy systems. 

The Dounreay site, which began to emerge in 1954, is still one of 
the biggest employers in the Highlands and pumps £30 million into 
the economy. 

Money says a plan for the future needs to be developed now, in 
order to safeguard that infrastructure: "We have to try to build 
something which is going to drive the economy in future. 
Decommissioning gives us the opportunity to turn this into 
something to give us long-term benefits for Caithness, the 
Highlands and Scotland." 

He says decommissioning of nuclear and non-nuclear sites - such 
as redundant oil rigs - is becoming a huge, multi-billion-pound 
business and he believes the Dounreay workforce would be well 
placed to cash in. 

"Dounreay is perhaps unique in the complexity and range of things 
to be decommissioned. A centre of excellence here would allow us 
to export the skills to other areas. We need to instil a vision 
into people that we can create great things here and look beyond 
the mere physical dismantling of the plant." 

Money is also looking at the possibility of adapting a system 
used by a site in New Mexico which has imposed economic 
development obligations on contractors. 

Dr Richard Dixon, the head of research for Friends of the Earth 
Scotland, says Dounreay could lead the world in decommissioning: 
"It’s going to be a growing market and it’s an opportunity we 
certainly should not miss. It would also be a terrible shame if 
Caithness were to lose that having put up with Dounreay for a 
long time. It would be a depressing prospect if we had 50 years 
of work at the site and then nothing." 

He says ground-breaking technology will have to be developed to 
tackle clear-up problems, such as the Dounreay’s notorious waste 
shaft, and this should then be adapted for use elsewhere: "No 
full-scale power reactor has ever been decommissioned so no one 
is really a world leader in that technology yet and we in the UK 
have the potential to be that leader by getting into it fairly 
early. 

"Significant sums of money will have to be spent to build remote 
exploration equipment - the robots which have not been dreamt of 
yet - and it would a shame if we buy these from Japan or America 
rather than developing them ourselves and then selling them to 
these people." 

Lorraine Mann, the convener of Scotland Against Nuclear Dumping, 
says the plan needs the commitment of UKAEA and the government to 
succeed. 

"The difficulty is going to be making sure UKAEA and the 
government invests in the best technology for decommissioning 
that they can. This will be an enormous market in future but it 
will also be very competitive. 

"With more and more countries tightening up their environmental 
requirements, anyone bidding for work will have to do things to 
the highest environmental standards. If Dounreay does not invest 
in developing the latest technology and do things in the most 
environmentally sound way, it will simply lose out in the world 
market." 

Dounreay, along with other parts of the Highlands and Islands, 
has also been suggested as a specialist centre for renewable 
energy, which many believe could bring thousands of jobs to the 
north. The site’s connection to the National Grid gives it an 
advantage over other areas. 

Mann adds: "A centre of this kind is badly needed in the 
Highlands and Islands and Dounreay could be one of the areas 
considered. But the government again needs to make a serious 
commitment to renewable energy. 

"We lost out to Denmark on wind energy and if we are not careful 
the same thing will happen to wave and offshore renewable 
technology." 

But she says the ongoing problem of the radioactive particles, 
originating from Dounreay, which have been found on the seabed 
and beaches near the plant, could be a drawback. 

Despite investigations, experts have yet to trace the source of 
the particles and Mann says this could harm any development of 
"clean" energy systems. 

"Until such time that the whole issue of the particles is sorted 
out such a development may not be allowed because of the danger 
of contamination." 

Peter Welsh, the director of Dounreay, says it is UKAEA’s duty to 
work with other agencies to replace employment before 
decommissioning ends. 

He pointed to a lithium battery plant, set up by AEA Technology, 
the privatised arm of UKAEA, with Japanese money and a new 
decommissioning training centre being set up in Caithness as 
examples of the type of work which can be brought to the area. 

"That factory will grow and will have the potential to employ 
hundreds of people. It is the sort of sustainable company we want 
to get, and it would not have ever gone there if it had not been 
for the Dounreay plant and the firms created out of it."                                                                                                                             

*****************************************************************
 13  Finance - Scot Power puts Scotland nuclear pricing in dispute
 
May 1, 12:53 PM
       
 LONDON, May 1 (Reuters) - Scottish Power (LSE: - ) pulled out of 
talks on Tuesday on a system that sets wholesale prices for 
nuclear power in Scotland and began legal action against other 
parties, said British Energy , which supplies the power.

 Scottish Power said that changes in the UK power marketplace 
meant that the agreement forced it to pay a price that was 
unfair.

 The Nuclear Energy Agreement, in place since 1990, is 
renegotiated each year, and runs until 2005. It says that 
Scottish Power must take 75 percent of its electricity from 
British Energy's stations, while rival Scottish and Southern must 
take 25 percent.

 It also attempts to ensure a fair wholesale nuclear price in 
Scotland, where nuclear power accounts for 55 percent of all 
supplies and where the industry structure is different from more 
highly liberalised England and Wales.

 The agreement based the price on a formula linked to English and 
Welsh prices.

 But since the introduction of New Electricity Trading 
Arrangements in England and Wales this year, the old electricity 
"pool" price on which pricing was based has gone.

 Scottish Power confirmed that it had taken legal action against 
both British Energy and Scottish and Southern. Both sides said 
they would prefer a negotiated solution.   

Copyright © 2001 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 14  years on, Chernobyl still sparks protests.*

24 - 30 April 2001
 
[illustration by TOL] MINSK, Belarus--People in Belarus, Ukraine, 
and Russia on 26 April marked the grim anniversary of the 1986 
explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power station in northern 
Ukraine. In Belarus, approximately 5,000 people marched along 
Minsks main thoroughfare, despite the authorities ban on the 
demonstration, and smaller unauthorized rallies took place all 
around the country.
 
Fifteen years after the disaster--the worlds largest nuclear 
power catastrophe--millions of people in the three countries are 
still suffering from severe physical and psychological damage. 
According to the International Federation of Red Cross and Red 
Crescent Societies, the incidence of cancer in the region is 16 
times higher than in countries not affected by the Chernobyl 
incident. The organization predicts that symptoms linked to the 
radiation are only now beginning to peak. In Belarus, which 
suffered the bulk of the radioactive fallout, almost a fifth of 
the population still lives in contaminated areas, and Chernobyls 
impact remains a highly politicized issue.
 
In the 1980s, when the Communist Party leadership attempted to 
hide the truth about the accident, the meltdown--along with the 
mass graves of the Stalin era in the Kurapaty forest near 
Minsk--became for many Belarusians symbols of communisms inhuman 
essence. The traditional *Charnobylski Shliakh* (Path of 
Chernobyl) march to commemorate the victims of the catastrophe 
became a major annual opposition protest and has continued in the 
post-Soviet era.
 
The current policies of the Belarusian authorities are aimed at 
motivating people to stay in the contaminated areas and at 
preserving agricultural production there--an approach that the 
opposition calls criminal--and Belarus authoritarian President 
Alyaksandr Lukashenka has steadfastly maintained that stance. The 
day of the anniversary he issued a decree cutting profit taxes by 
50 percent for newly established enterprises in the areas worst 
affected by Chernobyl. The new move will stimulate agricultural 
production on the contaminated territories, the leading 
government daily *Sovetskaya Belorussiya* commented approvingly 
on 26 April.
 
The same day, while visiting the Homel region--the area most 
affected by radiation--Lukashenka told reporters that he intended 
to issue an edict exempting young specialists working in 
radioactively contaminated areas from compulsory military 
service.
 
[illustration by TOL] How dangerous it is to live in the 
contaminated areas remains a topic of debate among scientists. 
Some researchers accuse the government of neglecting and 
concealing the harmful impact of small, daily radiation doses on 
the people still residing in the fallout zone.
 
One of the leading critics of the governments policy, Yury 
Bandazheuski, a medical doctor and the former rector of Homel 
State Medical Institute, is now on trial. Prosecutors claim that 
Bandazheuski set up a criminal ring to extort bribes from 
applicants to the institute, but the ex-rectors supporters argue 
that the charges were fabricated to silence his criticism of the 
government for neglecting Chernobyl-related problems. 
Bandazheuski says he was framed, and a witness in the case 
testified on 10 April that investigators in the case dictated to 
him the incriminating statements that he wrote against 
Bandazheuski.
 
A number of international medical and human rights organizations 
have come to Bandazheuskis defense, urging the Belarusian 
authorities to give him an opportunity to continue his research. 
The Homel State Medical Institute, however, abandoned 
Bandazheuskis research as pointless earlier this year.
 
*--by Alex Znatkevich*
react@tol.cz                                                                                                                                                                                         
                                      	 
         Copyright © 2001 *Transitions Online*. All rights 
*****************************************************************
 15  Long-term effects of nuclear “disaster” debated                                 

Power Online News for power industry professionals
 		 		 		 
For the Rest of Us by Rod Adams: 

-->4/30/2001            

People who oppose nuclear power often use the words “Three Mile 
Island” and “Chernobyl” as shorthand to imply that there are 
safety concerns relating to the technology that cannot be 
overcome. The great news, however, is that Three Mile Island 
happened more than 22 years ago, while the 15th anniversary of 
Chernobyl occurred Thursday, April 26.

 It is encouraging to know that the few accidents that have been 
experienced in nuclear power plants have become so famous. After 
all, the technology did not disappear after either one of the 
accidents; instead, the annual energy total produced in nuclear 
power plants worldwide has grown by 85% since 1986.

 It is a truism in the news business that unusual events make 
better stories; a story about a man biting a dog is far more 
likely to make it to the evening news than is one about a dog 
biting a man. When nuclear plants get into trouble, everybody 
pays attention, creating events that are universally remembered. 
It would be an ill-informed person indeed who had never heard of 
Chernobyl and the explosion that occurred there 15 years ago.

 The stories about the accident are numerous and horrifying. The 
reactor burned for 10 days, requiring a heroic effort to put out 
the blaze and stop the release of radioactive material to the 
environment. About 134 of the firefighters were exposed to so 
much radiation that it made them sick almost immediately. Of 
those, 28 died within three months and two more died a bit later 
from the effects of their exposure.

 Those facts are generally agreed upon. There is, however, 
significant disagreement over the long-term effects of the 
accident. These effects are what anti-nukes want to talk about 
when trying to make the case that the accident was more deadly 
than hundreds of other industrial accidents resulting in a 
similar short-term death toll. While many sources casually 
provide estimates of thousands of early cancer cases among the 
population of people exposed to some radioactive material from 
Chernobyl, the most detailed studies available tell a far 
different story.

 According to a June 6, 2000 report, the United Nations 
Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) 
found that, “Apart from the increase in thyroid cancer after 
childhood exposure, no increases in overall cancer incidence or 
mortality have been observed that could be attributed to ionizing 
radiation.”

 Their supporting statements lead one to believe that the area 
evacuations ordered by the Soviet government were actually 
harmful to human health and that the fertile land surrounding the 
accident site is still fit for human habitation. Those 
conclusions will not be too surprising to the workers that 
continued to operate other reactors on the Chernobyl site up 
until late last year.

 The UNSCEAR members sifted through enormous volumes of medical 
data accumulated in detailed studies over a 14-year period to 
come to their extraordinary conclusions. Unfortunately, the 
bottom line of the study is buried deep inside a 1,220 page 
document whose summary includes more than 19 pages of densely 
worded jargon. Though outwardly dedicated to the goal of 
increasing the world’s knowledge of radiation health effects, the 
scientists who wrote the report are not particularly skilled in 
the art of communicating with mere mortals like the rest of us.

 I predict that there will be no end to the catastrophic 
predictions of excess deaths; it will take more than an 
admittedly boring scientific report to shake people from their 
convictions.

 Please understand; I am not blaming the media for their failure 
to dig into the UNSCEAR report to search for nuggets of 
understandable news. It is a tough story to research, a difficult 
one to tell, and certainly one that does not sell as well as the 
dramatic news of the day.
 	
 I just hope, however, that before reporters write stories that 
quote old estimates of thousands of people suffering from the 
effects of radiation released from the Chernobyl accident that 
they exhibit a questioning attitude and find out what carefully 
conducted studies are actually showing. There is a world of 
difference between a prediction based on assumed theories of 
radiation health effects and documented evidence of actual cancer 
rates versus those of non-exposed populations.

 I also hope that the writers realize that there are a multitude 
of factors influencing the health of inhabitants of the Chernobyl 
area and that actual radiation health effects are much lower than 
the effects of stress and dislocation caused by an excessive fear 
of what the effects might be. A portion of the report is 
available at 
http://www.uilondon.org/industry/chernobyl/chernounscear.htm as 
is information about how to obtain a full report.

 *About the author: Rod Adams is currently working on a master’s 
degree in national security affairs through the Naval War 
College. He served as a nuclear submarine officer for almost 13 
years, including a tour as Engineer Officer on a 27-year-old 
ballistic missile submarine. He now serves as an active duty 
naval officer at the U.S. Naval Academy where he serves as an 
associate chair in the Weapons and Systems Engineering Department 
and also teaches Moral Decision Making for Military Leaders and 
Environmental Systems Engineering and offshore sailing. He can be 
reached at AtomicRod@aol.com.* Subscribe to our free e-mail 
newsletter.

 Click for a free Buyer’s Guide listing.

Copyright © 2000-2001, Vert Tech LLC. All rights reserved.     
*****************************************************************
 16  Letter: DOE refuses to be objective on Yucca site
 
April 30, 2001 
 
Once again we are greeted by a high-level pronouncement on the 
objectivity and lack of bias in the selection of Yucca Mountain 
as the site of the national nuclear waste dump.

 It defies objectivity to make such a pronouncement when clearly 
there are no other sites receiving equal consideration and 
testing as to their suitability. Las Vegas papers regularly 
include letters to the editor, which are written by Department of 
Energy officials. The department also has spent a lot of money 
flying out dignitaries from other parts of the United States to 
tour the site at Yucca Mountain and makes self-serving 
pronouncements on the safety of the site. Granted, if I lived in 
Tennessee, I would be readily impressed with the safety of the 
Nevada site, a safe 2,500 miles from my residence.

 What is obviously going on here is an exercise in the 
well-established "science" of public relations. A low-population 
state such as Nevada, which has tolerated much nuclear exposure 
in the past, is an easy target for further exploitation. 
Unfortunately, this conflicts with the changes in the 
demographics of population growth in the area that would argue 
against placing a facility in the area about the time it is 
scheduled to be in operation.

 At this point it is obvious that "objectivity" and "science" are 
code words for ignoring the best interests of Nevadans and 
continuing to press ahead with a plan that provides an expedient 
"quick fix" for the growing need for nuclear waste storage.

 ERIC STEFIK
 
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 17  Editorial: Uranium cleanup is sorry start
 
April 30, 2001 

Anytime there is a new president there will be policy changes -- 
even more so if the new occupant of the White House is from a 
different political party than the outgoing chief executive. 
Still, there are some matters that really shouldn't be partisan 
and one of those involves public health and safety. That is why 
it is disappointing that President Bush's first budget contains a 
paltry amount to start the cleanup of radioactive uranium 
tailings leaking into the Colorado River near Moab, Utah.

 The Department of Energy budget proposed by Bush would only 
allocate $2.8 million in the first year of the cleanup program, 
which it has been estimated will take 10 years to complete and 
cost a total of $300 million. This is hardly an auspicious start 
and raises disturbing questions about how truly committed the 
Bush administration will be to cleaning up the tailings. The 
Nevada congressional delegation, though, says it hopes to boost 
this proposed amount significantly when it comes time to 
establish the appropriations for federal agencies.

 It is vital that there be a cleanup of these uranium mill 
tailings, which were left over from 22 years of processing 
uranium for weapons. The radioactivity from the tailings is mixed 
with an assortment of hazardous substances, such as ammonia, 
arsenic, lead, mercury, selenium and other heavy metals. As the 
Sun noted in a story last week about the Bush administration's 
proposal, Utah and Nevada water officials are concerned about the 
prospect of a flash flood that could wash the pile of tailings 
into the Colorado River, contaminating downstream this tributary, 
which is a source of drinking water in Southern Nevada and other 
communities in the region.

 The Bush administration has gotten off to a terrible start on 
environmental and public health issues. It wouldn't make amends 
for all of its other miscues, but for the residents of Utah and 
Nevada it would be a refreshing change if the White House 
acknowledged it has underfunded the tailings cleanup -- and will 
honor the Clinton administration's pledge to remove this 
dangerous mess.
 
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 18  Cheney Pushes for Energy Development
 
May 01, 2001 

TORONTO- Vice President Dick Cheney says the whole nation could 
face blackouts like those that have hit California unless it 
finds more oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear energy. 

"The aim here is efficiency, not austerity," Cheney told editors 
and publishers Monday at The Associated Press annual meeting. The 
nation cannot "simply conserve or ration our way out of the 
situation we're in." 

Cheney addressed concerns about his history of four heart attacks 
by jokingly offering to do jumping jacks. More seriously, he 
said, "If I ever get to the point where my doctors believe that 
it's not wise or prudent for me to continue in this capacity, 
obviously I'd step aside." 

In his first extensive public remarks about the energy 
recommendations his Cabinet-level task force will make to Bush 
this month, Cheney blamed current shortages on shortsighted 
decisions in the past. 

He said conservation, while perhaps "a sign of personal virtue," 
does not make for sound or comprehensive policy. 

Without going into specifics, Cheney promised "a mix of new 
legislation, some executive action as well as private 
initiatives" to cope with rising energy prices and growing 
demand. 

He reiterated that the administration intends to push for 
drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge despite strong 
congressional opposition and rejected the notion of price 
controls, tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve or creating new 
bureaucracies. 

It will take between 1,300 and 1,900 new power plants over the 
next 20 years - or one every week - just to meet projected 
increases in nationwide demand, Cheney said. 

Alternative fuels are still "years down the road," he said. 

"Without a clear, coherent energy strategy for the nation, all 
Americans could one day go through what Californians are 
experiencing now, or even worse," he said. 

Along with additional exploration must come new refineries, 
Cheney said, noting that it has been 20 years since a large oil 
refinery was built in the United States. 

He also suggested federal initiatives to boost the use of 
hydroelectric dams and the construction of new nuclear power 
plants. He called nuclear power "a safe, clean, very plentiful 
energy source." 

Although one-fifth of the nation's electricity is 
nuclear-generated, the industry has not sought a government 
permit to build a new plant in more than 20 years, since before 
the accident at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island. 

In developing hydroelectric power, Cheney said the Bush 
administration, whose environmental record has been sharply 
questioned by activists, would be "mindful of the fish and 
wildlife affected by manmade dams." 

He put in a good word for coal, which he said remains the most 
available, most affordable way to generate electric power. The 
Bush administration has budgeted an additional $150 million for 
next year - up from $82 million this year - to support 
development of cleaner coal technologies. 

On natural gas, Cheney called for some 38,000 miles of additional 
pipeline and thousands of miles of added distribution lines to 
bring natural gas into homes and businesses. 

All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 19  Nuclear mix-up | April 30, 2001 | Ralph Nader
 		 		 		 		
A dangerous plan to have civilian plants produce tritium for bombs
 						
By Ralph Nader
						
Since World War II citizens around the world have been deeply 
concerned about the proliferation of nuclear power. There has 
been increasing concern about nuclear technology falling into 
careless hands lacking regard for public safety or worse, coming 
under the control of rogue nations bent on developing weapons of 
mass destruction.
 						
The nuclear accidents at Chernobyl in the Ukraine and at Three 
Mile Island in Pennsylvania were stark reminders of the dangers, 
and presumably of sufficient magnitude to reinforce the need for 
the tightest safety and nonproliferation safeguards possible.
 						
But is our government actually serving as a watchdog over nuclear 
power facilities in the U.S. or is it retreating from safety and 
nonproliferation standards that have been the heart of national 
nuclear policy for 50 years?
 						
With the nation focused on the holidays, President Clinton's 
Secretary of Energy, Bill Richardson, quietly announced planson 
December 22, 1998 to produce tritium – a key element in the 
manufacture of hydrogen bombs – at the Tennessee Valley Authority 
nuclear plants, which, heretofore, had produced only electric 
power for consumer and commercial use. The Administration's 
action violated policies that had firmly separated the commercial 
nuclear reactors from weapons production at TVA under every 
administration after the end of World War II.
 						
The license amendment, which would allow TVA to move into the 
production of material for military weapons, still must be 
reviewed and approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC). 
Rejection of the license has been urged by the Union of Concerned 
Scientistsand other nuclear experts like Dr. Kenneth Bergeron who 
worked 25 years at the Sandia National Laboratories performing or 
managing research on nuclear reactor safety and tritium 
production.
 						
The clear separation of commercial from military uses of nuclear 
power is key to nonproliferation efforts in the U.S. and 
throughout the world. President Dwight Eisenhower's Atoms for 
Peace program in the 1950s firmly established the dual-track 
strategy of isolating peaceful uses of nuclear power from 
military weapons.
 						
As Dr. Bergeron points out, this system "expanded into a vast 
nonproliferation regime that in one way or another touched each 
and every aspect of nuclear technology throughout world."
 						
For the U.S. to abandon this strategy, as the Clinton 
Administration proposed, would be a dangerous precedent that 
would seriously interfere with nonproliferation efforts 
worldwide.
 						
But there are other big negatives in dragging TVA into the 
military weapons business. Front and center is the question of 
safety – something it appears was not on the administration's 
radar screen when it decided to produce tritium at TVA plants.
 						
Dr. Bergeron says that the government could not have made a 
"worse selection" than the plants chosen to produce the hydrogen 
bomb ingredients. All three of the designated plants – two at 
Sequoyah and one at Watts Bar, Tennessee – are "ice condensers" 
that use giant wire baskets of ice chips to absorb heat and steam 
in case of a nuclear reactor accident. The buildings housing the 
ice baskets, according to Dr. Bergeron, are small and weak and 
would be "exceptionally vulnerable" to severe accident 
conditions. The buildings, Dr. Bergeron says, would "almost 
certainly rupture immediately after the nuclear core core melted 
through its pressure vessel."
 						
Dr. Bergeron's says his study of the ice condensers found that 
the system "has a high likelihood of failing in the event of a 
serious accident, leaving the public completely unprotected 
against the kind of massive release of radioactivity that 
occurred at Chernobyl...."
 						
In addition, whistle-blowers have come forward to raise other 
questions about safety at the TVA plants. One of these is Curtis 
Overall, who was the plant expert on the ice condenser system at 
Watts Bar with the responsibility for keeping the system running 
properly.
 						
Overall found that more than 200 screws that held the ice 
condenser baskets in place were either missing or broken. When he 
recommended a visual inspection to make sure that there were 
enough screws holding the ice baskets in place, he was removed 
from his position and ultimately fired by TVA.
 						
Ann Harris , another employee who filed a half dozen 
whistle-blower complaints involving safety issues, says she is 
convinced that TVA's plan to produce tritium at the Watts Bar and 
Sequoyah plants "poses serious and real danger to millions of 
people."
 						
Recently, Dr. Bergeron and David Lochman of the Union of 
Concerned Scientists along with the whistle-blowers appeared at 
the National Press Club to sound the alarm about the dangers of 
converting TVA into a weapons producing enterprise. Sadly, but to 
no one's surprise, the national media largely ignored the press 
conference. Like so many health and safety issues, it apparently 
takes a Chernobyl or its equivalent to move the Washington press 
corps. 
						
Copyright © 2001 San Francisco Bay Guardian.                                                           
*****************************************************************
 20  Quiet arrival for nuclear shipment - 

CNN.com - 

April 29, 2001
 	 	
  The shipment was delayed throughout its journey        

LONDON, England -- Germany's first nuclear waste shipment to 
Britain in three years arrived after surviving five-days of 
demonstrations. 
		 
The shipment of five containers of spent fuel rods from two 
southern German nuclear plants arrived in the northwest town of 
Barrow-in-Furness on Sunday. 
		 
Despite its protest-plagued journey involving sit-ins and smoke 
bombs no protesters were to greet its arrival, a spokesman for 
the British government-owned company British Nuclear Fuels, said. 
		 
"It arrived today very quietly," spokesman Bill Anderton told the 
Associated Press. 
		 
He added the final, 50-mile (80-kilometre) rail journey to the 
Sellafield reprocessing plant will be made "during the early part 
of this week." 
		 
The protests had begun on Tuesday when anti-nuclear campaigners 
had staged a sit-in on a road near at the Neckarwestheim power 
plant in the southern state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, briefly 
delaying part of the shipment. 
		 
In northern France, protesters threw smoke bombs onto a rail line 
on Thursday, slowing a train carrying the waste to the port town 
of Dunkirk. 
		 
Germany halted all nuclear shipments to Britain in 1998 after it 
emerged that radioactive emissions from the special containers 
had exceeded safety limits for years. 
		 
It also suspended dealings with Sellafield plant last year in the 
wake of a scandal over alleged fake records at the British plant. 
		 
Germany resumed nuclear shipments to France earlier this month 
for processing at the Cogema plant at La Hague, near the English 
Channel. 
					
*****************************************************************
 21  Nuclear fuel shipment sparks protest in Poland 

- 4/29/2001 - ENN.com
 
 Sunday, April 29, 2001 By Marta Karpinska 

Anti-nuclear activists blocked railways to the Baltic seaport of 
Szczecin on Sunday to protest against planned shipments of 
nuclear fuel through Poland to the controversial Czech power 
plant, Temelin.   

 About 40 Polish activists and Greenpeace members from Austria 
and Germany also put flags with nuclear warning signs on 
navigation buoys in Szczecin harbor.         

 The protest followed last weekend's shipment of U.S.-made 
nuclear fuel, which reached Temelin after being carried by rail 
through western Poland.     

 "We don't know when the next ship will come, so we are doing the 
action now," Greenpeace spokesman Franko Petri told Reuters. "We 
are also painting the rails with yellow color to show the Polish 
people that there will be a nuclear fuel transport on the way to 
Temelin soon," he added.   

 Temelin — a $2.6 billion nuclear power plant in the southern 
Czech Republic, just over 31 miles from its border with Austria — 
has been running on a test basis since the reactor started up in 
October.  

 It has been fiercely opposed by Austrian environmentalists, who 
have staged border blockades demanding closure of the station, 
which they say may be unsafe.         

 Last weekend Poland handled a U.S. shipment of about 24 tons of 
uranium oxide rods bound for Temelin. The rods were unloaded in 
Szczecin and transported to the Czech Republic by train under 
tight security.       

 No major incidents were reported, largely as a result of Polish 
officials keeping the operation under wraps.      

 Polish government officials have not said when they expect the 
next fuel shipment, citing freight security reasons.      

 Protesters said the government had no right to conceal the 
timing of the two or three further freights expected.     

 "We knew there would be no transport today, but our action is 
targeted against keeping future transports a secret," said Jakub 
Szumin, the head of local environment organization Gaja.    

 Sunday's protest — rare in Poland because the country has no 
nuclear power plants — was largely symbolic as the rails on which 
the demonstrators sat are rarely used.    

 The Temelin plant, which combines a Russian-made reactor with a 
control system made by U.S firm Westinghouse, has suffered 
several shutdowns because of vibrations and a crack in steam 
piping in the turbine in its non-nuclear generation section.     

 But a recent Czech-led independent commission, which included 
observers from the European Union, Austria and Germany, gave 
Temelin high marks in an environmental impact study. 

Copyright 2001, Reuters
*****************************************************************
 22  Polish Activists Block Szczecin Harbor Due to Temelin Fuel

 Central Europe Online - 

 
WARSAW, Apr 30, 2001 -- (CTK - Czech News Agency) Polish 
environmentalists and their colleagues of the Greenpeace branches 
in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands today jointly protest in 
Szczecin, Poland, against transports of nuclear fuel from the 
local port for the Czech nuclear power plant in Temelin.
 
The protest is mainly aimed against all information about similar 
transports being kept strictly secret, Robert Cyglicki from 
Poland's Green Federation organization told CTK. Aboard two 
boats, the activists first covered a section of the sea route 
which is used by ships carrying the Temelin- designed fuel to the 
Szczecin harbor.
 
They placed several banners with anti-nuclear symbols on the 
water and in the harbor. Now several dozen environmentalists are 
sitting on the rails connecting the harbor with the Szczecin city 
and then leading further to Polish inland. Some activists are 
painting the rails yellow. "We intend to block the harbor. We've 
information that another transport is to set off very soon," 
Cyglicki said.
 
He said that if a ship with Temelin fuel arrived in the port, the 
activist would not allow the consignment to be loaded out. Some 
sources, mainly ones linked to non-governmental organizations, 
recently indicated that another ship with nuclear fuel for 
Temelin might arrive in Szczecin this weekend. Polish and Czech 
environmentalists have criticized as scandalous that the 
transports are withheld from the public.
 
"Everything that is related to Temelin is at a sharp variance 
with how information on nuclear issues is provided in western 
Europe," Czech Greenpeace's Jiri Tutter told CTK on April 21, 
when the hitherto last train carrying American nuclear fuel for 
Temelin left Szczecin. Accompanied by exceptionally strict safety 
measures, the train reached Temelin, south Bohemia, one day 
later. Tutter said that to keep secret on similar transport was 
irresponsible particularly towards people living on its route. 
According to the environmentalists, the withholding of the 
transports' timing and route mainly from local authorities could 
result in the authorities' failure to react appropriately in case 
of a possible accident. The Polish atomic agency, however, said 
that the transported fuel's radiation was too low to endanger the 
population even if an accident occurred.
 
Earlier this week Czech Interior Minister Stanislav Gross told 
Czech Radio that the keeping of the information on the "nuclear 
train" secret was not meaningless. He said it was impossible to 
disclose information on something which many international 
terrorist groups views as a "material they are interested in". 
Temelin started to be put into operation last October. The 
government of the neighboring Austria and environmentalists in 
the Czech Republic, Austria and Germany are strongly opposed to 
the plant. They say it is not safe because it combines Soviet 
design and western technology.
 
The joint protest by Polish activists and members of the German, 
Austrian and Dutch Greenpeace branches ended today without the 
police having intervened against the protesters. The activists' 
information that another train with American fuel to the Czech 
nuclear power plant in Temelin is to leave Szczecin for the Czech 
Republic this weekend has not been confirmed.
 
The activists mainly protested against all information on similar 
transports being kept strictly secret. They said they were ready 
to prevent the unloading of the fuel if a ship with it appeared 
in the Szczecin harbor.
 
*((c) 2001 CTK - Czech News Agency)* <IMG 
*****************************************************************
 23    *EGYPT, RUSSIA AGREE ON NUCLEAR COOPERATION 

Middle East Newsline - Area News - Updated Daily
 				 				 					 			 
           CAIRO [MENL] -- Egypt and Russia have agreed to launch 
nuclear cooperation.

But Egyptian officials played down previous assertions that this 
would include the construction of a nuclear reactor.

"Let us stay away from the media exaggerations," Egyptian 
President Hosni Mubarak said. "The nuclear field is not confined 
to nuclear stations or reactors. I stress that Egypt will not set 
up nuclear stations at the time being to generate electricity."

Mubarak said Egypt does not have a need for a nuclear-power plant 
in a country that is full of natural gas reserves. Instead, the 
president said the nuclear cooperation with Moscow would focus on 
agriculture and medicine.

On Friday, the two countries signed a memorandum of cooperation 
for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. The memorandum said the 
extent of the cooperation would suit Egypt's needs and 
priorities.

Officials said the cooperation would include applied research, 
training, nuclear safety, environment protection, as well as 
laser technology.

Another area of cooperation would be Russian training and 
operation of the electronic accelerator Egypt purchased from 
Russia. The accelerator produces radioactive isotopes. 

*****************************************************************
 24  DEVELOPMENT OF LAND IS NEW FOCUS AT NUCLEAR SITE 

 [The Columbus Dispatch] 

 April 29, 2001 
*Associated Press *      

MIAMISBURG, Ohio (AP) -- The federal government's slowdown in 
cleaning up the former Mound nuclear-weapons plant is forcing 
officials to switch their strategy for converting the site to an 
industrial park.

 Previously, the Miamisburg Mound Community Improvement Corp. 
focused its efforts on filling buildings as the U.S. Department 
of Energy released them for commercial use. But the available 
buildings are nearly full.

 "That has forced us into the land- development business,'' 
corporation President Michael Grauwelman said.

 Last week, the Energy Department released 94 acres of largely 
undeveloped land that formed a buffer zone on the southern end of 
the 306- acre Mound site, about 10 miles southwest of Dayton.

 Grauwelman's biggest concern about the new strategy is that 
companies will be leery of investing in a site where the Energy 
Department is doing cleanup work on a schedule that keeps 
slipping.

 About 40 percent of the cleanup has been completed. The Energy 
Department has pushed back completion of the cleanup to 2010 from 
2004, and the site contractor might lay off workers.

 The Bush administration has proposed even deeper cuts for next 
year, reducing the agency's $91 million budget for the Mound site 
to $71 million.

 The Mound plant was built in 1949 to make triggers for nuclear 
weapons.

 In 1998, the Energy Department agreed to turn the site over to 
Miamisburg and help turn it into a high- tech business park. 
                                       
*****************************************************************
 25  Progress joins N-power caravan 

- 2001-04-30 - The Business Journal (Raleigh/Durham)
 
Daniel Pearson                          

RALEIGH ­ Charlotte-based Duke Energy and Raleigh-based Progress 
Energy are advocating the construction of new nuclear energy 
facilities to meet increased demand for electricity in recent 
years ­ as much as 15 percent since 1996. 

Duke plans to apply to renew its 40-year operating licenses for 
two of its nuclear power plants this June, and Progress Energy 
plans to submit an application for one of its plants within the 
next two years. 

But that may not be enough for the utilities to keep up with a 
booming population and the increased dependency on high-tech 
devices, such as computers and network servers. 

Duke and Progress are not alone. Electric companies across the 
nation are increasingly advocating the use of nuclear power as a 
solution to a reliance on electricity generated by burning fossil 
fuels. 

California's electricity problems and a spike in natural gas 
prices last winter have prompted the Bush White House to grant 
its blessing to nuclear power in the form of planned tax 
incentives and relaxed regulatory requirements aimed at spurring 
plant development. President Bush is expected to outline a 
comprehensive energy policy this spring. 

The two North Carolina utility giants hope the Bush 
administration's policy will address long-standing concerns over 
the storage of radioactive waste, which industry observers say is 
the cause of nuclear energy's long-delayed prosperity. 

"It is indeed a time of high interest in nuclear power, and there 
is the potential for a renaissance in the industry," says C.S. 
"Scotty" Clayton, senior vice president and chief nuclear officer 
for CP, Progress Energy's electricity subsidiary. "We are 
monitoring the results of other efforts, but we are not actively 
lobbying (Congress)." 

In 2000, demand for power from both companies reached all-time 
highs: Duke consumers used 84.7 million megawatts while Progress 
Energy customers used 59 million megawatts. Because of peak 
demands, the companies do not calculate an annual capacity 
figure. But, if all plants ran at 70 percent of peak usage, each 
would have a capacity of approximately 115 million megawatts per 
year. 

Besides generating their own electricity, both companies buy 
power on the wholesale market and contract power from other 
utilities, so neither anticipates that demand will exceed 
capacity in the foreseeable future. The need to start building 
new nuclear facilities in the U.S. is not an urgent one and is 
still many years away, observers say. 

But Duke Energy Corp. CEO Richard Priory says sitting back and 
waiting is not enough to solve the most pressing challenge ­ 
storage of spent nuclear rods. "Energy companies need to be 
pressing the issue that will get permanent storage off the back 
burner and moving toward a final solution," he says. 

No new nuclear plants have been built in the U.S. since the Three 
Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania nearly melted down 22 years 
ago, but several have been constructed or are being built in 
other countries, including France, Japan and South Africa. 

It was a widespread belief that the 103 plants in the U.S. (Duke 
and Progress have a combined three inside the borders of North 
Carolina and a total of seven) would be shut down before their 
40-year licenses expired. But utility companies now are beginning 
to apply for renewals. In May 2000, Duke became the second U.S. 
company to do so, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission expects 
80 percent of all U.S. plants to file applications this year. 

Advocates of nuclear energy say it is the cleanest and most 
inexpensive power source available and that it is less expensive 
to operate than natural gas, oil or coal plants. Plus, nuclear 
reactors don't release any greenhouse gases into the atmosphere 
as does burning fossil fuels. 

Since 1980, U.S. energy consumption has increased 60 percent, 
according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Half of North 
Carolina's demand is already met by power from the seven nuclear 
plants owned by Duke and Progress. 

The problem with jump-starting nuclear programs is the concern 
over the storage of radioactive waste; It must be contained for 
eons to prevent it from contaminating surrounding areas. 

Both CP and Duke say the government needs to expedite its 
proposal to store the hazardous waste within Yucca Mountain in 
Nevada. But geologists aren't convinced the site is suitable 
because the mountain's rock formations can't keep the radioactive 
waste from seeping into the surrounding areas over time. 

Both companies acknowledge that the public perception of nuclear 
energy has been slow to thaw since the Three Mile Island accident 
and more recently a disaster at the Chernobyl plant in Russia. 
But the industry is basking in the glow of new designs that the 
non-profit Union of Concerned Scientists, a Cambridge, 
Mass.-based energy analyst group, claims are safer and smarter 
than first-generation technology. 

The industry is starting the dialogue now with full knowledge the 
fight will be a long one. 

"If new nuclear plants are constructed in the U.S., it will be 
years before a new reactor will be seen in North Carolina," Duke 
spokesman Tom Shite says. 
			 
*Dan Pearson can be reached at dpearson@bizjournals.com.*
 			 
  [Get Copyright Clearance]     Copyright 2001 American City 
Business Journals Inc. 
*****************************************************************
 26  Cheap, Clean Nuclear Power Is the Answer 

April 29, 2001  

By TOM MCCLINTOCK
 
The newspaper's front page contained one of those jigsaws of 
incongruity that one expects these days in California: One 
article reported that the California Independent System Operator 
had just declared the latest in a long series of Stage 2 
electricity alerts while another reported on workers merrily 
dismantling the Rancho Seco nuclear electricity generating plant 
near Sacramento. 

Those two stories form the bookends of this state's energy 
crisis. We need 15,000 megawatts of additional generating 
capacity to meet immediate demand, produce a sufficient surplus 
to force prices down and to accommodate unexpected breakdowns of 
the state's aging fleet of generators. And we can't get there 
without a major commitment to nuclear energy. 

California has only two nuclear power plants left from the era 
when the state's leaders were committed to cheap, clean and 
abundant electricity. Those two plants alone still produce 16% of 
the state's electricity at a cost of roughly three cents per 
kilowatt-hour--a fraction of the 16 cents it costs to produce the 
same electricity with a natural gas-fired plant. 

Vermont gets 70% of its electricity from nuclear power. France 
gets 76%. And yet, under current law, a nuclear power plant 
application cannot even be considered in California. 

How are we to meet the demand for cheap, clean and abundant 
electricity without it? California has overrun its natural gas 
supply, natural gas prices have skyrocketed and air regulators 
routinely require large plants to pay as much as $4.8 million per 
day for air pollution permits. And yet gas-fired plants are the 
only applications being considered. 

"'Renewables" like solar power are often touted as the energy 
supply of the future, but their power is neither cheap nor 
abundant. 

Coal is cheap--about the same cost as nuclear power per 
kilowatt-hour--but is the dirtiest form of energy available. If 
clean, cheap and abundant power is the question, the only readily 
available answers are hydroelectric and nuclear. Four thousand 
megawatts of hydroelectric power could be made available in the 
next five years by completing the Auburn Dam, increasing the 
capacity of the Shasta Dam and upgrading a variety of existing 
facilities. But hydroelectricity becomes unreliable in droughts 
and still wouldn't bring us close to the 15,000 megawatts that 
California needs. * * * Which brings us back to the merry vandals 
at Rancho Seco, and ultimately to the ideological opposition that 
has blocked nuclear power development in California for 25 years. 
During that period, nuclear technology has taken quantum leaps 
that have dramatically decreased costs and increased safety and 
reliability. The arguments of opponents have been eclipsed by a 
quarter of a century of technological advances. Today, nuclear 
power can boast the safest operating record of any competitive 
power source in history. 

Modern nuclear plants operate for less than two cents per 
kilowatt-hour, three cents when construction and decommissioning 
costs are factored in. At that rate, the average home electricity 
bill would be $18 per month. Nuclear power eliminates the chronic 
air pollution associated with electricity generation. And with 
production reactors in use around the world, the fuel is 
inexhaustible. 

Nuclear plants create a fraction of the waste of conventional 
power plants. An ideal waste depository exists at Yucca Mountain, 
Nev., and recycling of nuclear waste--a common practice around 
the world but not in the United States--would reduce that 
further. 

California's public officials will hear none of this, of course. 
After all, sky-high prices for electricity, ubiquitous power 
blackouts, dirty air and yet another exodus of business away from 
California are a small price for them to pay to avoid the wrath 
of California's anti-nuclear zealots. 

But is it a price the rest of us should pay? - - -

State Sen. Tom Mcclintock (R-thousand Oaks) Represents Portions 
of Ventura County and the San Fernando Valley

Los Angeles Times for similar stories.
*****************************************************************
 27  USEC Inc. 

USEC Inc. (washingtonpost.com)
 
          The shines the spotlight on the top companies in the Washington
region.

 For the past 20 years, The Washington Post has evaluated hundreds of the
area's largest public and private companies and financial institutions. The
public and private companies are ranked by fiscal year 2000 revenue. The
financial institutions are ranked by assets.
            

Monday, April 30, 2001; Page X10 

6903 Rockledge Dr. 
Bethesda, Md. 20817 
301-564-3200 

Founded: 1998 
Revenue: $1.49 billion
 Net income: $8.90 million 
Earnings per share: $0.10 
Dividend: $0.83 
Stockholders’ equity: $947.30 million 
Return on equity: 0.94 percent 
Stock: USU (NYSE) 
Assets: $2.08 billion 
Market capitalization: $743.16 million
 52-week high: $9.24 (4/18/2001) 
52-week low: $3.88 (12/21/2000) 
President and CEO: William H. Timbers 
CFO: Henry Z. Shelton Jr. 
Employees: 3,840
 Local Employees: 150 

DESCRIPTION: USEC, a former government nuclear fuel operation, 
went public in 1998. It is the world’s leading seller of enriched 
uranium fuel for commercial nuclear power plants. Its subsidiary, 
U.S. Enrichment Corp., runs the nation’s only two enrichment 
plants—in Paducah, Ky., and Portsmouth, Ohio—that compete against 
European companies. USEC also operates the “megatons to 
megawatts” program, diluting uranium from decommissioned Russian 
nuclear warheads to convert it into commercial reactor fuel. 

DEVELOPMENTS: In response to foreign competition and reduced fuel 
sales, USEC is preparing to stop operations at the Portsmouth 
facility in June and consolidate enrichment at its Paducah plant. 
It is awaiting decisions by the Bush administration on the future 
of the Portsmouth plant. The Clinton administration had wanted to 
put the Ohio plant on standby status, which would preserve about 
two-thirds of the plant’s 1,700 jobs. The Bush administration has 
the option of scaling back that plan or closing the plant. 

To cope with reduced sales, USEC is cutting employment at its 
Bethesda headquarters by about 25 percent, eliminating as many as 
50 jobs. In January, executive vice president James H. Miller 
resigned to join another company. Chief financial officer Harold 
Shelton Jr. took Miller’s place as the No. 2 operating executive. 

USEC last year filed a complaint against European competitors, 
charging them with dumping enriched uranium in U.S. markets at 
unfairly low prices and asked federal trade officials to impose 
import penalties on foreign uranium fuel shipments. A decision in 
the case is expected at year-end. 

                      © 2001 The Washington Post Company

*****************************************************************
 28  Power station: Cancer link claim

BBC News | WALES | 

30 April, 2001, 

Report claims children at higher risk of developing cancer

Politicians are calling for action after the publication of a 
study which claims children living in an area of south Wales near 
a nuclear power station stand a higher risk of developing cancer. 
Newport East MP Alan Howarth and Michael Holmes - MEP for South 
West - want the release of cancer incidence figures in light of 
suggestions that clusters around Chepstow were linked to 
proximity the Oldbury nuclear power station. 

How many more clusters will have to be discovered before this 
government recognises that its existing models do not address the 
environmental causes of cancer
   	 		
Euro MP, Michael Holmes                           

The report's author radiation expert and Green Party spokesman Dr 
Chris Busby, claims to have found that children there are 11 
times more likely to develop myeloid leukaemia than the national 
average. 

The town is five miles from Oldbury nuclear power station on the 
banks of the river Severn, which campaigners claim has been found 
to contain high levels of radioactive particles. 

Myeloid leukaemia is a very rare form of cancer which is strongly 
associated with radiation. 

The study - which used data from the Wales Cancer Registry - 
shows that three cases of the cancer were discovered in children 
up to the age of four between 1974 and 1990 in Chepstow, compared 
to the national average of 0.27. 
	 		 			
[Alan Howarth MP] Alan Howarth backs calls by Michael Holmes
 		 		 		  
It also reveals that children in Chepstow run a higher risk of 
developing all cancers at 3.54 times the national average. 

Campaigners believe that the findings are comparable with the 
Sellafield leukaemia cluster which was highlighted in the 1990s. 

Mr Holmes, who commissioned Dr Busby's report, said: "It is 
imperative that Health Minister Alan Milburn releases data on all 
cancer incidence down to ward levels as a matter of grave public 
concern. 

"How many more clusters will have to be discovered before this 
government recognises that its existing models do not address the 
environmental causes of cancer? 

Report dismissed 

"It's possible the authorities know this is a much bigger threat 
then they are letting the public know - that's why they don't let 
the figures out." Dr Busby applied for similar information to be 
released from the South Western Cancer Registry to find out if 
the incidence of cancer is as high on the English side of the 
river Severn. 

But, he claims, he was refused access to the information on the 
grounds of patient confidentiality. 

"This discovery begs for the immediate release of data for the 
English side of the river to give the complete picture, 
especially as Bristol is only eight miles from Oldbury and could 
be blighted," he said. 

It is reported that British Nuclear Fuels - BNFL, which runs the 
Oldbury power station - has dismissed the report's findings. 
	         
      Search BBC News Online
*****************************************************************
 29  DOE's progress at Yucca to be revealed in report
 
May 01, 2001 
 
By Mary Manning 
<manning@lasvegassun.com>
 LAS VEGAS SUN

 The Department of Energy is expected to release a 1,000-page 
report Friday to explain progress on its studies at Yucca 
Mountain, the proposed high-level nuclear waste repository site.

 The report will not be the long-awaited recommendation on 
whether a repository should be built at the site, 90 miles 
northwest of Las Vegas. It is, rather, a review of the scientific 
work done so far at Yucca Mountain, according Lake Barrett, the 
DOE's acting director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
Management.

 The recommendation is expected at year's end.

 Barrett on Monday told delegates of the ninth International High 
Level Radioactive Research Conference meeting in Las Vegas that 
the Energy Department is committed to an unbiased decision based 
on sound science in its search for "the final solution" to the 
disposal of commercial reactor spent fuel and defense wastes.

 The DOE will schedule hearings this summer near Yucca Mountain 
on the report's findings before a site recommendation is made, 
Barrett said.

 The release was delayed last year after a two-page memo attached 
to a draft of an executive summary of the report raised questions 
about the DOE's approach. The memo, written by John Kelly of JK 
Research Associates of Colorado, suggested the report could be 
used to sell a repository at Yucca Mountain to Congress.

 That brought complaints that the DOE favored the repository. By 
law, the agency is supposed to remain unbiased.

 The DOE's inspector general issued an opinion on April 23 
finding no bias. The opinion also noted, however, that certain 
wording could be interpreted to mean that the DOE had already 
decided Yucca Mountain was scientifically sound to accept 
radioactive wastes. Another probe, under congressional 
investigators in the General Accounting Office, has not started.

 Once a site is recommended, it will take years before the DOE 
receives a license for a repository from the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, which has the final say in whether Yucca Mountain is 
built and accepts waste by 2010, Barrett said.

 The NRC's deputy executive director said that with a looming 
energy crisis this summer, the commission is expecting within a 
year to receive its first application for a new U.S. nuclear 
reactor. It would be the first in the United States in 28 years, 
Carl Paperiello said.

 The Bush administration has signaled support for a possible 
revival of nuclear power. Vice President Dick Cheney, who heads a 
Cabinet-level task force on energy policy, said in an interview 
on CNN's "Larry King Live" on Friday that nuclear power plants 
will be a major part of his recommendations to President Bush. 

All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                     NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES
*****************************************************************
 1 Bush to look at Hanford budget
 
This story was published 5/1/2001
 
By John Stang
Herald staff writer
 
The Bush administration said Monday that it will look at possibly 
increasing Hanford's environmental cleanup budget for fiscal 
2002.
 
But the administration stopped short of making any actual 
promises or saying what specific budget figures it might 
consider.
 
U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., met with Mitch Daniels, director 
of the federal Office of Management and Budget, on Monday to 
discuss shortfalls in the Department of Energy's 2002 cleanup 
budget request to Congress. The OMB prepares the president's 
annual budget requests to Congress.
 
Hastings and OMB spokesman Chris Ullman said Daniels 
"acknowledged" Hanford's budget needs, and said OMB will work 
with Congress on reaching a mutually acceptable nationwide 
nuclear cleanup budget.
 
"I think (Daniels) clearly came out of the meeting with a better 
understanding of the (legal, technical and contractual) 
complexities of Hanford," Hastings said. Ullman added, "We'll 
continue to work with Congress."
 
No solid dollar figures nor specific detailed promises emerged 
from that meeting, Hastings and Ullman acknowledged.
 
The basic dilemma is this:
 
OMB, which sets DOE's budget targets, told DOE to trim its 
overall budget from $19.7 billion in 2000 to $19.2 billion in 
2001. That translates to DOE's nationwide cleanup budget dropping 
from $6.267 billion to $5.913 billion. And that would trim 
Hanford's cleanup budget from $1.456 billion in 2000 to $1.4 
billion in 2002.
 
Hanford's budget alone is $400 million to $500 million short of 
meeting the site's legal obligations in 2002, and other DOE sites 
face similar shortfalls.
 
The state of Washington has threatened to file a lawsuit against 
DOE unless the federal government soon makes sure those legal 
obligations -- which DOE agreed to in the contractlike Tri-Party 
Agreement -- are met.
 
Meanwhile, the U.S. House and Senate have adopted $6.65 billion 
as their starting point for the next few months of budget talks 
with the administration over the nationwide nuclear cleanup 
program. That's a $737 million difference between Congress' and 
the administration's current positions.
 
Daniels' statement to Hastings on Monday closely resembles what 
he told U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., on Feb. 13.
 
Murray met then with Daniels about her concerns over a Wall 
Street Journal article that stated DOE's $6.267 billion 
nationwide cleanup budget was expected to be cut by about $400 
million. She said afterward that Daniels told her Hanford's 
budget would not be cut, and would actually be increased.
 
But when DOE revealed April 9 that its nationwide cleanup budget 
would be cut by $354 million and Hanford's budget would be cut by 
$56 million, Murray became angry with the OMB.
 
Both Ullman and Hastings said they don't know what was actually 
said between Murray and Daniels on Feb. 13. Hastings speculated 
Daniels and Murray may have misunderstood each other.
 
But Murray's press aide, Todd Webster, said Murray specifically 
asked Daniels about the likelihood of a $400 million nationwide 
cleanup budget cut, and Daniels had told her the $400 million cut 
would not happen -- all in clear language.
 
However, Webster said the public and Congress should work with 
the possibility that the administration might increase the 
nationwide cleanup budget. "The bottom line is as long at the 
(extra) money gets there, that's what we're working for," he 
said. Back to top stories 

Copyright 2000 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This 
*****************************************************************
 2  HAMMER takes blow in DOE's '02 budget
 
This story was published 5/1/2001
 
By John Stang
Herald staff writer
 
The Department of Energy's proposed 2002 budget would trim 
Hanford's HAMMER training facility's budget to $1 million from 
about $5.9 million.
 
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray's staff and Sam Volpentest, executive vice 
president of the Tri-City Industrial Development Council, 
confirmed the proposed cut Monday.
 
Such a cut likely would close much of the DOE center, which 
trains rescue workers and others on how to deal with hazardous 
materials and other emergency situations. Most trainees come from 
the Northwest, but some come from across the nation and from 
around the world.
 
The center employs anout 40 people.
 
"When you talk of $1 million (for a 2002 budget), you'll have to 
lay most of them off and have no training center, and you might 
as well put a padlock on it," Volpentest said.
 
Volpentest was a key figure in creating the $29 million Hazardous 
Materials Management and Emergency Response center, or HAMMER, in 
the 1990s. The 120-acre complex on Hanford's southern border 
opened in 1997.
 
The nearly $5 million cut is part of DOE's overall proposal to 
cut its nationwide environmental cleanup funds to $5.913 billion 
in 2002 from $6.267 billion in 2001. That would reduce Hanford's 
cleanup budget to $1.4 billion in 2002 from $1.456 billion in 
2001.
 
However, Congress proposed raising DOE's nationwide cleanup 
budget in 2002 to roughly $6.65 billion. That would add $5 
million to HAMMER's 2002 budget, said Volpentest and Murray 
spokesman Todd Webster.
 
Volpentest said he's optimistic the money could be restored to 
HAMMER's 2002 budget, noting Murray, D-Wash., and U.S. Rep. Doc 
Hastings, R-Wash., already are fighting for the center in both 
chambers.
 
"I don't know if we're going to get all of (the $5.9 million) 
back, but we should get enough to keep it going," Volpentest 
said.
 
DOE's annual budget requests traditionally take until late summer 
or early fall to work their way through Congress to get the 
president's signature.
 
DOE's Washington, D.C., headquarters ordered local DOE officials 
not to discuss the 2002 budget figures -- including those 
pertaining to HAMMER.
 
DOE has not unveiled how its proposed $1.4 billion budget for 
Hanford will be divided among individual projects -- a breakdown 
the agency has publicly provided by mid-February of the past few 
years. Back to top stories 

Copyright 2000 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This 
*****************************************************************
 3  DOE safe site report called vague 

The Paducah Sun
Paducah, Kentucky
Tuesday, May 01, 2001

*The study of the Paducah plant's neighbors found no apparent hazard.* 

By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com--*270.575.8650*
 
A new study concluding there is "no apparent public health 
hazard" at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant is marked by 
qualifiers and apparently doesn't assess the cumulative effects 
of toxins, said the chairman of the plant's citizens advisory 
board. 

"My main concern is that I don't see how they can really assess 
what the potential health effects may be," said Mark Donham of 
Brookport, Ill. "I hope we find out all this has a very minimal 
impact, but I'm not convinced from this report." 

Carol Connell, lead health assessor for the study done by the 
Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry, said researchers 
did consider the aggregate effects of exposures to various 
contaminants. She said the word "apparent" means that people near 
the plant might be exposed, "but not at a level that a health 
hazard would exist." 

She and Donham, a longtime critic of the plant's environmental 
practices, encouraged people to attend tonight's public meeting 
and ask questions about the study. The meeting will be at 7 p.m. 
at the Paducah Information Age Park Resource Center. 

"If they object to some of the things we have in our report, 
now's the time for them to comment on that," Connell said. The 
public comment period ends May 14. 

The report — available at four area libraries and on the Internet 
at www.atsdr.cdc.gov — says that under "normal operating 
conditions," the plant has been safe since 1990. That was when 
the Department of Energy began permanently replacing contaminated 
residential wells with municipal water, Connell said. 

The plant will stay safe, assuming the effectiveness of warning 
signs and fencing at contaminated ditches and creeks; fish 
advisories at some ponds in the wildlife management area around 
the plant; and existing regulations on air and surface-water 
discharges, the report says. 

Donham said the study is too broad and vague to be meaningful, 
and he hopes the registry, a branch of the U.S. Department of 
Health and Human Services, will return for a more specific look 
at the health of plant neighbors. Connell said another study 
isn't justified, but the group will offer to better educate the 
public on the current findings. 

Many plant neighbors interviewed by researchers worry about plant 
contamination and the incidence of cancer, but studying small 
groups can uncover illnesses just as likely to be random as 
exposure-related, Connell said. She explained that most of the 
sicknesses seen in the recent study were quite varied and 
unrelated to the same cause. 

"It may be cancer," she said. "But it might be 20 different types 
of cancer." Despite the study's conclusion that the plant is 
safe, some federal lawsuits allege the plant's sampling data is 
fraudulent and neighbors' health remains in jeopardy. Connell 
said her group reviewed not only plant findings, but sampling 
results from the state and research universities — a total of 
more than 840,000 current computer data points. The study 
compared data of various pathways to be sure the levels made 
sense, she said. 

Connell said her researchers are "very much aware" that the 
public has been deluged with conflicting reports, lawsuits and 
studies regarding plant safety, particularly in the past few 
years. But unlike most of those, which focused on worker 
exposures, the registry work centered on pathways and levels of 
exposure to plant neighbors. She said some plant neighbors 
expressed distrust of the federal government because of the 
plant's track record. 

Past use of trichloroethylene (TCE), a common cleaning solvent, 
has contaminated huge quantities of groundwater beneath the 
plant. Groundwater exposure to vinyl chloride, a degradation 
product of TCE, and acute air exposures to uranium and hydrogen 
fluoride "are an indeterminate public health hazard for past and 
potential future exposures," the study says. "This means that the 
information available is incomplete." 

Federal law mandated the public assessment because the plant is a 
Superfund site. The work reviewed chemical and radioactive 
materials, their known health effects and potential pathways to 
humans, and community reports of injuries, disease and death. 

Besides the Internet, the reports are available at the Paducah 
Public Library, Paducah Community College Library, Metropolis 
Public Library and Murray State University’s Waterfield Library. 

*****************************************************************
 4  Is energy agency like the serpent that tempted Eve? 

- Earnest Ray English
 

The Paducah Sun
Paducah, Kentucky
Tuesday, May 01, 2001

EDITOR: Regarding the article, "DOE site's neighbors not in 
danger, agency reports,": When I read this article my mind went 
back to the book of Genesis in the Bible when Eve took a little 
walk in the garden by herself. The way I remember the story there 
was a serpent that lived right in the middle of Adam and Eve's 
neighborhood. They knew that this one area was a contaminated 
area and could be hazardous to their health, but she listened to 
what that lying serpent told her: that she would not surely die 
if she ate of this apple. We know how too late she did eat the 
apple and her husband did, too. Because of eating this 
contaminated apple, she and her family died over a period of 
time. 

All of this story can be applied to the neighbors of the Paducah 
Gaseous Diffusion plant. The apples that can kill in the middle 
of our neighborhood are TCE's, TC-99, uranium hexafluoride gas, 
plutonium, and other toxic heavy metals and chemicals. The plant 
even said it released several tons of uranium hexafluoride gas in 
the first few decades of the plant's operations. Did this gas 
just float over our heads and bypass the neighbors of DOE? I 
think not.

And, like Eve, we have been lied to. 

My family and some of our neighbors have been tested for toxic 
metals and toxic chemicals, and they have been found in our 
bodies. So, if there is no danger from these exposures, why is 
there such a high rate of illiness in the west McCracken County 
and Ballard County area? I am talking about cancers, brain 
tumors, birth defects, neurological disorders, thyroid problems 
and the list goes on and on. 

What did the ATSDR Agency base its report on? They sure didn't 
get it from the neighbors I have talked to. 

Is this just another cover-up to make DOE look good? People had 
better wake up and take a look around them. If you don't have 
medical problems now, you eventually will because these releases 
and exposures have occurred over at least a 50-mile radius. 

What about the workers who have worked in the places where these 
contaminants have been released and they have been exposed to who 
knows what and have not even been made aware of it? What happens 
when they become sick and go on disability or die due to the 
contamination being made when these spills and releases occur? 

The contamination is there. Whether you want to believe it or not 
is your decision. Take a little time and attend the public 
meetings. The DOE says the public is satisfied because very few 
show up. They don't tell you that the meeting is not announced 
until the morning of the meeting so that many won't show up 
because of not hearing the time and place or because they haven't 
gotten off work as of the time the meeting starts. They don't 
want you to really know what goes on. The less you know, the 
better off you are. 

EARNEST RAY ENGLISH West Paducah 

*****************************************************************
 5  Computer found empty 

Oak Ridger Online --> 

Story last updated at 12:54 p.m. on Tuesday, May 1, 2001

*Data slated for use in K-25 investigation *

by Paul Parson 
Oak Ridger staff 

Some people said it was "criminal" that the hard drives were 
missing from a computer believed to be beneficial to the 
examination of historical contaminations of water at the Oak 
Ridge K-25 Site.

 The issue is so troubling that the Department of Energy's 
Inspector General's office is being notified of the situation.

 The missing computer equipment was discussed Monday afternoon by 
the Community Input Team, which provides stakeholder 
representation for the water examination.

 The team includes representatives from the Tennessee Department 
of Environment and Conservation, the Oak Ridge Site-Specific 
Advisory Board and the Paper, Allied-industrial, Chemical and 
Energy Workers Union.

 William Noe, who once used the computer and is on the Community 
Input Team, confirmed that the computer would not start when 
technicians tried to examine it in mid-April. The computer's two 
hard drives had been removed and are missing along with multiple 
backup copies of the K-25 water line drawings and digital photos 
that could indicate possible cross-connected water lines.

 Richard Frounfelker, a DOE representative on the Community Input 
Team, said the hard drives were reformatted after Noe left in 
late 1996 and the computer was given to someone else. He said 
this is a typical procedure within DOE. However, Frounfelker 
added that the person who took over Noe's computer said it did 
not work when he got it.

 Frounfelker also provided a written history of what happened to 
the computer after Noe left. The document states the computer's 
"hard drive" was discarded in May 2000. Frounfelker was unable to 
confirm whether that applied to both hard drives or just one.

 The missing computer equipment generated mixed response from 
Community Input Team members on Monday.

 "This is bordering on criminal," said Sherrie Farver, who 
represents Coalition for a Healthy Environment on the team. 
"We're looking at negligence and possibly criminal negligence."

 Norman Mulvenon, who represents the Oak Ridge Reservation Local 
Oversight Committee on the team, said it was just "ineptitude" on 
DOE's part.

 Ultimately, the Community Input Team voted to notify DOE's 
Inspector General's office in writing expressing their concern 
about the missing computer equipment. It will be up to the 
Inspector General's office to determine if an investigation needs 
to be conducted.
 
All Contents ©Copyright* The Oak Ridger *
*****************************************************************
 6  Public input still sought on K-25 water investigation 

Oak Ridger Online --> 

Story last updated at 12:54 p.m. on Tuesday, May 1, 2001

Officials are still seeking public input concerning the 
investigation of historical contaminations of water at the Oak 
Ridge K-25 Site.

 The historical water examination is a continuation of tests 
conducted in August after employees voiced concern about 
contaminated water at K-25. Those tests indicated the site's 
current drinking water is safe to consume.

 The current project is expected to be completed by August 2002. 
It will involve investigating and assessing K-25's drinking water 
and steam systems and the potential for exposure through any 
possible route due to cross-connections or via other means from 
other utility systems including firefighting water, recirculating 
cooling water, storm drains and sanitary sewers.

 Information can be conveyed to the investigating team by calling 
the project hot-line at (865) 481-8290.

 Facts can also be provided to the team through Suzanne Conway of 
Terra Graphics Environmental Engineering at (865) 300-9855 or 
Richard Bird, a physician and member of the investigating team, 
at (781) 646-5770. Terra Graphics is one of the companies 
participating in the investigation.

 Several members of Coalition for a Healthy Environment say they 
are also willing to talk with people and direct them to the 
proper sources. The coalition serves as a support and research 
group pertaining to the illnesses of workers at Department of 
Energy facilities and the citizens of Oak Ridge and the 
surrounding areas.

 Coalition contacts include Harry Williams, president of the 
organization, (865) 693-7249; (865) Sherrie Farver, 482-5023; and 
Mary Pinckard, (865) 376-3970.

All Contents ©Copyright* The Oak Ridger *
*****************************************************************
 7  Bush plans transformation of nuclear arms controls

RGJ.com - 

*Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel*
 KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS
 Tuesday May 1st, 2001
 
WASHINGTON — President Bush is poised to launch the most sweeping 
transformation of U.S. nuclear weapons and arms control policies 
in almost 30 years.
 
U.S. officials and European diplomats, speaking on condition of 
anonymity, say that Bush would seek to extensively rewrite or 
abandon the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. “The implicit 
message in the last weeks was that the new administration is 
slowly but surely moving away from the ABM Treaty,” said one 
Western European diplomat, who spoke only on the condition of 
anonymity.
 
Bush is expected to deliver a speech today calling for 
accelerating development of a missile defenses. The ABM Treaty 
bans all but the most limited defenses against ballistic 
missiles.
 
The treaty is considered the backbone of strategic arms control 
because it embodies the idea that neither side would be assured 
of defeating the other, thereby reducing the risk of nuclear war.
 
Under Bush’s plan, the United States is also expected to cut its 
nuclear arsenal without a formal pact with Russia. The president 
would propose replacing traditional arms control treaties with 
another mechanism for consulting on nuclear and arms control 
policies, said the diplomats.
 
Bush “is going to make a particular appeal to the Russians to 
develop a new foundation for strategic stability and security,” 
said a senior administration official, who spoke on condition of 
anonymity. The White House also plans to hold talks with China, 
which strongly opposes a defensive shield that could neutralize 
its small number of nuclear missiles.
 
Jettisoning the ABM Treaty and the traditional arms control 
process would be a fundamental departure from the 
long-established method of limiting the arsenals of the United 
States and Russia through tedious and highly technical 
negotiations that can last for years.
 
Proponents of the new approach, including Bush, Vice President 
Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other senior 
officials, say the end of the Cold War and improved ties with 
Russia have rendered traditional arms control measures, including 
the ABM Treaty, obsolete.
 
In his speech today at the National Defense University here, Bush 
will say “it’s time to rethink the concept of deterrence, based 
solely on the threat of nuclear retaliation,” said the senior 
administration official.
 
Proponents of missile defense say the United States needs the 
ability to mount defenses against a host of new threats, 
especially the development of ballistic missiles capable of 
carrying nuclear, biological and chemical warheads by such 
nations as North Korea, Iran and Iraq.
 
Another concern is accidental or unauthorized nuclear missile 
launches by China or Russia.
 
Arms control advocates and NATO allies are deeply worried that 
abandoning the treaty could undermine the global system designed 
to restrict the spread of nuclear weapons.
 
At the same time, U.S. allies and arms control proponents welcome 
the concept of not waiting for Russia’s agreement to implement 
major cuts in the U.S. nuclear arsenal, estimated at more than 
7,000 warheads.
 
The United States and Russia are due to reduce their arsenals to 
no more than 3,500 warheads each by 2007 under the START II 
Treaty. Russia has called for further reductions to 1,500 or 
fewer warheads each.
 
“There is a strong case that can be made that unilateral 
reductions are the way to go,” said Joseph Cirincione, an arms 
expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, in 
Washington. But, he said, nuclear weapons cuts need to be 
underpinned by agreements that allow both sides to verify that 
the other is doing what it pledged.
 
“Unilateral reductions and negotiated agreements are not mutually 
exclusive,” said Cirincione.
 
Such a move reduces the danger of nuclear war and could make it 
easier for Russia to accept the deployment of U.S. missile 
defenses, they say.
 
Bush would not endorse any specific missile defense systems in 
his speech, the senior official said. He also was not expected to 
announce a withdrawal from the ABM Treaty but instead call for 
consultations with the European allies and Russia on modifying 
the pact.
 
The European diplomats, however, said that the changes would have 
to be so extensive that the treaty would be impossible to 
preserve. Bush, therefore, is expected to give the required 
six-month notice of a U.S. withdrawal from the treaty before he 
departs on a European tour in June.
 
During the presidential campaign Bush said the United States 
should try to defend itself, its troops abroad and its allies 
from attacks by limited numbers of missiles.
 
The Pentagon is pursuing various options, including interceptors 
that could hit warheads in space, ship-based interceptors that 
could destroy missiles as they climb, an aircraft armed with a 
powerful laser and a space-based laser.
 
The United States is years away from deploying most of these 
systems because of the high costs and enormous technical hurdles.
 
Some experts doubt they will ever work, saying they will not be 
able to defeat countermeasures such as decoy warheads. They also 
argue that developing and deploying extensive missile defenses 
could cost more than $100 billion. They question how Bush can pay 
for missile defense along with his $1.6 trillion 10-year tax cut 
plan and improvements in conventional military forces.
 
“It does appear to be the administration’s intention to replace 
it (the ABM Treaty) with another framework,” said a second 
European diplomat.
 
In an effort to win over the NATO allies, Bush previewed his 
speech in telephone calls Monday to German Chancellor Gerhard 
Schroeder, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, French President 
Jacques Chirac, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and NATO 
Secretary General Lord Robertson.
 
Aware of complaints that his administration failed to consult 
U.S. allies on other important issues, Bush will dispatch 
high-level officials to Europe and Asia next week to discuss his 
plan, White House officials said.
 
“I have a solemn obligation to protect the American people and 
our allies, not to protect arms control agreements signed almost 
30 years ago,” Bush said last September during the presidential 
campaign.
 
In the same speech, Bush pledged to deploy missile defenses to 
protect the United States, its troops abroad and its allies “at 
the earliest possible date,” and said he would abrogate the ABM 
Treaty if Russian President Vladimir Putin refused to modify it.
 
©2001 Reno Gazette-Journal
*****************************************************************
 8   Navy Bombing Exercises Begin Anew
 
May 01, 2001 

VIEQUES, Puerto Rico- After a brief delay because of overcast 
skies, Navy ships and fighter jets began pelting a firing range 
on this Puerto Rican island with inert bombs and shells in 
bitterly protested military maneuvers scheduled to end Tuesday. 

Thirteen more people were detained overnight for trespassing on 
federal land, the Navy said. Only a dozen stood outside the 
Navy's base Tuesday morning with flags and posters demanding 
"Peace for Vieques." 

The latest round of maneuvers would end by nightfall and the 
ships and jets will head to the Mediterranean and Persian Gulf, 
said Navy spokesman Lt. Jeff Gordon. 

"The problem with this round of exercises has been that the 
current administration (in the Puerto Rican government) has 
actively tried to prevent the maneuvers," Gordon said. "We've 
also spent a lot of time looking for protesters on the range." 

Monday's maneuvers were stalled for hours after a report that 
protesters were burying themselves in the 900-acre firing range 
littered with unexploded ammunition. No one was found. 

The Navy says the range provides unique training that saves 
American lives in combat. It denies the claims of opponents that 
60 years of bombing and shelling have harmed islanders' health. 

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, asked where President Bush 
stands on Vieques, said the president's concern was "making sure 
that American troops are able to carry out their missions." 

"And the line of responsibility for making certain that our 
troops are able to carry out their missions falls to the 
Department of Defense," added Fleischer, who spoke at a briefing 
Monday. 

More than 160 protesters have been arrested since Thursday. Many 
were charged Monday with trespassing and ordered to pay bail 
ranging from $3,000 for first-time offenders on Vieques to 
$10,000 for those convicted in previous protests. 

Among them were environmental lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr., 
Mexican-American actor Edward James Olmos, New York labor leader 
Dennis Rivera, U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez and Puerto Rico 
opposition Sen. Norma Burgos. 

For decades, the Navy owned the eastern end of the island, which 
includes the bombing range, and the western end, where it had a 
munitions warehouse. Sandwiched between the two is an area with 
9,400 civilians. 

On Monday, the Navy relinquished its 8,100 acres in the west as 
part of an agreement reached last year with the White House to 
quell rising tensions. It gave 4,248 acres to the Vieques 
municipality, 3,100 acres to the U.S. Department of the Interior 
and 800 to the private Puerto Rico Conservation Trust. 

But protesters - who have put themselves in the line of fire of 
the inert bombs to delay exercises daily since they began Friday 
- continued demonstrating, calling for the Navy to leave for 
good. 

There has been opposition to the Navy on Vieques since it took 
over two-thirds of the island during World War II, forcing about 
two-thirds of residents off their land. 

Simmering resentment exploded after two off-target bombs killed a 
civilian guard on the range in April 1999, uniting Puerto Ricans 
in protest and fanning anti-U.S. sentiment. 

Demonstrators occupied the range for a year until federal 
marshals removed them and the White House brokered an agreement 
under which the Navy now uses only inert ammunition. 

Also under the agreement, Vieques residents are to vote in 
November on whether the Navy should stay on the island or leave 
by May 2003. 

All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 9  DOE declassifies nuclear test yields 

  [Las Vegas Review-Journal] 
  
Tuesday, May 01, 2001
 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal 

NORTH LAS VEGAS 

Department of Energy officials said Monday they have declassified 
information about the yields of below-ground nuclear tests in 
Nevada, data that researchers will be able to use in tracking 
groundwater contamination. 

The once-secret data will be available in a report this summer, 
covering six areas at the Nevada Test Site, according to a 
statement from the agency's Nevada Operations Office in North Las 
Vegas. 

"This is an important declassification action because it will 
help build public trust and it will permit a more detailed 
explanation by this agency of the selection of corrective action 
units and the extent to which remediation, if any, is required," 
according to Nevada Operations Manager Kathy Carlson. 

Full-scale nuclear weapons tests were conducted at the test site, 
65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, from 1951 through 1992 with most 
underground tests occurring after 1963. 

This story is located at:
http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/May-01-Tue-2001/news/15994428.html
   
*****************************************************************
 10  U.S. inspectors to look for Russian nukes

WorldNetDaily: 

 
 MAY 1
                                    
CAN MOSCOW BE TRUSTED?
 U.S. inspectors to look for Russian nukes
 Weapons thought to be hidden in enclave of Kaliningrad
 
By Jon Dougherty
 © 2001 WorldNetDaily.com 

A team of U.S. weapons inspectors has arrived in Kaliningrad, 
Russia, as part of a mission to verify that Moscow has kept its 
word and has not moved tactical nuclear weapons into the area. 

The inspection comes after U.S. press reports in January that 
Russia had moved tactical nuclear weapons to a military base in 
the enclave, following threats to do so if NATO's eastward 
expansion continued. 

Though Moscow has denied the weapons were transferred, U.S. 
reports said satellite imagery showed the weapons moving by ship 
and rail to the area. Officials were not able to distinguish the 
type of weapons being deployed, but speculated they were tactical 
battlefield weapons. 

The U.S. inspection is the fifth conducted within the framework 
of a treaty signed by the former USSR and the United States at 
the end of the Cold War. Previous inspections were held in 1992, 
1996, 1998 and 1999. The current inspection is the last one under 
the framework agreement. 

Russian officials said the U.S. team would be scrupulous in its 
examination of the Kaliningrad facility. 

"It seems that the U.S. wants to confirm a scandalous statement 
made by the Western press concerning the deployment of nuclear 
weapons in the Kaliningrad region," an unnamed Russian defense 
official was quoted as saying yesterday by Itar-TASS. 

The Washington Times originally reported on the transfer of 
nuclear weapons to Kaliningrad, which is a major seaport located 
between Poland and Lithuania. It is a major base for Russian 
naval and ground forces. It is also home to Baltic Fleet 
headquarters. 

The original movement of the weapons was detected in June 2000. 

Some defense officials said the weapons are probably for use on a 
new short-range missile known as the Toka. A Toka was test-fired 
on April 18 in Kaliningrad. It has a range of about 44 miles, the 
Times reported. 

The paper said U.S. spy satellites were able to pinpoint the 
exact location of the weapons in a February follow-up report. 

The weapons were transferred via ship to a special nuclear 
storage bunker near a military airfield in Kaliningrad, said the 
paper. 

*Jon E. Doughertyis a staff reporter and columnist for 
WorldNetDaily, and author of the special report, "Election 2000: 
How the Military Vote Was Suppressed."*

© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com, Inc. webmaster@worldnetdaily.com
*****************************************************************
 11  Russian nuclear submarine towed to port 

A Russian nuclear-powered submarine was towed to port this month 
after an apparently minor incident in the Barents Sea.
 
  Accident in 1998   
  
  People in Severomorsk and Murmansk took iodine pills after 
rumours of a serious accident on one of the Northern Fleet's 
nuclear-powered submarines outside the Kola Peninsula in the 
Barents Sea. &nbsp;more &raquo;  

Vladislav Nikiforov , 2001-04-30 19:11

A Russian Victor-III class nuclear submarine was towed to port 
after an apparently minor incident in the Barents Sea on April 
14th 2001. 

"We registered that a Victor-III class submarine was towed to 
port...there was nothing to indicate that it was a serious 
accident," said commander Per Hoiby, a spokesman for the 
Norwegian armed forces. He told Reuters that the submarine had 
been trailing "smoke or exhaust...It could, for instance, have 
been a problem with a diesel generator." Nuclear submarines may 
use diesel generators when nuclear installation is out of order. 

The Russian Northern Fleet vice-chief Igor Dygalo said that it 
was “sudden naval exercises” to train towing the submarine in 
emergency situation. He told Gazeta.ru that Russian navy vessels 
and helicopters also took part in the exercises, although it was 
completely unexpected for them. On April 15th, immediately after 
“sudden exercises” the submarine went back to the training field 
of the Northern Fleet in Barents Sea, Dygalo said. However, the 
Northern Fleet press-centre said the exercises were finished on 
April 14th, and all the submarines returned to their bases. 
Victor-III submarines have their homebase at Bolshaya Lopatka Bay 
in Zapadnaya Litsa, the western part of the Kola Peninsula. 

“I do not remember if the submarine went into the dock. It is 
quite possible that it did not as the crew was scheduled to 
fulfil many other tasks. However, I want to stress that 
malfunction submarine would never be allowed to leave the base," 
Igor Dygalo told Gazeta.ru. Joint navy exercises of the Northern 
and Baltic Fleets took place from the 9th till the 14th of April. 
15 ships, 4 submarines, aircraft and helicopters of both fleets 
took part in the exercises. The emergency towing operation of the 
submarine was invented by the Russian navy headquarters before 
the exercises. Dygalo added that he was glad the exercises had 
been taken for real as it means the highly realistic conditions 
of the exercises. 

Similar situation off the coast of the Kola Peninsula was in May 
1998, when according to the navy officials, the Northern Fleet 
units were engaged in a military exercise training for an 
emergency situation on a nuclear submarine. The officials assured 
the reporters that nothing but an exercise was underway. “What we 
have documented was a Delta-class submarine which surfaced and 
then went into one of the bays," Knut Roar Bakken, 
lieutenant-colonel in the Norwegian Military General 
Headquarters, told the Norwegian daily VG in the afternoon of May 
8th 1998. The available information suggested that the incident 
occurred near Rybachiy Peninsula on May 5th 1998. The cause of 
the incident was presumably a malfunction in the submarine's 
missile shaft. The submarine then went to one of the bases on the 
Kola Peninsula, presumably Vidyaevo or Gadzhievo. Northern Fleet 
officials had to admit the accident later. 

Victor class attack submarines are designed to target enemy 
submarines. The Victor-III class submarines have two pressurised 
water reactors, and capable of carrying SS-N-21, SS-N-15 or 
SS-N-16 nuclear tipped missiles. The nuclear warheads were 
removed from such submarines in the early 90’s. The crew consists 
of 70 servicemen.
   
      Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge 
Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: 
webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 
38 38 62  * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway Reuse and 
reprint recommended provided source is stated       
*****************************************************************
 12  Mayak plant to increase Cobalt-60 export
 

 Mayak plant plans to double isotope export to fund manufacturing 
of nuclear weapon components.
 
Rashid Alimov , 2001-04-30 18:54

Mayak plant has a conversion program to produce isotopes for 
civil purposes, Mayak deputy director for reactor-isotope 
production, Valery Asnovsky said in an interview with local 
weekly PrO Mayak. 

Mayak is one of the few producer of cobalt-60 isotope in Russia. 
More than 90% of the isotope is being exported, bringing in the 
much-desired cash, Asnovsky said. 

In the year 2000 Ministry of Defence held a session on prospects 
of radioisotope industry. One of the Mayak departments had 
prepared documents for the discussion, mentioning Russia's 
keeping only 25% of the world isotope market, while producing 
enough cobalt-60. Minatom was given a task of providing about 40% 
of the cobalt-60 market. Other isotopes were also mentioned. 

Reactors of the factory no. 23 may increase cobalt-60 
manufacturing by 1.5 to 2 times in comparison to today's rates, 
Asnovsky said. In order to boost the production, Ludmila reactor 
is planned for repair. Ludmila has power of 1,000 MW and is also 
used for production of tritium and various other isotopes of 
military application, including 238Pu. Another reactor, Ruslan, 
went into operation some time between the end of 1948 and 1951, 
and was active until about 1980. Towards the end of the 1980s, it 
was rebuilt to a light water reactor with a capacity of 1,000 MW. 
Ruslan is used to produce tritium for the Soviet hydrogen bombs 
and specific isotopes such as 238Pu along with civilian products. 

But productivity is limited by the need to make the components 
for nuclear weapon in the same reactors. "If we could push up 
isotope sales 2 times, we could do without the state subsidy for 
the defence product," Asnovsky said. Besides cobalt-60, Mayak 
produces other radioactive isotopes, e.g. tritium, helium-3 (at 
the factory no. 156), and molybdenum. Molybdenum has been 
produced in Obninsk, but now one reactor there is being shut 
down, and another set under repair, Asnovsky said. 

Asnovsky mentioned Mayak's contract with Leningrad NPP: "they 
will sell us cobalt, and we'll sell it further." In August 2000 
Leningrad NPP was granted Ministry for Trade licence for 
exporting isotopes based on cobalt-60. That was the first licence 
in Russia's nuclear industry, permitting a NPP to carry out 
export independently. 

Radioactive isotope 60Co is used mainly in medicine as a 
sterilizer.
   
      Publisher: , President: Frederic Hauge Information: , 
Technical contact: Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 
38 62  * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway Reuse and 
reprint recommended provided source is stated       

*****************************************************************
 13  No time to waste on FFTF reprieve
 
Published May 1, 2001
 
The reactor that shouldn't die has gotten another important reprieve.
 
But three more months of study into whether the Fast Flux Test 
Facility should be restarted, in part for medical isotope 
production, will be for naught, unless the Department of Energy 
delves into market interest in the reactor.
 
Last week, at the behest of a drug company, researchers and 
Tri-Citians including U.S. Rep. Doc Hastings, Energy Secretary 
Spencer Abraham decided to put off FFTF's permanent shutdown for 
three months. During that time, his agency will look at possible 
uses for the reactor and analyze the costs and challenges to 
operating the reactor.
 
With his decision, Abraham agreed to review his predecessor's 
perhaps too-hasty decision in the waning days of the Clinton 
administration to shut down FFTF.
 
Regrettably, the information Energy Department officials are 
seeking - private and international interest and financial 
support for the reactor's operations - was not part of the Energy 
Department's environmental impact study into how the reactor 
could fit into its mission.
 
Some of that work was started by a now 2-year-old Pacific 
Northwest National Laboratory study, which concluded FFTF was 
needed, that enough "core" missions from the federal government 
exist to support its restart, and that eventually international 
research projects and medical isotope production could underwrite 
a significant portion of its operating costs. That study helped 
to prompt an environmental study into FFTF's possible restart. 
But the EIS did not adequately follow through on the PNNL work.
 
Besides helping to meet a growing domestic need for medical 
isotopes for the treatment and diagnosis of diseases, FFTF could 
be used for nuclear energy research and development. That latter 
possibility is particularly important given the current energy 
crisis and the potential role nuclear power could play in 
alleviating it. An independent advisory committee informed the 
Energy Department that the nation's nuclear resources are 
inadequate and, noting FFTF's unique capabilities, called it an 
irreplaceable asset.
 
Also, there's strong evidence Energy Department officials based 
their original shutdown decision on projections that drastically 
understated demand for medical isotopes.
 
Opponents of FFTF's restart say the three-month suspension will 
needlessly take money away from other, higher priorities. They 
could be right if Energy Department officials merely go through 
the motions of collecting more data.
 
But FFTF's unique capabilities warrant a thorough study so the 
nation won't make a mistake by discarding an asset with great 
potential.
 
Hastings proposed an interesting idea that could finally 
determine with certainty whether enough financial backers can be 
found to help pay for FFTF's operations. Hastings suggested the 
Energy Department put out a request for proposals from public and 
private agencies and businesses, which are serious about using 
FFTF. If there is enough interest and, most importantly, enough 
financing, the case might well be made for FFTF's restart.
 
For this extra 90 days to mean anything, the Energy Department 
will have to do a better job of assessing all of the interest in 
FFTF. That includes a thorough probe of present and potential 
medical, energy and other missions for the reactor.
 
FFTF has three extra months. That time, and money, should not be 
wasted. What's your opinon? 

Copyright 2001 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This 
*****************************************************************
 14  DOE sets expanded nuke job for the lab

 Pendulum swings to work in plutonium pits 
*April 28, 2001*
 By Glenn Roberts Jr.
STAFF WRITER 

LIVERMORE -- The Energy Department has plans to expand work at 
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory in the evaluation of plutonium pits 
-- the imploding spheres that drive hydrogen bomb explosions. 

John Belluardo, an Energy Department spokesman, said Livermore 
already has begun some work in the surveillance of the pits, 
which rest inside thermonuclear warheads. 

Formerly the work had resided entirely at Los Alamos Laboratory, 
Livermore's sister lab near Santa Fe, N.M. The shift of some pit 
work is "primarily due to the fact that Livermore already has the 
personnel and technical capabilities required to perform pit 
surveillance," Belluardo said. 

Livermore researchers are "doing some of it but not all," he 
said. 

"Additional pit surveillance work is being planned for 
Livermore," he added, but there are no plans to permanently 
transfer any employees from Los Alamos to the Livermore Lab to 
support the pit surveillance work. 

Pit surveillance is part of the Energy Department's Stockpile 
Stewardship Program, a research program intended to ensure the 
safety and effectiveness of nuclear weapons. 

Program researchers study the effects of aging on components 
through experiments and computer simulations. 

Livermore Lab scientists have worked with Los Alamos researchers 
to manufacture a form of plutonium that ages about 10 times 
faster than plutonium used in weapons. Experiments with this 
plutonium will assist researchers in measuring the reliability of 
decades-old plutonium pits in the stockpile. 

The transfer of the plutonium work was first publicly disclosed 
in 1999, when Energy Department officials discussed a plan, 
called the "Mega Strategy," to balance the nuclear workload at 
weapons labs by transferring some responsibilities from Los 
Alamos Lab to Livermore Lab. 

Under this proposed strategy, the Energy Department would "move 
promptly" to transfer plutonium pit surveillance work to 
Livermore Lab and transfer responsibility of a cruise 
missile-launched warhead, the W-80, from Los Alamos to Livermore. 

The transfer of the W-80 responsibility and the addition of some 
plutonium pit surveillance work was announced this month by 
Livermore Lab and Energy Department officials. 

Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment 
criticized Energy Department officials, claiming that they failed 
to inform the public about the plans. 

"The (Energy Department's) conduct frustrates Tri-Valley CAREs' 
efforts to educate the public regarding major activities 
throughout the nuclear weapons complex," said Marylia Kelley, 
executive director of the group.     <IMG

NewsChoice.com
*****************************************************************
 15  Iraq seeks Gulf war uranium check

Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | 

Paul Brown in Kosovo
Monday April 30, 2001
The Guardian 		
 		
Iraq and Kuwait have separately asked for an independent 
assessment of the health hazards to local people and soldiers of 
the depleted uranium ammunition, used in battle for the first 
time in the Gulf war 10 years ago. The requests were revealed 
yesterday by Pekka Haavisto, head of the Balkans depleted uranium 
assessment team, who has been asked to take on the job His team 
has just completed an investigation for the UN Environment 
Programme of the nine tonnes of depleted uranium used in the Nato 
assault on Serbian forces in Kosovo. The mineral is used to 
reinforce the tips of armour-piercing munitions. 

In the Gulf war, 350 tonnes were used in attacks on Iraqi armour, 
but no independent study of its dangers has ever been made, 
partly because of Nato resistance. Both Iraq and Kuwait have a 
potentially deadly problem of uncleared DU ammunition. 

Iraq asked the UN secretary general Kofi Annan to help, and 
Kuwait approached the International Atomic Energy Agency in 
Vienna. 

US and British veterans of the war to expel Iraq from Kuwait 
suspect that depleted uranium is the cause of Gulf war syndrome, 
the unexplained illnesses suffered by many of those who served in 
the conflict. Iraq has blamed it for a rash of childhood cancers. 

The team's findings in Kosovo have gone a long way to dispel 
fears that the mildly radioactive ammunition will have a 
long-term effect on the health of local people. 

But in the Gulf it may be a different story. The hot, dry climate 
and the volume of ammunition used may mean there is a far greater 
and continuing hazard. 

Dr Haavisto gave his final report on the Kosovo study at the 
Djakova garrison, near the Albanian border, where 300 DU rounds 
were fired. The garrison is one of 120 sites in Kosovo where such 
ammunition was used. 

Criticising Nato for delays in telling his team where DU was 
used, he said it was clear that some shells had been found and 
removed before it arrived on the scene. 

Some rounds had penetrated concrete foundations and were buried 
deep in the soil beneath. Even so, detectors at the point of 
entry registered 15 times the normal level of background 
radiation. 

Dr Haavisto said research in Kuwait and Iraq would be hampered by 
the passage of time. The large number of tanks destroyed in the 
Gulf war by depleted uranium rounds meant that a great deal of 
toxic dust had been released. Since there was virtually no rain, 
the dust could still be blowing around, he said. Until the team 
arrived it was impossible to tell how much of a threat threat 
remained. "But radioactivity does not go away," he said. "We 
should be able to find enough evidence to try and assess the 
present risks to health, and something of the past." 

There was no such dust to worry about in Kosovo because the team 
had not found no armour had actually been hit with such rounds. 
Most of the armour-piercing rounds had burrowed into the ground, 
probably as much as two metres deep. Where ammunition was known 
to be buried, as at Djakova, any risk could be removed by 
covering the area with concrete. 

He recommended the local authorities to test the water supply 
routinely to see if there was depleted uranium present. It was 
not known how long the uranium would take to seep through the 
soil but it could appear in the water supply in 10 years. 

This summer Dr Haavisto's team hopes to investigate Bosnia, where 
three tonnes of the ammunition was used five years ago. The main 
purpose was to assess claims of a higher incidence of cancer in 
some villages, and to check the water supply. 

He also criticised the US because traces of uranium 236 - an 
isotope found only in spent nuclear fuel - and plutonium had been 
found in the Kosovo armour-piercing rounds. The tiny amounts did 
not increase the risk to local people, but it was "a little bit 
alarming". 

             Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 
*****************************************************************
 16  Bringing private sector into ORNL development gets positive reaction
 
April 30, 2001
 
By Frank Munger News-Sentinel senior writer

UT-Battelle officials were pleased with the turnout of developers 
and construction contractors at last week's pre-bid conference on 
the commercial project to build three new research facilities at 
Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 

Their intent, of course, is to use private-sector investments as 
a way to accelerate lab modernization and supplement the building 
projects being charted with funds from the Department of Energy 
and the state of Tennessee. It would be almost impossible to 
construct 10 or more new facilities and refurbish others if 
dependent solely on federal budget requests. There's just no way 
ORNL modernization could achieve that kind of short-term priority 
in the Energy Department's budget -- especially with hundreds of 
millions of dollars already committed to Oak Ridge for the 
Spallation Neutron Source. 

So, UT-Battelle turned to private financing as an option, 
assuming some risks along the way. If, for instance, DOE should 
decide not to lease the new facilities, then UT-Battelle 
Development Corp. -- a not-for-profit entity set up as a buffer 
between the private developers and the federal government -- 
would have to find other tenants or eat the costs. 

Battelle used a similar formula during a building campaign a 
decade ago at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Washington 
state. 

"The exact model that we used at PNNL was a little different than 
what we used here," said Jeff Smith, ORNL's deputy director for 
operations, who worked at Pacific Northwest before coming to Oak 
Ridge. "I think you'll find that Battelle has done private-sector 
facilities development for commercial operations at a lot of 
places around the world ... and each one of them was a little 
different. So it's not a cookie-cutter approach. In this case, 
obviously, getting access to the federal property was a key 
issue." 

DOE is transferring (via quitclaim deed) 6.6 acres of federal 
property to the UT-Battelle Development Corp., which in turn will 
lease the land to the private developer that wins the 
three-building contract up for grabs this summer. The developer 
then will lease the space back to the not-for-profit corporation, 
which will sublease it to ORNL/DOE for use in the lab's research 
missions. 

If that sounds confusing, well, it is. 

Meanwhile, among those attending the pre-bid conference was Jim 
Hall, the former manager of DOE's Oak Ridge Operations. 

He now is regional vice president for The Washington Group, which 
has shown interest in bidding on the ORNL project. 

Hall applauded UT-Battelle and DOE for pushing for private 
investment at the national laboratory, bemoaning the fact that he 
never got that accomplished during his tenure. 

"This was something we wanted to try to do but couldn't get it 
out of the Office of Science," he said. 

Hall said Al Trivelpiece, then director of ORNL, and Martha 
Krebs, then director of DOE's Office of Science, refused to 
support the initiative to have outside entities finance 
construction of lab facilities. 

"We've been saying for years that the private sector needs to 
participate and be a contributor to moving the lab forward, so 
this is a step up," he said. 

The ORNL modernization program includes an overhaul of Building 
4500 North, which currently houses the lab's top administrators 
and many of its researchers. 

The refurbishment, as it's now planned, will eliminate Wigner 
Auditorium -- the lab's largest auditorium -- which will be 
converted to office space, record storage or some other use. But 
UT-Battelle is taking steps to make sure there are plenty of 
places to congregate in the future. 

For instance, the Spallation Neutron Source (under construction 
on nearby Chestnut Ridge) is expected to have an auditorium with 
about 350 seats. That's downscaled from an earlier plan for a 
600-seat showplace, but it still should be large enough to 
accommodate major scientific meetings. 

Tim Myrick of UT-Battelle said lab planners are looking at 
incorporating smaller auditoriums in other new facilities, such 
as the Research Support Center and possibly at one or more of the 
joint institutes on the drawing board. 

"We want to have the right mix of size and flexibility, but we 
don't want to compete with what's already available in Oak Ridge 
and Knoxville," he said. 

The Oak Ridge Center for Advanced Studies, which is being funded 
by the state of Tennessee, will give ORNL a great tool to conduct 
virtual classrooms that link the laboratory with its partner 
universities. 

It also gives the Oak Ridge laboratory a great home for a 
think-tank to tackle important contemporary issues in science. 

"You might gather people to do a major policy study," said Lee 
Riedinger, ORNL's deputy director for science and technology. 
"You might gather experts from the universities, from the lab, to 
come together for two weeks or a month for a major study on 
electricity deregulation or global warming or the next 
radioactive beam accelerator." 

The center also will become a place for ongoing workshops across 
a broad range of scientific topics, Riedinger said. 

The first of those is being planned for August, when Reinhold 
Mann (director of the lab's Life Sciences Division) will lead a 
high-level discussion of the "New Biology" -- what happens now 
that the human genome has been sequenced. 

"That's the kind of thing that ORCAS should be doing - bringing 
people together to talk about where science and technology is 
headed," Riedinger said. 

Since the new building won't be available, the initial workshop 
probably will be held in Pollard Auditorium or somewhere else 
off-site, he said. 

Senior writer Frank Munger can be reached at 482-9213 or by 
e-mail at twig1@knoxnews.infi.net. This weekly column on science 
and technology also is available on our Web site at 
http://www.knoxnews.com/science/munger/.   
*****************************************************************
 17  Pressure builds for radiation medicine
 
But state not sold on disaster pill
 By Beth Daley, Globe Staff, 4/30/2001 

very Duxbury school nurse knows the drill in case of a radiation 
release at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station:
 
Send envelopes filled with tiny white pills to every homeroom. 
Teachers then will dole out one potassium iodide tablet per child 
to prevent thyroid damage in case of exposure to radiation.
 
The thyroid gland is highly susceptible to radiation damage, but 
Massachusetts public health officials and federal and industry 
officials have opposed such stockpiling for years because they 
say it distracts residents from the most important task during a 
nuclear accident: leaving.
 
But after six tries, a bill pending before the Legislature to 
provide the pills to residents near power plants may have its 
best shot at passage this year. 

The federal government agreed several months ago to pay for 
states to stockpile the pills. While still opposed, Massachusetts 
public health officials have also slightly relaxed their stance, 
giving the public information about how to get potassium iodide. 

Duxbury's decision to buy 22,400 of the pills has stirred 
interest from other towns near plants across the state.
 
''What I want is the ability for residents upon a nuclear 
situation to take a pill which has been shown to protect the 
thyroid,'' said Representative Vincent A. Pedone, the Worcester 
Democrat who cosponsored the bill with Representative Carol A. 
Donovan, Democrat of Woburn.
 
''I don't care who is within 10 miles of a nuclear disaster; I'm 
pretty sure they will want to evacuate,'' Pedone said. ''This 
isn't going to convince anyone to stay. It's just added 
protection.''
 
The thyroid gland absorbs the potassium iodide from the pills, 
and the radioactive iodine can't be absorbed. There are few side 
effects, health officials say. 

During the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979, federal 
officials made a phone call in the middle of the night to get the 
drug manufactured, because they couldn't find it anywhere. The 
pills were not needed, but the event sparked an ongoing 
discussion of how to protect residents. 

In 1986, the Polish government distributed millions of doses of 
potassium iodide after the accident at the Chernobyl reactor in 
neighboring Ukraine. Scientists say the pills helped reduce 
thyroid cancer rates. Most European countries now stockpile the 
pills. 

But stockpiling has long been controversial in the United States. 
Nuclear industry officials say that it gives a false sense of 
security, and that the pill can cause an allergic reaction. 

Potassium iodide ''protects one organ in the body,'' said Tom 
Sowdon, chief scientist for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station. ''If I 
believed people would understand it is not a magic pill, not 
delay evacuation, and not misadminister the drug, and there would 
be no adverse reaction, I'd recommend it.''
 
Officials with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have also 
struggled with what to do about the pill, changing stances over 
the years until finally deciding late last year to pay for 
stockpiles. The pills cost about 18 cents each. 

Supporters of the Massachusetts bill say the pills should be 
available to 565,406 Massachusetts residents: those who live in 
the vicinity of the Pilgrim plant in Plymouth, the power plant in 
Seabrook, N.H., and the Vermont Yankee plant in Vernon, Vt. That 
figure includes Cape Cod residents who are downwind from the 
Pilgrim plant. 

Massachusetts public health officials say it still doesn't make 
sense to stockpile the drug, even though they do it for emergency 
workers. It would be difficult to distribute the pills on such a 
wide scale and ensure that they remain potent after years of 
sitting on shelves, they say. 

In Duxbury, there has been little controversy since Town Meeting 
last year overwhelmingly voted to spend $5,000 to stockpile the 
pills. Mary Lampert, who spearheaded the effort and is a 
supporter of the statewide bill, says the pills are merely a 
precaution against an accident everyone hopes never occurs.
 
''We have seat belts in our cars and fire extinguishers in our 
homes; likewise, we should have potassium iodide,'' she said. 
''We hope never to need any of these things, but not to have them 
would be foolish.''
 
This story ran on page 01 of the Boston Globe on 4/30/2001. © 
Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company. [ | Easy-print version ] 
*****************************************************************
 18  Turner's Anti-Nuke Group Seeks to Make Clear That Threat Exists
 

*NewsMax.com Wires*

*Monday, April 30, 2001* Charlie Curtis faces a daunting task. 
His mission as the full-time manager of Ted Turner's Nuclear 
Threat Initiative is to create from nothing an international 
organization whose influence will be felt from Washington to 
Moscow and - who knows? - even the Indian subcontinent and maybe 
the Middle East. But first he had to find office space, get the 
phones hooked up, hire some people and get connected to the 
Internet. "A lot of people talk about starting an organization 
from scratch," he said in a recent interview. "And we are in the 
scratch stage." 

Not for long. 

Turner, the Atlanta billionaire who came up with the idea for the 
new organization - and whose gift of $250 million over five years 
is paying for it - is a man who likes quick action. Prime 
Washington office space has been found, 12,000 square feet on the 
seventh floor of an office building in the 1700 block of 
Pennsylvania Avenue, a block from the Old Executive Office 
Building. What Curtis calls a "core staff" has been hired, 
including three vice presidents and a senior vice president who 
will be Curtis' deputy. The phones are connected, everyone's on 
the Web, and the initial directions of the organization are 
starting to emerge. 

Judging from the titles of the new officers, the organization 
will focus at first on trying to stop the spread of nuclear 
materials and knowledge from Russia and other former Soviet 
countries to other nations or organizations; on reducing the 
threats posed by biological weapons; and on developing a campaign 
to convince people that the threat of nuclear disaster did not 
end when the Berlin Wall came down. 

The direction of the organization should snap into sharper focus 
on Monday, when its board holds its first substantive meeting. 
Curtis said he does not expect large expenditures to be 
authorized until a second meeting, scheduled for October. What he 
does expect Monday, he said, is "program direction" - 
instructions from the board to flesh out proposals that will be 
ready for funding in the fall. 

"We want to make prudent investments," he said. 

Turner railed against the dangers of nuclear weapons for years 
but, like many others, thought the danger had eased with the end 
of the Cold War. His attention was drawn back to the issue in 
1998 when India and Pakistan each fired missiles capable of 
carrying nuclear warheads. 

More than a year ago, he began working on creating an 
organization to reduce the threat, enlisting the help of former 
U.S. Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), who is known for his expertise on 
military matters. In January, the two men announced that they 
were creating the Nuclear Threat Initiative. 

Nunn and Turner are co-chairmen of the board of directors, and 
Nunn is also the organization's chief executive officer, 
retaining his law practice but devoting half his time to the new 
initiative. The former senator has immersed himself in the 
details of setting up the initiative, Curtis said, doing 
everything from interviewing job candidates --- more than 180 
applications were received --- to supervising the selection of 
telephones. 

"He is very much the chief executive officer of this 
organization," Curtis said.

 A little-known chief officer 

But the chief operating officer, the man who will be at the helm 
100 percent of the time, is another member of the initiative's 
board --- Curtis, a 61-year-old lawyer and former federal 
official who has been little known outside government circles. 

Born in Pennsylvania and raised in Massachusetts, Curtis has been 
in Washington for 36 years --- 18 1/2 in government and 16 in 
private practice. As deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of 
Energy from 1994 to 1997, he had responsibility for the national 
laboratories and the nation's nuclear weapons complex. During 
that period, he helped establish a program designed to help 
ensure that nuclear materials, including plutonium and highly 
enriched uranium, in former Soviet laboratories were accounted 
for and secure. And the department also began efforts to reduce 
the prospect that nuclear know-how, in the person of newly 
unemployed Soviet scientists, would spread to rogue states or 
terrorist organizations offering much-needed jobs. 

Curtis is also a former chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission and a former counsel to the House Commerce Committee. 
He came to Turner's attention when he was hired in 1999 as chief 
operating officer of the U.N. Foundation, the organization set up 
to disburse Turner's 10-year, $1 billion grant to United Nations 
projects. 

"Charlie is the best public policy mind I've ever worked with," 
said Tim Wirth, president of the U.N. Foundation, who spent 25 
years in politics and government. "I've never known anyone as 
good as Charlie." 

Curtis, Wirth said, is unflappable, universally respected, the 
rare person who is able to design policy, execute it, build 
consensus and lead. 

Wirth said he spent two years trying to persuade Curtis to join 
the U.N. Foundation. Curtis finally accepted, then got to know 
Turner - who was so impressed he hired him away within months.

 Sounding the alarm 

Some observers say that the Nuclear Threat Initiative's most 
significant contribution would be in finding ways to inform the 
public that nuclear dangers still exist. Opposition to nuclear 
weapons, which once motivated thousands of protesters, has faded 
over the last decade. 

"They can build the political will that is needed to de-alert the 
thousands of weapons that are now on a hair-trigger approach to 
what could be nuclear oblivion," said John Anderson, the former 
independent presidential candidate who now is head of the World 
Federalist Association, which is dedicated to establishing a 
world government. 

And some who work for nonprofit advocacy groups had expected the 
Nuclear Threat Initiative to resemble Turner's U.N. Foundation 
and work primarily to grant money to organizations already 
tackling nuclear issues. 

But, like Nunn and Curtis, all the members of the initiative's 
"core staff" have deep government experience, mostly in the 
Department of Energy, the Department of Defense, or both. And 
officers of the initiative have made clear that the organization, 
while it might make grants to other organizations, will work 
largely on developing its own programs. 

Curtis said the initiative will open an office in Moscow by the 
end of this year and later, perhaps, in regions of the world that 
are likely to be nuclear hotspots. 

"Our co-chairmen are very intent on making this an international 
endeavor," Curtis said. "Over time, we will both grow our board 
with greater international participation, and we are likely to 
establish a physical presence in other countries." 

The initiative appears likely, as well, to work on an area that 
has long been of concern to Nunn - securing the nuclear weapons 
and knowledge left untended by the downsizing of Russia's nuclear 
weapons program. 

As a senator, Nunn worked with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) to set 
up a program under which the U.S. government works with Russian 
officials - whose government has neither the wherewithal nor the 
will to accomplish the task on its own - to make the former 
Soviet arsenal safer. And last month, he hosted international 
experts at a Sam Nunn Policy Forum at Georgia Tech on, among 
other issues, how to help the thousands of unemployed nuclear 
scientists and engineers in Russia's 10 "closed nuclear cities." 

This early direction by the initiative surprises Stephen 
Schwartz, publisher of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 

"When I heard Ted talking about this at the annual meeting of the 
Physicians for Social Responsibility . . . what this was intended 
to do in part was to provide seed money, if you will, for a 
significant amount of new funding in an area that has been 
traditionally underfunded," Schwartz said. 

But Schwartz said the initiative seems to have evolved and will 
probably "act as an adjunct" to government-funded programs such 
as Nunn-Lugar. And he said he is not sure this is the best way to 
put Turner's money to use. 

"I'm sensing that it is evolving away from Ted's vision into 
something more along the lines of what Sen. Nunn and Charlie 
Curtis and other people in the foundation think is doable and 
practical," Schwartz said. 

But there is no disagreement between Curtis and Schwartz that the 
nuclear dangers are great and the work, whatever form it takes, 
is important. 

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is the creator of the 
Doomsday Clock - a theoretical measure of the world's nuclear 
danger. In 1991, as the Soviet Union disintegrated, the clock 
read 17 minutes to midnight. But since 1998 it has been set at 
nine minutes to midnight, signifying greater risks. 

"We still have plans to incinerate millions of people, and people 
don't understand that," Schwartz said. 

And Curtis, asked why he took the job, said nuclear and other 
weapons of mass destruction pose the biggest threat to U.S. 
security. 

"When you come to a certain age you focus on future generations," 
said Curtis, who turned 61 on Friday. "And this is kind of the 
responsibility of our generation."

 Copyright 2001 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution 

    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************