***************************************************************** 05/04/01 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 9.108 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS 1 Radioactive waste disposal program may be scrapped 2 Bill would extend nuclear waste storage at Prairie Island 3 Lawmakers want to end storage limits on Prairie Island dry casks 4 Bill will be introduced to extend life of nuclear plant 5 Statement by Prairie Island Tribal Council Regarding Possible 6 Prune Envirocare 7 Nevadans mindful of nuke power 'renaissance' 8 Columbia County readies for nuclear waste transfer 9 Amended waste dump bill may benefit Simmons firm 10 Editorial: Half an energy policy 11 Nuclear power comes "clean" in U.S. ad campaign 12 Nuclear renaissance ... 13 Scientech Issue Alert: The Nuclear Future 14 Build more nuclear power plants 15 IAEA Releases Nuclear Power Statistics for 2000 - Press Release 01/07 16 New leukaemia cluster in Chepstow 17 Landmines in your lungs 18 Las Vegas council briefs for May 3, 2001 19 Nuclear waste documents a major step 20 Power company pitches new generation of nuclear plants 21 Over and over 22 Yucca still key in DOE reports: Studies may pave way for NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS 1 Federal budget cuts may delay waste-cleanup projects at Hanford 2 Glassification project faces more delays 3 Plutonium shipment won't affect Pantex 4 Chao: Compensation program near 5 Chao: Compensation may begin in early fall - By Joe Walker 6 Retired workers take wait-and-see attitude on plan 7 Claims offices to open near nuclear weapons plants 8 Special claims office to open June 15 at Nevada Test Site 9 Center planned for ex-workers at test site 10 Fallout ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Radioactive waste disposal program may be scrapped [charlotte.com] Published Friday, May 4, 2001 *Associated Press * AIKEN -- Rising costs and policy changes have the Energy Department reconsidering a multimillion-dollar plan to treat a highly radioactive solution at the Savannah River Site, an agency official said. "We're evaluating some alternatives to our current disposition program," said Sachiko McAlhany, an assistant manager for the Energy Department at SRS. To dispose of sludge left over from making nuclear bombs, the plant converts the waste into glass. The plan was to ship the glass to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, where scientists would use it to create other radioactive materials for cancer research, McAlhany told the SRS Citizens Advisory Board on Wednesday. The 25-member board is made up of Georgia and S.C. residents and gives input on SRS' waste management and environmental remediation operations. McAlhany said Oak Ridge no longer wants the material, nor do any other research labs. The agency is considering treating the solution as radioactive waste, using existing treatment plants at SRS. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, which advises the Energy Department on safety issues at nuclear-weapons sites such as SRS, has called the americium and curium solution a "high radiation and contamination hazard." Some members of the public questioned whether existing SRS plants could treat the solution safely, but McAlhany said it needs more study. She said the government has spent $67 million on the program, which had been expected to cost about $40 million. The latest cost estimate is $129million, and SRS contractor Westinghouse Savannah River Co. has asked to escalate that figure by another $68 million, McAlhany said. ***************************************************************** 2 Bill would extend nuclear waste storage at Prairie Island Published: Friday, May 4, 2001 DETAILS Rep. Loren Jennings, DFL-Rush City, said the bill would not be voted on this year, but is being introduced now to allow plenty of opportunity for public discussion before lawmakers consider it next year. Jennings said the legislation is needed because of a growing power shortage in Minnesota in the coming decade. DENNIS LIEN STAFF WRITER A Minnesota lawmaker said Thursday he plans to introduce legislation next week that would allow more nuclear waste to be stored in casks outside the Prairie Island nuclear power plant near Red Wing. Rep. Loren Jennings, DFL-Rush City, said he would introduce a bill that would essentially undo a hotly fought 1994 agreement that allows Xcel Energy's plant to store waste in no more than 17 above-ground concrete casks. That limit is expected to be reached in 2007. Jennings said the bill would not be voted on this year, but is being introduced now to allow plenty of opportunity for public discussion before lawmakers consider it next year. He said the bill's Senate sponsor will be Sen. Mark Ourada, R-Buffalo. Jennings said the legislation is needed because of a growing power shortage in Minnesota in the coming decade, even with nuclear power, which accounts for 30 percent of Xcel's energy output. ``The fact is we are short, and this is an effort to address that,'' he said. The proposal prompted angry responses from Rep. Alice Hausman, DFL-St. Paul, who revealed the plan at an anti-nuclear news conference on the State Capitol steps and pledged to fight it, and from George Crocker, executive director of the North American Water Office, an environmental group. ``The intent of this would be to undo all the limits and turn Minnesota into a nuclear zone,'' said Crocker, adding it would break a deal reached by lawmakers. Jennings said his plan would allow additional storage at Prairie Island under the current federal license, which expires in 2014, essentially extending the storage capacity for seven more years. He said it also would authorize additional storage at Prairie Island or Xcel's Monticello plant if they sought to extend their licenses beyond the current expiration dates. Monticello's license expires in 2010. The proposal would also try to punish the federal government by withholding the state's share of taxes now paid into a fund to build the nuclear waste storage site until one is opened. Xcel customers had paid $283 million into the fund as of last year. Jennings said he doesn't expect the same level of political fight that eventually led to the 1994 deal. ``Clearly the landscape is changed,'' he said. Scott Northard, director of nuclear asset management for Xcel, said the nuclear storage issue isn't on the utility's agenda this year. He added he was aware of Jennings' bill until contacted by reporters. Operators of the multistate power grid that includes Minnesota predict it will have to begin importing electricity before the end of the decade. Lawmakers are responding this session with an effort to speed up the process for allowing companies to build new power plants and transmission lines in the state. Jennings said his bill purposely does not address the standing of the Prairie Island Indian Community. The tribe, which owns land next to the plant, signed a contract with Northern States Power Co. and the state that gave the tribe legal standing to enforce the 1994 law. NSP is now a part of Xcel Energy. In a statement late Thursday, the tribe said it is premature to comment on the plan until the legislation is introduced. ``What we can say is that we have standing to enforce the contract between Xcel Energy and the state of Minnesota limiting nuclear waste storage on Prairie Island. That storage cannot be expanded without our permission.'' Dennis Lien can be reached at dlien@pioneerpress.comor (651) 228-5588. The Associated Press contributed to this report. © 2001 PioneerPlanet / St. Paul (Minnesota) Pioneer Press / TwinCities.com- ***************************************************************** 3 Lawmakers want to end storage limits on Prairie Island dry casks Published Thursday, May 3, 2001 By PATRICK HOWE / Associated Press Writer City; PICKS UP 3rd graf pvs ' That limit...' ST. PAUL (AP) -- A plan is afoot to remove the limits on the amount of nuclear waste that can be stored in casks outside the Prairie Island nuclear plant, stirring anger from some people who originally fought the waste storage. Rep. Loren Jennings, DFL-Harris, and Sen. Mark Ourada, R-Buffalo, said they plan to introduce a bill Tuesday that would essentially undo a 1994 agreement that allows Xcel Energy' s plant to store waste in up to 17 concrete casks. That limit is expected to be reached in 2007. The plan would also let the nuclear plant in Monticello start storing waste in outdoor casks. The changes would clear the way for both of the plants to extend their federal operating licenses. Monticello' s expires in 2010. Licenses on Prairie Island' s two reactors expire in 2013 and 2014. The lawmakers said the state is facing an energy crunch and can' t afford to close the nuclear plants because they don' t have enough storage space. Jennings said he doesn' t expect the bill to get a vote this year, but hopes it will next year. St. Paul DFLer Rep. Alice Hausman said she' ll fight the measure. " It' s starting the battle of ' 94 all over again, " Hausman said. She disclosed the plan at an anti-nuclear Capitol news conference. George Crocker, executive director of the North American Water Office, said the plan " would turn Minnesota into a nuclear zone." " This breaks the deal, " he said, " and there are bad words for people who do that." He and other opponents of nuclear power say Xcel has already gone to the Legislature to soften parts of the deal that required the energy company to develop or buy power from alternative energy sources. Jennings counters that the federal government has broken its end of the deal. The government has agreed to find a repository for nuclear waste, but a proposed site in Nevada remains embroiled in political fight. He hopes to build support for the plan over the summer and fall. But Jennings said he doesn' t expect the same level of political fight that eventually led to the 1994 deal. " Clearly the landscape is changed, " he said. " We are short of electricity. No one disputes that." Scott Northard, director of nuclear asset management for Xcel, said the nuclear storage issue " isn' t really on our agenda this year." But he added, " We are certainly interested in keeping Prairie Island and Monticello operating as long as it is safe and economical to do so." He said he is familiar with the plan, but has not seen specifics of the bill. Ourada, whose district includes the Monticello plant, said Xcel did not request the bill. " I know people are going to be skeptical, " he said. " This is something I' m doing on my own." Operators of the multistate power grid that includes Minnesota predict it will have to begin importing electricity before the end of the decade. Lawmakers are responding this session with an effort to speed up the process for companies to build new power plants and transmission lines in the state. The plan would also try to punish the federal government by withholding the state' s share of taxes now paid into a fund to build the nuclear waste storage site until one is opened. Xcel customers have paid $283 million into the fund as of last year. Jennings said the bill will not address the standing of the Prairie Island Mdewakanton Dakota Tribe. The tribe, which owns land next to the nuclear plant near Red Wing in southeastern Minnesota, signed a contract with Northern States Power Co. and the state that gave the tribe legal standing to enforce the 1994 law. NSP is now a part of Xcel Energy. In a statement from the Prairie Island Tribal Council, officials said they can enforce the contract. " That storage cannot be expanded without our permission." Copyright 2001 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 4 Bill will be introduced to extend life of nuclear plant Published Friday, May 4, 2001 Robert Whereatt / Star Tribune A state senator says he will introduce legislation next week that would extend the life of the Prairie Island nuclear power plant owned by Xcel Energy. The bill would undo the 1994 state law that permits a maximum of 17 casks to be filled with highly radioactive spent fuel rods and stored on the grounds of the Red Wing plant. Twelve casks have been filled so far. The maximum of 17 will be reached in 2007 when the plant, according to the 1994 law, is supposed to shut down. Sen. Mark Ourada, R-Buffalo, said his bill would allow one of the two nuclear generators at the plant to run until 2013 and the second to run until 2014, the end of their licensed lives. A companion bill will be introduced in the House by Rep. Loren Jennings, DFL-Harris. The legislation isn't expected to be acted upon this year. "We want it in and on the table this year to put people on notice that it's an issue we have to deal with," Ourada said Thursday. "Everybody knows we're short [of electrical generating capacity]," he said. "There's general agreement that by the end of the decade we'll be short 2,500 to 3,000 megawatts, and that's *with *Prairie Island. Prairie Island generates 1,000 megawatts." Ourada's district includes Xcel's nuclear plant at Monticello in Wright County. "I want to make it very clear [that] Xcel did not come to me and ask for this. This is a Senator Ourada initiative, not an Xcel initiative. I know a lot of people will question me, since they [Xcel] have such a big presence in my district." Jennings and Ourada met with the Prairie Island Tribal Council on Thursday "to begin discussion," said John Knapp, a lawyer and lobbyist representing the Prairie Island Dakota Tribe. Tribal lands adjoin the utility company land. "The bill that's being introduced does not have the support of the tribe," Knapp said. In a prepared statement, the tribal council said it has legal standing to enforce a contract between Xcel and the state limiting the number of casks to 17. The contract was part of the 1994 agreement and law. "That storage cannot be expanded without our permission. We have been in contact with lawmakers regarding this issue and we hope to continue the dialogue," the statement said. Rep. Alice Hausman, DFL-St. Paul, said she will oppose any attempt to extend the life of the plant. "The Prairie Island plant is safe," she said. "My sole issue is the generating waste." The federal government hasn't found a permanent repository for the spent fuel. "Finally, we as a state have to say, this may well stay in our state and then we better responsibly talk about how we manage that," Hausman said. She said the state shouldn't allow waste to pile up beyond the 17 casks. The issue of storing spent fuel rods at Prairie Island consumed most of the 1994 legislative session. It pitted environmentalists against the utility, which was then called Northern States Power Co., and its supporters. Scott Northard, Xcel's nuclear assets manager, said he hadn't seen the legislation and as a result couldn't comment on the specifics. He did say Xcel may seek a federal extension of its Prairie Island license. If the plant continues to run safely and economically, it would be in customers' best interest to get an extension of the license from federal regulatory authorities, Northard said. "I think we've demonstrated since 1994 that it can be stored safely. ... Our record speaks for itself." Northard said other utilities that have sought licensing extensions generally have asked for 20 years more of life for the facilities. Prairie Island produces about 20 percent of the electricity that Xcel provides for 1.5 million customers in Minnesota and four other upper Midwestern states. Monticello accounts for another 10 percent. Many of the spent fuel rods at the Monticello plant were shipped to Illinois in the 1980s, and the remainder are stored in the reactor's pool, with no need for additional storage in outdoor casks. *-- Robert Whereatt is at rwhereatt@startribune.com.* © Copyright 2001 Star Tribune. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 Statement by Prairie Island Tribal Council Regarding Possible Legislation to Expand Nuclear Waste Storage at Xcel's Prairie Island Nuclear Power Plant [PR Newswire] Thursday May 3, 7:09 pm Eastern Time Press Release *SOURCE: Prairie Island Indian Community* Statement by Prairie Island Tribal Council Regarding Possible Legislation to Expand Nuclear Waste Storage at Xcel's Prairie Island Nuclear Power Plant PRAIRIE ISLAND, Minn., May 3 /PRNewswire/ -- ``It would be premature to comment on any possible legislation to expand storage of nuclear waste at Xcel Energy's Prairie Island power plant, located less than 600 yards from our community, until and unless that legislation is introduced. What we can say is that we have standing to enforce the contract between Xcel Energy and the state of Minnesota limiting nuclear waste storage on Prairie Island. That storage cannot be expanded without our permission. We have been in contact with lawmakers regarding this issue and we hope to continue the dialogue.'' *SOURCE: Prairie Island Indian Community* Copyright © 2001 PR Newswire. All rights reserved. Republication or ***************************************************************** 6 Prune Envirocare The Salt Lake Tribune -- Utah's Statewide Newspaper Friday, May 04, 2001 Bending science and federal policy to produce a distorted version of the truth is one thing, but Envirocare's corporate stoop to the low level of berating and discrediting the public is quite another. Wasting the public's time and further spinning policy and science do not make Envirocare's prospects more appealing. This behavior only denigrates the public and pioneers of pure science who discovered that some radionuclides (including those in the class B and C waste) have half-lives of thousands of years and are hazardous for longer. There is little consolation for the public when Envirocare contends that because our bodies contain harmless amounts of radioactive elements, it is Utah's duty to our country to accept class B and C, everything-but-the-fuel-rods radioactive waste from nuclear power plants that do not serve or benefit Utah. If Envirocare must spin science and federal policy pertaining to the 500-year institutional control period, so be it. Right or wrong, Envirocare at least acknowledges that it must meet the requirements of the intended policies for institutional controls to ensure that no one can come in contact with the waste for 500 years. Rather than spinning to greater depths of public loathing and mistrust, as well as degrading science and the public, just do the job to ensure compliance with the laws that govern Envirocare because, in the much wiser words of Ben Franklin: "A man of words and not of deeds is like a garden full of weeds." ROBIN JENKINS Erda © Copyright 2001, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on ***************************************************************** 7 Nevadans mindful of nuke power 'renaissance' Today: May 04, 2001 at 11:33:12 PDT By Benjamin Grove LAS VEGAS SUN WASHINGTON -- Nuclear power is enjoying unprecedented support in the nation's capital these days as policy leaders search for energy-shortage solutions. Ever wary of waste, Nevada officials have taken notice. Consider this week: * On Monday Vice President Dick Cheney gave a speech in Toronto saying the United States should broaden nuclear power generation, which now accounts for about 20 percent of the nation's electricity. Cheney is expected to unveil a national energy strategy this month that includes more nuclear power. * On Wednesday Reps. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Charles Stenholm, D-Texas, introduced a bill loaded with nuclear industry goodies: tax incentives, funding for nuclear technology and new plant designs, and the renewal of a federal law providing government liability coverage for nuclear plant accidents. Similar legislation has been introduced in the Senate. Nuclear power provides 65 percent of electricity generated in Graham's state. Also on Wednesday Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham stressed that the nation needs to tackle the nuclear waste problem so that nuclear power output can be increased. * On Thursday a congressional panel led by two leading Senate supporters of nuclear energy held a hearing on the industry's brightening future. "We know there is great interest in the (nuclear) industry. We're in a time of enormous change right now," Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Richard Meserve told the lawmakers. Senate Energy Committee Chairman Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, agreed, "Four of five years ago, who would have thought we would hear talk of buying and selling (nulcear) plants, and, yes, even building new plants. Today this discussion is happening." That discussion has the close attention of Nevada politicians. More nuclear power means more nuclear waste. And Congress has designated Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as the nation's nuclear waste dump. If approved, Yucca would eventually be the permanent burial ground for 77,000 tons of radioactive spent fuel rods now piling up at the nation's 103 power plant reactors. Nevada's congressional members have battled Yucca initiatives on both political and scientific fronts for years. They are backed by public concerns about transporting waste to Nevada and lingering fears about nuclear plant accidents, but they are up against an influential nuclear energy lobby. America must deal with its waste problem before it increases nuclear power output, Nevada lawmakers say in response to murmurs of a nuclear energy "renaissance." "Yucca Mountain is not safe, and the industry will not be able to dump its waste there," Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said in a statement this week that criticizes Cheney's pro-nuclear comments. "The administration is proposing to exacerbate a massive radioactive problem, to which there is currently no solution." Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., asserts the push for nuclear energy is "nothing new." He said it was an attempt by Republican leaders to help industry officials who haven't had a new plant commissioned since the 1970s. Nevada's Republican members said they were not flinching in the face of a new national debate on nuclear energy, sparked by their GOP colleagues. "I actually think of it as an opportunity for us," Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said. "If the Bush administration wants more nuclear power, then we have to have an answer to the nuclear waste problem that doesn't include burying it at Yucca Mountain." Nevada lawmakers support spending for research on waste storage options. Those include "transmutation," a process that breaks down waste into a less dangerous substance. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said too much money (about $7 billion) and too much time has been invested at Yucca. "Once you solve the nuclear waste problem, nuclear energy can be a viable energy source for this nation," Gibbons said. But that could be a long time, Nevada lawmakers said. Gibbons echoed Ensign, saying the waste solution was transmutation, not "burying it in a hole." Sun wire reports All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 8 Columbia County readies for nuclear waste transfer Augusta Georgia: Technology: *Web posted Friday, May 4, 2001 By Preston Sparks *Columbia County Bureau* Columbia County emergency officials are gearing up for the first delivery of radioactive materials from Savannah River Site through the county. Speaking at a Columbia County Local Emergency Planning Committee meeting, Pam Tucker, the county's Emergency Management Agency director, told ambulance, fire and police officials that although the shipment day - Tuesday- is still tentative, they should be on alert just in case. ``What we would really like is for the law enforcement, when we know it's coming through, to help us keep traffic moving smoothly,'' Mrs. Tucker said, adding that the shipment will travel along Interstate 20 through 17 miles of the county. ``We want to get it in and out of our county as quick as possible.'' The first delivery of the hazardous materials - which includes tools, rags, clothing and debris exposed to plutonium through years of Cold War preparation - will be loaded on one truck in route to Carlsbad, N.M., to be buried in a salt mine at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. The plan is designed to cleanup nuclear waste at SRS. It has been in the making for 10 years and has had several delays because of protests concerning safety, said Mrs. Tucker. However, Mrs. Tucker said that the shipments - which would take place for the next several years - would be conducted at the highest level of safety. ``This is probably going to be one of the safest transports of hazardous materials in the history of the country,'' she said. ``I'm a lot more concerned about these chemical tankers and rail cars carrying hazardous materials that don't have the regulations on them that these trucks will.'' Each truck will be tracked by a satellite system and have highly trained drivers. Chuck Ray, a field coordinator for the Georgia Emergency Management Agency who attended the meeting, said the May 8 shipment date could be delayed only if WIPP officials decide to give a different directive. No specific time of day for the delivery has been set. ``Now that all of (the environmental groups) have pretty much been satisfied, it all hinges on Carlsbad,'' he said. Mr. Ray estimated that once the deliveries begin, there will be one approximately every month by truck. Also, two to three times a year, the waste will be transported through the county by train. Mr. Ray said his department is currently looking at using Bobby Jones Expressway as a second delivery route as well. In preparation for the upcoming transports, Columbia County emergency officials will be attending a WIPP first responder course July 12 and a WIPP radiological instrument training class July 19. Reach Preston Sparksat (706) 868-1222, Ext. 110. ;1996 - 2001 *The Augusta Chronicle*. All rights ***************************************************************** 9 Amended waste dump bill may benefit Simmons firm The Dallas Morning News: Texas/Southwest 05/03/2001 By George Kuempel / The Dallas Morning News AUSTIN  Protesters twice interrupted Senate debate Wednesday on an emotionally charged bill that critics said would fatten the pocketbook of a Dallas billionaire by flooding the state with deadly low-level radioactive waste from the federal government. Senators tentatively approved the measure to allow for a waste disposal dump by a vote of 19-10, with one abstention. That was after the sponsor, Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, failed to persuade his colleagues to remove an amendment that was described as a likely windfall for businessman Harold Simmons. That amendment, put on the bill in committee by Sen. Teel Bivins, R-Amarillo, would allow a proposed dump  which Mr. Duncan had wanted restricted to low-level radioactive waste from Texas, Vermont and Maine  to take contaminated waste from the U.S. Department of Energy. Texas entered into a compact several years ago in which it agreed to dispose of waste from Maine and Vermont in response to a federal law making states responsible for disposing of their own waste. But the state has not yet found a suitable site for the dump. "Texas is taking this [DOE] waste not to honor any national obligation, but to benefit one contractor," Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, said in arguing against the Bivins amendment. "Let's look at sound public policy, not what benefits a single person." The Senate refused to remove the amendment. Mr. Bivins conceded during the debate that Waste Control Specialists, a Simmons-controlled company that now operates a hazardous waste dump in Andrews County, would be the likely beneficiary of his amendment. Mr. Simmons has been lobbying for several years to get DOE waste. The bill, as amended, would allow for two adjacent disposal sites, one to handle the waste generated in Texas, Vermont and Maine and the other to accept the more profitable DOE waste from decommissioned weapons plants and other federal sites. Mr. Bivins said the federal waste is needed because waste generated by the three states alone wouldn't produce enough income to attract a private company to operate the dump. The bill does not designate a dump site, but Mr. Bivins said Andrews County would be the likely choice. Waste Control Specialists' dump is already there, and the community wants the low-level radioactive dump because of the jobs it will create, he said. Waste Control Specialists has 16 paid lobbyists working on its behalf in Austin this session. "If you consider geography, politics and economics, the odds are it's going to be in Andrews County," Mr. Bivins said. A spokesman for Mr. Simmons could not be reached for comment. Sen. Carlos Truan, D-Corpus Christi, warned that the measure would make Texas an "outdoor privy" for the nation's radioactive waste, posing a serious threat to the environment for years to come. "I think we're going to come to regret this. I hope you understand this is probably the most serious environmental concern that we've had this session," he said. Mr. Duncan argued that the state badly needs a site for its deadly radioactive waste to be stored and carefully monitored. That waste now is being stored, often with little supervision, at 1,200 hospitals, commercial and other sites around the state, he said. "It's irresponsible not to have a [dump] site in Texas under our agreement," he said. But Mr. Duncan argued against taking DOE waste. He said the state wouldn't have as much control over that waste as it would over the three states' waste. And he said there are no assurances that the federal government would honor any limits set on waste or that it would be responsible for any cleanup. "We don't have as much control over that [site] as we do our site," he said. Acting Lt. Gov. Bill Ratliff was twice forced to halt debate briefly to allow the removal of several vocal protesters who were taken from the gallery in handcuffs. Four people were arrested and charged with disrupting a public meeting, a Class B misdemeanor. They were identified as Glenn Oliver, Michelle Weston, Alfredo Reza Jr. and Thora Gray. No hometowns were provided. The bill requires one more vote before going to the House. 2001 The Dallas Morning News ***************************************************************** 10 Editorial: Half an energy policy [PG News] Cheney pushes production, pooh-poohs conservation Friday, May 04, 2001 The Bush administration energy policy sketched out by Vice President Dick Cheney this week is just the kind of approach you would expect from two kick-butt Texas oil men. None of this sissy talk about conserving energy. Conservation may be "a sign of personal virtue," but it is hardly a comprehensive policy, the vice president complained. The Bush administration wants to keep Americans in the energy-consuming style to which they have become accustomed - which means using twice as much energy per person as the rest of the developed world. Accommodating that level of consumption will require building more generating capacity, drilling for more oil, burning more coal and natural gas and opening the door to more nuclear power. The administration deserves credit for initiating this important debate on the nation's energy needs and how to meet them, including what roles should be played by fossil fuels like oil and coal and alternative energies like nuclear, windmill and solar power. But its dismissive attitude toward the critical role that conservation can take, and the lack of concern about the environmental impact of the various alternatives, is very disturbing. There is a case for a new look at the possibilities for nuclear generation, but that option cannot be considered without coming to terms with how to handle radioactive waste. And, yes, the nation will continue to depend on coal-powered generation into the future, but new capacity must be built using the cleanest and safest technology, with limits on the emissions of greenhouse gases as well as ground-level pollutants. The administration, on the contrary, has suggested it may be necessary to roll back environmental regulations to accommodate more coal power. Additional gas and oil wells will need to be drilled, but it is not necessary to open the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil development. Tougher fuel efficiency standards for sport utility vehicles, for example, would more than make up for all the oil that can be recovered from the Arctic coastal plain. Similarly, the nation could have saved the equivalent of 30 to 50 power plants' worth of electricity had President Bush not rolled back efficiency standards for central air-conditioning units. The president's belated promises issued this week to scale down energy use in federal buildings, particularly in energy-hungry California, is a welcome move. But it is somewhat suspect in light of his budget proposal, which calls for a 48 percent spending cut for the Federal Energy Management Program, the very agency that oversees this effort. Mr. Cheney is right that conservation does not make for a comprehensive energy policy. But neither does unbridled development. By any standard, Americans are profligate users of energy. Cutting back does not need to mean austerity or extreme pain. But it won't happen without a national leadership that embraces conservation as part of a balanced energy policy. How much more responsible it would have been for the vice president to have balanced his message - let's address consumption while working to enhance production in environmentally sound ways. Luckily, the debate has just begun, and there is still time for a more responsible, more evenhanded approach to evolve. post-gazette.com ***************************************************************** 11 Nuclear power comes "clean" in U.S. ad campaign Friday May 4, 9:15 am Eastern Time By Janet McGurty The Nuclear Energy Institute's latest print ad campaign features a young girl with all the accoutrements of her generation -- down to shimmering blue nail polish and a glittery stick-on face tattoo. The sky is blue. The clouds are fluffy and white. The headline reads ``Clean air is so 21st century'' and it goes on to say ``Our generation is demanding lots of electricity...and clean air.'' ``It's saying those old, green people are so twentieth century,'' said Barbara Lippert, ad critic for ``Adweek Magazine.'' Not exactly, counters Steve Kerekes, spokesman for the industry lobbying group Nuclear Energy Institute. ``The purpose of the ads are to remind the American people and policymakers that we are here.'' The campaign is part of an effort by the nuclear power industry to ride on coattails of the resurgence in solar and hydroelectric power -- the darlings of the clean, green power generation set -- to create a triumvirate of emission-free power producers in the minds of Americans. And they appear to have some degree of success. On the NEI's Web site (http://www.switchonamerica.com), respondents voted an overwhelming ``Yes'' to the question ``Are you willing to use more emission-free electricity, like hydroelectric, nuclear and solar power?'' In the United States, emission-free power sources provide about one-third of all electricity. Of that, nuclear power provides about two-thirds, or about a fifth of all electricity in the United States. CHENEY FACTOR ``They are lobbying for a share of the Cheney pie,'' said Linda Gunter, Communications Director with Safe Energy Communication Group, which calls itself an ``active watchdog for false, misleading and inaccurate energy advertising.'' SECC has done battle with the NEI on advertising before. In 1999, it said as a result of its part in a complaint against NEI advertising, the Better Business Bureau found NEI advertising ``inaccurate and misleading'' and recommended it should be discontinued. But the case lost steam when the Federal Trade Commission issued a split decision on whether or not the advertisements were deceptive. Under President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, former head of energy services company Halliburton (NYSE:HAL - news) is leading a task force on energy strategy. One of the cornerstones of the policy appears to be using a mix of energy sources to prevent power shortages such as the one that has hit California. ``The larger point is that there are pluses and minuses with all energy sources. There is no perfect energy source that has no adverse environmental impact,'' said Kerekes. But is the ad campaign effective? Will it convince the American public -- which still focuses on the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979 and the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 -- that nuclear power is viable? ``Visually and verbally there is nothing new there,'' said Frank Ginsberg, chairman and chief creative officer of advertising agency Avrett Free &Ginsberg, part of True North Communications. ``That kind of trite and stereotyped visual image does nothing to capture what youth of today is about. They need a new persuasive argument to act on,'' he said. ``I can see why they are doing it,'' said Steve Hayden, vice chairman of Olgivy &Mather, part of WPP group. ``It has to have occurred to everyone that the California power crisis and the threat of over other heavily populated parts of the U.S. that it's time to look for new sources of power,'' he said. Still, Hayden say, the industry has a long way to go to change its image. ``I sense that the average American's impression of nuclear power plants is shaped by 'The Simpsons,''' he said, refering to the television cartoon show in which Homer Simpson tosses pieces of used nuclear material out of his car window as he heads home from his job at a local nuke plant. Copyright © 2001 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 12 Nuclear renaissance ... May 4, 2001 Nuclear renaissance ... As concern grows over rising fuel costs and reliable energy supplies, nuclear power is getting a second look. So are the arguments against it Neville Nankivell National Post The nuclear option is suddenly back on the policy table as part of the future electricity-generation mix for most major industrialized economies. As natural gas costs keep rising and concerns grow over reliable electricity supplies, this is a sensible change from many earlier intentions to phase out nuclear power eventually. As a Canadian government official put it recently: "we need every arrow in the energy quiver." In the United States, Canada and some European Union countries, applications to upgrade existing nuclear plants and extend their operating licences are now being looked upon more favourably. New plants are also being seriously considered again after years of moratoriums. This is the case in Finland, whose president recently declared it would be absurd to renounce nuclear power. As part of its long-range energy supply policy, the Bush administration favours granting permits for new U.S. plants. Japan is sticking to its construction program. In Canada, there's even some talk of the future possibility of a nuclear power plant in Alberta so the province won't be so dependent on natural gas. New Brunswick and Quebec are expected to extend the working lives of their existing nuclear units through refurbishing proposals that are now under review. Ontario will soon have a group of its laid-up reactors back in service. Its plan to lease another plant to a consortium headed by British Energy, a private sector group, will involve substantial new capital investment in nuclear facilities. Some 30 nuclear power plants in the United States, or one-third of the total, have applied for license extensions -- typically 20 years -- on the basis of plans to invest in upgrades. Most others are expected to follow suit. Yet just a few years ago there had been predictions that a third of the nuclear power plants in the United States would be closed rather than have their licences renewed. These developments portend a renaissance for an industry in which Canada is particularly advanced technologically, and is also a major world supplier of commercial uranium used in the fuel fabrication process. There is, however, still formidable public hostility to nuclear power -- although the industry has had an excellent safety record since the chilling accidents at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island some 15 to 20 years ago. Recent surveys in the United States suggest the mood may be changing. A clear majority there now supports the building of new plants, compared with 42% a couple of years ago. Behind the swing: sharply rising electricity prices and power shortages in California and other parts of the country. Nonetheless, the industry will have its work cut out to get the public truly onside for nuclear renewal. It will have to show, for instance, that zero tolerance is in force for lapses such as those that happened last decade in Ontario, where sloppy maintenance procedures led to several nuclear units being taken off-line for intensive inspections and work to get them up to proper operating performance. That said, the industry, which is tightly regulated, has a lot going for it now. Nuclear power is becoming more price competitive because of the rising costs of conventional fuel sources such as natural gas, coal and oil. In the United States, nuclear power is now cheaper than coal in terms of operating costs for thermal generation, and well below gas and oil. Nuclear plants are more expensive to build than gas-fired ones, but technological advances are now improving the efficiency of existing plants. Industry consolidation is helping too. Overall output of nuclear plants in the United States is up 20%. An increasing number of private sector-owned U.S. plants are now quite profitable. Next-generation reactors promise even better operating results. New construction techniques should help hold down capital costs. The industry is also rightly promoting the positive role that "blue skies" nuclear power can play in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol, aimed at establishing specific emission reduction targets internationally, is effectively dead because U.S. President George W. Bush has said his administration won't ratify it. But this doesn't mean the United States or other governments will abandon efforts to encourage production of more environmentally friendly energy. The best way to do this, said U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney in Toronto this week, is to extend the operating lives of existing nuclear plants and allow new ones to be built. Mr. Cheney is heading an energy task force on behalf of the President. To fill this bill properly, low-emission nuclear power will have to be market competitive and not propped up by government subsidies. There's still the problem of permanent disposal of hazardous nuclear waste, although various concepts -- including a deep-storage proposal for Canada -- have been judged technically feasible. Opposition from anti-nuclear groups, including violent protests in Europe over the movement of radioactive waste, has spooked governments from moving more expeditiously on this issue. Yet those who do ship radioactive material have had an exemplary safety record. Some industrialized countries, such as Germany, remain opposed to further nuclear power development and intend to stick to phase-out plans. But increasingly, more governments are keeping an open mind on the issue. This is the realistic way forward. Global electricity demand continues to grow robustly. Meeting it is key to maintaining economic growth. *Neville Nankivell is a columnist and former editor-in-chief of the Financial Post.* Copyright © 2001 National Post Online | Privacy Policy | ***************************************************************** 13 Scientech Issue Alert: The Nuclear Future Power Online News for power industry professionals -->5/3/2001 Issue*Alert* for May 2, 2001 by Jon T. Brock Director, Strategic and Competititve Intelligence *[News item from AP]* 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. 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. Analysis: What a difference a new administration makes. The Clinton administration was generally thought to be anti-nuclear and EPA lawsuits were initiated over coal-fired emission violations. Efficiency and load curtailment was stressed as the answer to any energy crisis. Monday in Toronto, Vice President Dick Cheney stressed that conservation, while perhaps "a sign of personal virtue," does not make for sound or comprehensive policy. Rather, he supports a supply-side approach of constructing new fossil- and nuclear-fueled generation plants. The main concerns with nuclear generation are, of course, safety and the handling of nuclear waste. Supporters of nuclear energy, however, believe these risks are worth managing, especially when compared to the long-term health risks and potential global climate impact of fossil-fueled generation. New nuclear generation designs are being developed that are expected to be inherently safer than predecessor designs. There is an article running in today's Wall Street Journal exploring safer reactor designs for the nuclear power generation industry. The article tells the story of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) professor Andrew Kadak challenging his students at MIT to design a nuclear reactor which doesn't produce carbon dioxide. He told them it should be cheaper to build and simpler to operate than any constructed to date, with no possibility of a meltdown. The students must have done their research quite well as they returned with what is known as a “pebble-bed” reactor. A pebble-bed-nuclear reactor is currently under development by a South African consortium being headed by South African utility Eskom and its South African partner, the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC). To date, Eskom and IDC have attracted two international investors in their Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) project. One is British Nuclear Fuel (BNFL) and the other is better known to the United States as PECO (or Exelon). The PBMR works by using uranium elements (pebbles) encased in graphite to form a fuel sphere (about the size of a tennis ball). In addition, helium is used as the coolant and energy transfer medium to a closed-cycle-gas turbine and generator. So why is it safer than previous nuclear reactor designs? According to PBMR, the safety features are described as follows: “Representative of a new generation of advanced reactors the PBMR is characterized by a series of inherent safety properties, differentiating it from other reactor types. It is due to these characteristics that the PBMR do not require the typical nuclear safety systems to actively guard the plant for the duration of its operational life. The use of graphite as fuel element cladding/moderator and core structural material/reflector means that a core melt situation can be ruled out because of the large difference existing between the normal, average operating temperature (1095°C) and the maximum tolerable temperature (2800°C).” To summarize, the PBMR is a safer design because it utilizes fuel pebbles encased in graphite and makes use of helium as a coolant. Supposedly, this reduces the threat of a core meltdown to a theoretical zero. Also, distributed generation enthusiasts should warm to the fact that this design would be sized to produce about 110MW, which is about 10 percent of the output of a conventional nuclear or fossil fuel-driven power station. The modular approach makes it possible to build smaller nuclear power plants to serve local needs and to expand them as demand grows. Nuclear waste has been an issue for some time now in the United States. Yucca Mountain, located in Nevada is being tested as a suitable site for a spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste repository. Experts throughout the world agree that the most feasible and safe method for disposing of highly radioactive materials is to store them deep underground. Based on this consensus, the United States Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 that directs the Department of Energy (DOE) to find a site and characterize it. If the site is found suitable and a license application is approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the DOE is to build and operate an underground disposal facility. Yucca Mountain is the current site under investigation by the DOE. How much waste are we talking about here? The sources vary on their estimates of how much highly radioactive material waste exists in the United States. However, if we take the range of estimates, it would equate to a football field ranging from fifteen to twenty feet deep. That estimate takes into account all high level nuclear waste generated in the United States since the start of a nuclear program in the 1950s. Compared to other hazardous materials, the amount of nuclear waste generated per year is very small. All of the nuclear plants in the U.S. produce about 30,000 tons of spent fuel a year, whereas 300 million tons of chemical waste are generated in the U.S. per year. According to an information source managed by the University of Missouri-Rolla American Nuclear Society, “Nuclear wastes are, for the same power output, some 3.5 million times smaller in volume than the wastes from coal plants. High-level nuclear wastes can be disposed of by diluting them with twice their own volume of neutral materials as they are changed into glass or ceramic form. The reprocessed waste volume from a 1,000 megawatt nuclear power plant would fit easily under a typical dining room table. A coal plant of the same capacity (1,000 megawatts) produces some 10 tons of waste per minute.” And not to bash coal, Vice President Dick Cheney also informed the Toronto audience that 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. The United States has a tremendous coal reserve that clearly the current administration believes must be utilized to meet our growing energy demand. So where does this lead us? It appears that as the years go by, technology is improving the environmental effects of our generation sources. Natural gas is becoming more efficient, coal is getting cleaner, and nuclear is getting safer. The Bush administration appears to be realizing that fuel diversity is a good thing for an energy policy. An over-reliance on any one type of fuel for power generation can cause problems in a crisis situation. Is nuclear making a comeback in the U.S.? The signposts seem to be inferring that it is. Just last week a California grassroots watchdog group proposed plugging nuclear-powered U.S. Navy aircraft carriers into California's power grid. The power from two of three aircraft carriers now on the West Coast could provide enough energy to power a minimum of 400,000 homes in the state. Also, the first demonstration PBMR unit is scheduled for commercial operation by 2005. Should the test prove successful and the NRC approve the design, we could be seeing new nuclear reactors in the United States by 2010. *Copyright 2001. SCIENTECH, Inc. All rights reserved.* ***************************************************************** 14 Build more nuclear power plants [deseretnews.com] Friday, May 04, 2001 Deseret News editorial When it comes to safety, nuclear power plants have an impressive record. To date, only two accidents have occurred. Many people can name them without much thought. One was at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania in 1979, the other at Chernobyl, Ukraine, in 1986, a time when that country was part of the Soviet Union. Of the two, only Chernobyl caused any damage to the surrounding environment. Two accidents, despite plants operating in various parts of 32 different nations. And most plants are operating at full speed these days. Last year, according to the Energy Information Administration, the plants in the United States generated 753.9 billion kilowatt-hours, which was an all-time record. None of the plants in operation today emits gasses that contribute to global warming. And yet no new permits for nuclear plant construction have been granted in 20 years. Nuclear opponents have succeeded in branding the technology as too dangerous. That's why it is refreshing to hear Vice President Dick Cheney say the time has come to build more. Cheney and President Bush have been criticized for being too closely aligned with the energy industry, but most of what they say makes sense in a world where energy consumption is on a dramatic rise and environmentalists have succeeded, through obfuscation and scare tactics, to bring new production to a standstill. Speaking to the annual meeting of the Associated Press in Toronto this week, Cheney also spoke in favor of more coal production. Utah is home to some of the nation's largest coal reserves, but much of this in Southern Utah has been tied up in the Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument. Given the recent energy crisis in California and the potential for shortages elsewhere, it makes sense to tap coal and other resources and to produce more nuclear plants to handle the demand. The vice president said it won't do to urge people to use less. Indeed, while conservation is good, this is an age in which the economy has become dependent on the proliferation of computers, fax machines and other technologies that rely on electricity. The trend is pretty clear. People will be using more. One cannot discuss the need for more nuclear plants without addressing the nuclear waste that those plants produce. Utahns, and this page in particular, have been strongly opposed to efforts to create a temporary repository of high-level nuclear waste on the Goshute Indian Reservation in Skull Valley. The opposition, which ought to continue, is less concerned with the safety of the stored waste than with what it would symbolize to the world — that Utah is the place to dump unwanted trash. We support the government's efforts to establish a permanent repository for nuclear waste. We also wonder why the government, in the name of national security, has put an end to all research into recycling this waste. Not all of the administration's energy policies make sense. Americans ought to be more concerned with conservation, and businesses ought to be given greater incentives to create products that use less energy. As the New York Times reported this week, automobiles reached the peak of their fuel economy 13 years ago, when the average vehicle got 26 miles to the gallon. Today the average is 24. But it is clear that Americans need more energy, and that will come only through the sensible use of more natural resources and through nuclear generation. © 2001 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 15 IAEA Releases Nuclear Power Statistics for 2000 - Press Release 01/07 [worldatom] [press] [current] [-] PR 2001/07 (3 May 2001) *Vienna, 3 May 2001* -- A total of 438 nuclear power plants were operating around the world at the end of 2000, according to data reported to the IAEA’s Power Reactor Information System. The plants had a total net installed capacity of 351 GW(e). Also during 2000, six nuclear power plants representing 3056 MW(e) net electric capacity were connected to the grid, one in Brazil, one in the Czech Republic, three in India and one in Pakistan. Additionally, construction of three new nuclear reactors started in 2000 — one in China and two in Japan, bringing the total number of nuclear reactors reported as being under construction to 31. Nuclear power provides about 16% of global electricity, with about 83% of nuclear capacity concentrated in industrialized countries. The ten countries with the highest reliance on nuclear power in 2000 were: France, 76.4%; Lithuania, 73.7%; Belgium, 56.8%; Slovak Republic, 53.4%; Ukraine, 47.3%; Bulgaria, 45%; Hungary, 42.2%; Republic of Korea, 40.7%; Sweden, 39% and Switzerland, 38.2%. In total, 17 countries relied upon nuclear power plants to supply at least a quarter of their total electricity needs. In North America, where 118 reactors supply about 20% of electricity in the United States and 12% in Canada, the number of operating reactors has declined slightly. In Western Europe, with 150 reactors, overall capacity is likely to remain at or near existing levels in the coming years. In Central/Eastern Europe and the Newly Independent States, with 68 reactors, a few partially built plants are likely to be completed, while aging units are being shut down. Only in the Middle East, Far East and South Asia, with a total of 94 reactors at present, are there clear plans for expanding nuclear power, particularly in China, India, the Republic of Korea and Japan. Worldwide in 2000, total nuclear generated electricity increased to 2411.40 terawatt-hours. Cumulative worldwide operating experience from civil nuclear power reactors at the end of 2000 exceeded 9800 reactor-years. A table showing the electricity supplied by nuclear power reactors in 2000 and the respective percentage of electricity produced by nuclear energy is available here *([pdf] 13 KB pdf file)*. ***************************************************************** 16 New leukaemia cluster in Chepstow in Chepstow similar to Seascale Low Level Radiation Campaign Press release 29th April 2001: Immediate use. A report "Cancer Mortality and Proximity to Oldbury Nuclear Power Station in Gloucestershire 1995-1999" was commissioned from consultants Green Audit by Michael Holmes MEP. In connection with the cancer mortality study an analysis of childhood leukaemia and cancer incidence in Chepstow has also been conducted. It has been made possible by the release, in 1995, of Wales Cancer Registry's entire database of cancer incidence at local authority ward level to the Low Level Radiation Campaign. Cancer incidence data are usually only published in a highly aggregated form, at the level of counties or county districts. Both reports can be downloaded as Word files from this web site (www.llrc.org) together with coloured maps of cancer mortality risk ward by ward. (see links at foot of page) This material can also be can be sent by email. Contact Richard Bramhall if necessary. The leukaemia cluster in Chepstow is statistically significant. It is similar in intensity to the notorious Seascale cluster although direct comparison is not straightforward. In Chepstow between 1974 and 1990 (17 years) at least 4 cases were diagnosed in children younger than 5 years - 2.4 times the expected number (1.68). Three of them were the rare Myeloid form of leukaemia - more than 11 times the expected number (0.27). The presence of this disease is strongly suggestive of a radiation link. (in Chepstow UD Relative Risks are even higher and are still statistically significant; the fact that large parts of Chepstow RD are distant from the Severn may account for their lower risks) Relative Risks of childhood cancer in Chepstow show a pattern similar to the leukaemia risks. In Seascale between 1968 and 1995 (28 yrs (note 1) 3 leukaemias were diagnosed in children younger than 5 years; 6 were diagnosed in those under 14 years. For the 0 - 14s this is 12.3 times the expected number (expected rates for the 0 - 4s are not available) In addition it is reported from Chepstow that as many as four cases have been traced which may not be on the files analysed for this study. If true this has serious implications concerning earlier analyses of the Wales Cancer Registry databases which will reopen discussion between this Campaign and COMARE. This issue will not be addressed in this press release. The Seascale cluster has persisted for over 30 years. It was discovered by Yorkshire TV and hit the headlines in the mid '80s in a programme called Windscale: the Nuclear Laundry. This led to the Black Committee, whose report recommended that the Government set up the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE) and the Small Area Health Statistics Unit (SAHSU). SAHSU was set up to ensure that in future clusters of disease would be discovered by official agencies rather than by reporters and campaigners (see www.llrc.org/rat3210.htm). They have instead concentrated on developing and propagating methods of dismissing clusters as random occurrences. Their current study of cancer around the Bradwell nuclear power station employs a crude method which makes no attempt to follow the distribution of radioactivity in the local environment and seems to have been designed deliberately to find no effect. COMARE has uncritically accepted the National Radiological Protection Board's recommendations despite the demonstrable weakness of the NRPB model of radiation risk at environmental levels of dose. Accordingly COMARE has found that radioactivity from Sellafield could not be the cause of the Seascale cluster. Clear bias in COMARE's approach to reports of high cancer risk in parts of Wales near radioactively contaminated mud banks is evident in Minutes leaked to LLRC (see www.llrc.org/anothersubvertedwatchdog.htm). It is clear that COMARE and SAHSU are failing in their jobs and LLRC is calling for them both to be replaced. Cancer Mortality Study: Background Cancer mortality between 1995 - 1999 (Note 2) has been analysed at the level of local authority wards in the area potentially affected by discharges of radioactivity into the Severn Estuary from three nuclear power stations and Nycomed Amersham plc's Cardiff site. It is believed that this is the greatest concentration of such nuclear pollution anywhere in the world. Strong tidal action carries the radioactivity up and down the estuary. In addition the Severn and the Wye drain a large part of the Welsh uplands, and are therefore transporting radioactive fallout into the same area. This fallout came from atmospheric testing of nuclear bombs on the 1950s and '60s and from Chernobyl. Wet regions such as Wales receive more fallout than dry areas, in proportion to rainfall. There is a large amount of evidence suggesting that cancer rates are associated with radioactive contamination of mud in estuaries. Monitoring of mud in the Severn has been conducted by MAFF, showing 70 nanoGrays per hour (nGy/hr) of gamma rays. This is more than double the inland radiation rate measured by NRPB (30 nGy/hr). MAFF monitoring of tritium in surface water of the Severn shows that concentrations increase upstream. Fine particles of contaminated silt are easily resuspended in air and inhaled. Such particles have been detected many miles inland. Main conclusions of the cancer mortality study + Wards near nuclear power stations do not have high risks, except for prostate cancer. The high risks are mostly below the Severn Bridge, in Woodspring, south Avon and the Welsh coast. + The coastal effect observed in other parts of the country is present; risk for all cancers increases with proximity to the coast; the trends have very high statistical significance, except in the case of prostate cancer. + Lung and breast cancer risks are strongly associated with living in the valleys of the rivers Wye, Avon and Frome, particularly Chepstow at the mouth of the Wye. This suggests that smoking has less to do with lung cancer than environmental factors where people live. The Gordano valley (which has no river) has high risks for all cancers. These findings support the hypothesis that risk is positively associated with residence near areas of radioactively contaminated mud and that the radioactivity is a major factor in causing the cancers. Other factors, such as pollution from petro- chemical works, probably contribute to risks. It is well recognised that factors interact and multiply risks. Recommendations + COMARE and SAHSU should be replaced. + Localised cancer incidence data for England, plus recent Welsh data, should be released to responsible independent research organisations for the purpose of environmental studies of associations between localised contamination and variations in disease rates + Scientific models of radiation risk at low dose and dose rate must be thoroughly reviewed. Contacts + Dr Busby (Green Audit) 01970 639 315 / 07989 428833 + Richard Bramhall (Low Level Radiation Campaign) 01597 824771 + Jim Duffy (Stop Hinkley) 07968 974 805 Notes 1 i.e. the period covered by the 4th Report of COMARE 2 these data are available for purchase from the Office of National Statistics, in contrast to incidence data, which Cancer Registries refuse to release. Incidence data are far more informative, due to the larger numbers and the fact that the influence of environmental factors tends to be masked by people moving house between diagnosis and death (Incidence data are usually coded to residence at diagnosis) Downloadable Reports + Childhood leukaemia and cancer in Chepstow, opposite Oldbury Nuclear Power Station. + Cancer Mortality and Proximity to Oldbury Nuclear Power Station in Gloucestershire, 1995 - 1999 Pt. I + Cancer Mortality and Proximity to Oldbury Pt. II Maps to open and save [as JPEGs] + Map of breast cancer mortality risk + Map of lung cancer mortality risk + Map of all malignancies mortality risk, female + Map of all malignancies mortality risk, male + Map of prostate cancer mortality risk ***************************************************************** 17 Landmines in your lungs The timebomb in your lymph nodes illustrating the fallacy of the "average dose" model. [plutonium in tracheo-bronchial lymph node (94KB)] Plutonium 239 autoradiography. The star slightly left of centre shows tracks made by alpha rays from a particle of plutonium 239 in the lung tissue of an ape. This set of alpha tracks (magnified 500 times) occurred over a 48 hr period. The tracks are about 35 microns (5 cell diameters) but this is a two dimensional view of a 3D tissue event, which in fact occurs continuously in biological space. Taken from Robert Del Tredici's book Working in the Fields of the Bomb (1) published in 1987. The situation would have been much the same if the particle had been depleted uranium, which is now implicated in Gulf War syndrome and an accelerating rate of leukaemia and congenital deformities in Iraq (see *Guardian* newspaper 21st December '98) A single particle of DU smaller than 5 microns can expose the surrounding tissue to radiation 800 times the annual dosage permitted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for the entire body. See this link for establishment admissions on this subject. See this link for cartoon illustrating the absorbed dose fallacy. Alpha particles have a short emission path so may be hard to detect outside the body. Customary histology and autopsy studies do not detect plutonium in the living body so it is likely to be an occult, undetected and unreported factor. In man, it is particularly well situated to cause harm since it lodges especially in the body-wide reticulo-endothelial system. (2), in human tracheo-bronchial lymph nodes at concentrations between 100 times and 10,000 times higher than in any other tissues in the same body. (3), (4). Here it can impair and kill cells of the immune system leading to immune deficiency and eventually leukaemia. Leukaemia is found down wind from Windscale which has been processing nuclear waste and extracting plutonium since 1952. The first plutonium bomb (Japan, August 1945) comprised 15 kg of Pu239. Of this only 1.5 kg fissioned, and the remainder (13.5 kg) was vaporized. It has been shown that within two years the Nagasaki plutonium became evenly distributed around the northern hemisphere and random sampling in stable ice layers in the Canadian Arctic for instance showed traces (5). It is inferred that from this time, Pu239 could gain access to biological systems and to the food chain. Plutonium has four oxidation states so its chemistry is complex. It can form water soluble hydroxyls and oxyhalides that can be absorbed into living systems. Some heavy metals form methyl derivatives capable of skin absorption. In the hydrosphere, plutonium concentrates in sediments. Plutonium has been shown to gain access to marine life and food chain in varying proportions (5). It is taken up most actively by plankton, and is also rapidly excreted by them, but plankton feeders such as fish larva, herring, pilchard, anchovy and whales are susceptible to ingesting it. It is also taken up significantly by bottom feeding marine creatures that live on or disturb sediment. These include starfish, octopus, flatfish and cod.(5) It hs also been shown to become incorporated into tree rings and in children's teeth in Britain (6). See a report on plutonium in the environment on this site. References: 1. From At Work in the Fields of the Bomb, Robert del Tredici, Harper and Row, 1987, page 39. 2. Environmental Plutonium in Humans by David M. Taylor Applied Radiation and Isotopes V.46, No.11, 1995, p1245-1252 3. McKinroy, J. F. Kathren, R.L. Voelz, G.L. Swint, M. J. 1991 U. S Transuranium Registry Report on the 239 Pu distribution in a human body Health Physics, Vol. 60 No. 3 307-333 March 1991 see this link for the data 4. 5.Plutonium in the Environment Symposium Report, Ottawa July 1994, reported in Applied Radiation and Isotopes V.46, No.11, 1995 : 6. Variations in the concentation of plutonium, strontium 90 and total alpha-emitters in human teeth collected within the British Isles. Science of the Total Environment 201 (1997) 235-243. This page was borrowed from and amended by LLRC 22nd December 1998. ***************************************************************** 18 Las Vegas council briefs for May 3, 2001 May 03, 2001 Resolution backs planning coalition The Las Vegas City Council has approved a resolution supporting the Southern Nevada Regional Planning Coalition's efforts to coordinate strategies on Yucca Mountain. The resolution says that the city supports the coalition's opposition of the location of a high-level nuclear waste repository in Southern Nevada. The Department of Energy is considering shipping 70,000 to 90,000 tons of nuclear waste through the Las Vegas Valley on the way to Yucca Mountain. The council is encouraging the coalition to provide regional guidance on policy issues affecting the area and ensuring that constant opposition is maintained among governments in Clark County and Nevada. More funds OK'd for disputed wall With construction beginning after more than a year, the city will spend an additional $45,000 to complete the Bonanza Village wall. Additional project costs were related to the work hiatus ordered by the Nevada Supreme Court in June. In March, the court ruled that the city could continue the project, which was stalled after a resident sued the city alleging that a majority of the residents no longer wanted the project completed. City staff conducted a survey of the residents in the neighborhood near Martin Luther King Boulevard and Bonanza Road and obtained estimates for options to enhance the aesthetics and a time frame to pay back the cost of the wall. The city sent surveys to 169 residents in Bonanza Village, but only 47 people responded. A majority or residents said they would rather the wall stay how it is, rather than use stucco or split-face. Although a majority of respondents said they wanted to pay the cost of the wall back over 10 years, City Councilman Lawrence Weekly opted for a 20-year pay period for lower-income residents, which the council supported. Office planned for West LV The Veterans Administration will soon have its own office in West Las Vegas. The council has agreed to lease 3.2 acres of land in the Las Vegas Enterprise Park to the federal government, which will in turn select a lessee to build an office facility. The government will pay the city $1 yearly for the land. Once a lessee is chosen the city will sell the land at Vegas Drive and Stella Lake Street for $5 a square foot or $702,980. The lease will carry for two years with the option to renew in 2003. The city is moving forward with annexing 175.38 acres in the northwest. A bill calling for the annexation of Bureau of Land Management land at the northwest corner of Torrey Pines Drive and Horse Drive was approved by the council Wednesday. Final annexation will take place May 11. Two bills sponsored by Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman and approved Wednesday will tighten restrictions for outcall entertainers and escorts. The bills requires persons who work as escorts or outcall entertainers to obtain a health card. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 19 Nuclear waste documents a major step JOURNEY FOR APPROVAL STARTS Today's release of documents on the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository starts the recommendation process for site development. Additional information, such as how the repository would comply with federal radiation standards, is scheduled for release later this summer. After that, public hearings will be held. Then, the preliminary site evaluation report will be finalized and submitted to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. He is expected before the end of the year to review the documents, the final environmental impact statement and other information to decide on whether to recommend the project to President Bush. Bush then will make his recommendation to Congress. At that time, Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn or the Nevada Legislature can issue a notice of disapproval, which stands unless overridden by a simple majority vote of the House and the Senate. If Congress overrides the state's veto, the Energy Department would have to submit a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build and operate the repository. A second license application would have to be submitted to take possession of the spent reactor fuel. -- Keith Rogers/Review-Journal Friday, May 04, 2001 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Nuclear Consideration of repository moves forward By KEITH ROGERS LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL Nevada lawmakers today will get their first look at documents that Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham will use as a road map to decide whether to recommend Yucca Mountain as the burial ground for the nation's most lethal nuclear wastes. Copies of the 1,500-page collection, obtained by the Review-Journal, stop short of concluding that the volcanic-rock ridge 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas and a system of barriers are suitable for safely holding spent reactor fuel stored at nuclear power plants across the country. But release of the reports represents a big step toward Yucca Mountain becoming within the decade the nation's repository for nuclear waste. The reports are not expected to surprise Nevada officials who oppose what they call "the dump," and they launch a process that will allow the state to disapprove of any recommendation Abraham and later President Bush could make to Congress to proceed with building the repository. One of the four documents -- a new addition to a draft impact statement that was published for public review two years ago -- said the worst possible accident would be an earthquake collapsing a building where waste canisters are handled above ground near the proposed repository. Even this, the document said, would produce a slim chance only that anyone would die from an accidental radioactive release, a figure that is 22 percent less than was presented in the draft environmental impact statement. A "flexible design" -- one leaving open how long the repository should be allowed to ventilate heat the waste packages will transmit to the rock surrounding them -- will reduce the chance of a lethal radioactive release. An earthquake crumbling an above-ground waste-handling facility has been an issue with state officials, but the new evaluation does not address a major concern of state scientists: that thermal groundwater, triggered by a seismic or volcanic event, could shoot upward and flood the repository floor, corrode waste containers and carry off radioactive materials into the environment. Federal geologists have discounted the odds of such an event falling within a 1-in-10 million-per-year chance of happening. If odds had hit that level, such an accident would have been included in the analysis of the repository. The federal scientists base their assumption on evidence from minerals found 1,000 feet deep in the mountain, which they have said were formed by rainwater trickling downward through cracks in the mountain, not by hot water that state scientists claim shot upward since the mountain was formed by volcanic ash 13 million years ago. Also, the supplement to the draft environmental impact statement -- which will be put out today for a 45-day public review -- does not discuss the effects of transporting waste to the repository from reactor sites over highways and railroads. State and local officials in Nevada and elsewhere have expressed concerns about possible accidentsinvolved with transporting nuclear waste. But the document said, "Transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to the repository would not be affected by the repository design evolution and is not evaluated in this supplement." Release of the documents starts the site recommendation process. It represents a crossroad in 20 years of assessing the scientific and engineering hurdles involved with designing and building a maze of tunnels inside Yucca Mountain to hold 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste, most of which is solid spent fuel pellets encased in metal rods. The repository could be ready to receive the first waste shipments in 2010. It would be loaded over a 24-year period and sealed at some time to endure at least the next 10,000 years. The cost of doing this and closing and decommissioning a repository in 2119, if one is built on schedule, would be more than $49 billion based on last year's dollar value. Since studies began in the late 1970s, nearly $7 billion has been spent on the program, according to one of the documents released today. Another new document, an assessment of fees paid by nuclear-power ratepayers, concludes that the fund will be adequate for the waste-disposal task but notes, "projected balances in the Nuclear Waste Fund are highly sensitive to the economy's real rate of return," considering interest rates and inflation. The bulk of the new documents consists of the Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report. The 3-inch-thick report replaces what Energy Department officials had called the Site Recommendation Consideration Report, a record of the completed scientific work that was accompanied by a controversial draft summary. The summary and a note to reviewers were investigated this year by the agency's inspector general after allegations surfaced that some of the language prematurely concluded the mountain was a safe place to build a repository because nothing so far has been found that would disqualify it. While investigators found that some of the wording could have been interpreted to mean that scientists determined the site was suitable, the inspector general concluded that the scientific studies are sound and not biased. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 20 Power company pitches new generation of nuclear plants LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL: NEWS: Friday, May 04, 2001 Plans assume waste repository at Yucca Mountain will be built By STEVE TETREAULT DONREY WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The president of a Chicago-based power company said Thursday his firm is on track to seek licenses for a new generation of small nuclear power plants, which would make them the first ordered in the United States in more than 20 years and the latest indication that nuclear is making a comeback in the nation's energy mix. Corbin McNeill, head of Exelon Corp., told a panel of U.S. senators about his company's investment in technology to build the pebble-bed modular reactor, an updated design that boosters claim is safer and more economical than those built in the 1960s and 1970s. McNeill said he was not concerned about nuclear waste disposal. "I have confidence that we will see a big jump by this time next year in the development of Yucca Mountain" as a repository, he said. The Energy Department is expected to recommend later this year that the mountain ridge 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas can safely store nuclear waste for 10,000 years. McNeill said a test plant of the pebble-bed reactor will be built near Capetown, South Africa, if the design passes scrutiny by an expert team that will report this summer. Exelon's partners are Eskom, the state-owned utility in South Africa, the Industrial Development Corp. in South Africa and BNFL, the former British Nuclear Fuels Limited. If successful, the company would apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an early site permit next year and a construction and operating license later in 2002 or 2003. McNeill said Exelon would want to build several plants, but did not say where. Exelon, formed last year by the merger of Unicom Corp. of Chicago and PECO Energy in Philadelphia, already operates 17 nuclear reactors generating 16,970 megawatts of electricity. McNeill cautioned that a number of financial and insurance regulations would need to be changed in recognition that pebble-bed reactors are smaller reactors that generate a fraction of a conventional 1,100-megawatt nuclear plant. McNeill outlined the plan at a hearing led by Sens. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., and Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska. Both support nuclear energy and said they have waited a long time for good news. Nuclear power -- which generates about 20 percent of the nation's electricity -- is attracting renewed attention in the face of energy shortages in parts of the nation, streamlined government regulations, increased interest from investors and a new generation of promising power plant designs, industry supporters say. A White House energy task force headed by Vice President Dick Cheney is expected to recommend new incentives to build more nuclear power plants and extend the lives of old ones when it releases its report in the coming month. "I'm pleased we are finally taking a serious look at how nuclear energy can fit into a national energy policy strategy," Domenici said. Anna Aurilio, an analyst for the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, said environmentalists are skeptical of the pebble-bed design. "It sounds like the stuff they were saying about nuclear energy 40 years ago," she said. "This reactor doesn't exist anywhere yet and second, nuclear power companies have a notorious history of dramatically underestimating their costs." Also testifying Thursday on the state of nuclear power was Richard Meserve, chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Asked for an update on negotiations to set radiation standards at Yucca Mountain, Meserve told senators the matter still is up in the air. The NRC and Energy Department differ from the Environmental Protection Agency over the amounts of radiation that could acceptably escape into the air and groundwater outside the repository. Negotiations have been under way since the outset of the Bush administration, Meserve said. "I wouldn't say they are standing on opposite sides of the room and yelling at each other," Meserve said. "There are differences of views but there is an effort under way to find a satisfactory resolution. Whether that will be achieved or not, it's too early to say."optional trim 1 ends here optional trim 2 starts hereRichard Rhodes, an author who won a 1988 Pulitzer Prize for his book on the making of the atomic bomb, said the media slants against nuclear power. "There is ample evidence of bias in media coverage of accidents and breakdowns, which is far more sensational and punitive for nuclear power than for other kinds of energy generation," Rhodes said. "One can look at the numbers and say, even if there were leakage from a waste repository in 10,000 years, how do you balance the risk against the fact, and this is a World Health Organization number, that 3 million people die in the world every year from indoor and outdoor air pollution," Rhodes said.optional trim 2 ends here webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 21 Over and over Friday, May 04, 2001 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal To the editor: In his May 1 letter, R. Titus blasts Democratic legislators for being "thick between the ears when it comes to economics" and then states that only "nuclear and fossil fuels can provide the quantities of dependable electrical energy needed in this country ... " as this relates to the development of renewable resources. I must respond with some good ole' Democratic logic. In Webster's, conservatism is defined as the "disposition in politics to preserve what is established." Liberalism is defined as "a political philosophy based on belief in progress ... ." Not in Webster's, but difficult to deny, is the notion that insanity can be defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. Applied to R. Titus's comments as well to the current energy policy espoused by Vice President Dick Cheney, it doesn't really take a liberal -- oops, I mean rocket scientist -- to see where we'll be in the next 10 years since what we've been doing has worked so well. But, then again, who uses logic anymore? T. KROLAK LAS VEGAS Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2001 ***************************************************************** 22 Yucca still key in DOE reports: Studies may pave way for dumpsite's future Today: May 04, 2001 at 11:33:12 PDT By Mary Manning LAS VEGAS SUN Four Energy Department reports on Yucca Mountain -- including an outline of scientific progress and a cost analysis -- were expected to be released today. The studies do not provide an official endorsement of Yucca Mountain as a high-level nuclear waste repository, according to Lake Barrett, acting director of the DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. The DOE studies, which report no major obstacles in recommending the site to the president and Congress, serve as an extra step toward ensuring public health and safety if a repository to house 77,000 tons of commercial reactor and weapons waste is built in Nevada, Barrett said. "The DOE believes Yucca Mountain remains a promising site as a high-level nuclear waste repository," DOE Yucca Mountain Project Manager Russ Dyer said. State and local government officials are expected to be briefed on the reports during a meeting today at the DOE Science and Information Center on Meadows Lane. The four studies include a 1,000-page science and engineering report that describes ongoing studies at Yucca Mountain; a total cost analysis of the project from construction to closure; a nuclear consumer fee analysis; and a supplemental environmental impact statement on repository design. Reports and some of the findings include: * Science and Engineering: The research examines how fast ground water moves through the mountain's volcanic ash layers, what could happen when highly radioactive waste heats the rocks and chemical changes occur inside the mountain. The DOE also presents options for keeping the radioactive burial site open for 100 years or more for monitoring after the last waste containers are buried in 2060. * Supplemental Environmental Impact: This report includes plans other than the current "hot" repository concept. The current design would allow packages of radioactive waste to be packed closer together inside the mountain. Alternatives would leave more space between containers, which would allow for a "cooler" repository. Independent scientists have recommended that the DOE examine a larger repository design to allow for more space between containers. The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board told the DOE that if containers are placed closer together a greater chance exists for heat to accelerate corrosion, which would allow radiation to escape from containers and into the environment. * Cost Analysis: Predicts how much the DOE would have to spend for building and operating the repository. It could cost at least $58 billion to build and begin operating a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain by 2010. * Nuclear Ratepayer Fees: This document indicates the current charge of a tenth of a cent paid per kilowatt hour by nuclear power consumers would cover expenses associated with constructing and operating the repository. The DOE's analysis of the fee paid by nuclear power consumers indicates that the current rate -- a 10th of a cent per kilowatt hour -- is sufficient to fund the construction and operation of a Yucca Mountain repository. The cost analysis and the fee reports were required by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the congressional mandate that launched the national program to manage high-level nuclear waste. The DOE plans public hearings on this report in late May and early June. A final environmental impact study is expected should the site be recommended to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. The reports were delayed for about five months as the DOE's inspector general's office conducted an investigation into allegations of bias on the part of DOE officials who prepared the reports. A two-page document, written by John Kelly of JK Research Associates of Colorado, explained to reviewers how to sell the Yucca Mountain site to Congress, despite an estimated $58 billion price tag. The Sun published excerpts from the memo on Dec. 1. Licensing of the project by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is not expected to begin until mid to late 2002. The DOE estimates it will take about a year for the site recommendation to move from the Bush administration through Congress. It is then expected to face a challenge from Nevada lawmakers, who have the right to veto the recommendation under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Federal budget cuts may delay waste-cleanup projects at Hanford *Friday, May 4, 2001* By LINDA ASHTON THE ASSOCIATED PRESS YAKIMA -- The Bush administration budget for cleaning up radioactive waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation may delay several projects, including accelerated cleanup along the Columbia River, the state Department of Ecology said yesterday. "It just looks like there's going to be trouble all over the site, especially for the cleanup along the river," said Mike Wilson, nuclear waste program manager for Ecology. Wilson and other regulators met with representatives of the U.S. Department of Energy yesterday to discuss the implications of the Bush budget for Hanford, the most contaminated nuclear site in the nation. The Energy Department has been working with state and federal regulators during the last year on the Hanford 2012 plan, which would speed up cleanup along the river corridor. But the Bush budget "kind of puts this on a back seat," said Wade Ballard, the Energy Department's assistant manager for planning and integration in Richland. The president's fiscal year 2002 budget for the Richland Operations Office is $585 million, a decrease from the 2001 budget of $689 million and significantly below the $823 million DOE needs to meet all its current legal obligations under the 1989 Tri-Party Agreement, the pact governing cleanup at Hanford. The Columbia River-focused Hanford 2012 scenario, which would include some changed cleanup deadlines under the Tri-Party Agreement, would require $765 million in funding for 2002. The Richland Operations budget covers all aspects of cleanup at Hanford, except the Office of River Protection, which has a separate budget. The river protection office is responsible for managing the 177 underground tanks holding nearly 54 million gallons of highly radioactive waste and for building a glassification plant to turn 10 percent of the waste into glass logs for long-term storage. The Office of River Protection was funded at $757 million in 2001 and needs $1.1 billion to meet its contract obligations in 2002. The Bush administration has budgeted $814 million for 2002. The contracts for building the glassification plant and preparing the tank farms for the project were written with financial incentives for the contractors to bring the 2002 tasks in under $1.1 billion, said Steve Wiegman, an ORP senior adviser. "But if you reduce the amount of money available, it also reduces the incentive to get the work done cheaper," Wiegman said. "A smaller budget forces you into finding efficiencies, but it also removes the advantages that you've gained in the way we negotiated these contracts. We haven't worked our way completely through that." One of the Department of Ecology's biggest concerns is that the Bush budget will further delay the start-up of the glassification plant, now scheduled for 2007, Wilson said. Just how far beyond 2007 depends on budget developments for the next couple of years. At least two of the Office of River Protection's budget scenarios "asked us to suspend disbelief," Wilson said. "They ask us to assume things happening that have never happened before -- that we will have a significant increase in funding in 2003." Construction on the plant was supposed to start in July, but the Energy Department has said for months it wouldn't happen until July 2002. Now, it's more likely in the fall of 2002. "It's one of the stories of the tanks -- there's never enough money to do it this year, but there's always plenty to do it next year," Wilson said. Some critical projects remain intact under the Bush budget, such as moving spent nuclear fuel out of the old, leaky K Basins, just yards from the Columbia River, and stabilizing about 4 tons of scrap plutonium for disposal. [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 ***************************************************************** 2 Glassification project faces more delays This story was published 5/4/2001 By John Stang Herald staff writer Hanford's stalled waste glassification project appears likely to be delayed even longer by the Department of Energy's budget for fiscal 2002. How long of a new delay is uncertain. The current targets of beginning construction in 2002 and converting the first radioactive waste into glass by 2007 appear likely to slip under the budget the Bush administration is sending to Congress. Much of the budget request also does not meet requirements of the Tri-Party Agreement, which governs Hanford cleanup. "We have very close to a bogus budget scenario," said Mike Wilson, nuclear program manager for Washington's Department of Ecology. DOE already is making overtures to renegotiate the Tri-Party Agreement and similar DOE pacts in other states. A big question is whether the budget request will trigger a state lawsuit because it underfunds many DOE legal obligations, especially the glassification project. Richland DOE officials briefed Washington's Department of Ecology and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday on Hanford's nearly $1.4 billion budget request. Depending on the budget scenario used, that amount is either $469 million or $527 million short of Tri-Party Agreement milestones. The budget request almost fully funds removing spent nuclear fuel from the K Basins next to the Columbia River and converting Hanford's plutonium into safer forms. These are Hanford's No. 2 and No. 3 priorities. The rest of Hanford's projects face cuts. Bechtel Hanford's river shore projects and the 300 Area's cleanup have been slashed. Also, it's unclear how the budget plan would affect Hanford employment. Contractors at the federal site don't know. Fluor Hanford and Bechtel Hanford budgets are earmarked to shrink in 2002, which makes layoffs likely. However, Bechtel National is in a hiring spurt for the glassification project. There's a chance the hirings and layoffs might cancel out each other, said Wade Ballard, DOE assistant manager for planning and integration. But he said some job skills are interchangeable between projects and some are not, which clouds the picture. The Bush administration's budget unfolds like this: n DOE's nationwide budget is cut from $19.7 billion in fiscal 2001 to $19.2 billion in fiscal 2002. n The nationwide cleanup budget consequently shrinks from $6.267 billion in 2001 to $5.913 billion in 2002 although Hanford and other sites need more cleanup money. Congress has set its starting position for budget talks at $6.65 billion. n At Hanford, the DOE plan shrinks the cleanup budget from $1.456 billion to almost $1.4 billion. DOE in Washington, D.C., has set these guidelines for how its Richland office and the Office of River Protection should divide the money among major programs: n Tank waste glassification The top priority -- to build plants to convert radioactive tank wastes into glass -- is to get only $500 million in 2002. And to increase the glassification budget from $377 million in 2001 to $500 million in 2002, DOE took money from other Hanford work. Glassification already has stalled several times in the past decade, most recently when DOE fired BNFL Inc. last May and replaced it with Bechtel National in December. On Thursday, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham discussed the budget request with a subcommittee of the U.S. House Appropriations Committee. His prepared statement said the $123 million increase to $500 million will enable the glassification project to begin construction in 2002 and go to "hot start" in 2007. His testimony did not mention that DOE had long-ago calculated that $690 million is needed for that. Steve Wiegman, a senior technical adviser at the Office of River Protection, said a $500 million glassification budget means the 2002 and 2007 targets likely won't be met. He couldn't forecast how long any delays might be. Actually, DOE has already delayed the 2007 "hot start." When DOE signed its contract with Bechtel, it gave Bechtel until 2009 to reach "hot start," despite a Tri-Party Agreement deadline in 2007. The state was not consulted on that change. DOE's Washington, D.C., headquarters says that it plans to increase the glassification budget enough in fiscal 2003 to meet the 2007 "hot start" -- floating a preliminary 2003 budget estimate of $880 million. Wiegman cautioned that Hanford experts still need to analyze that to see if it is on target. Wilson noted that DOE has balked at significant glassification budget increases for years. "We haven't seen that happen yet," he noted. He doubts DOE will seek the $880 million. Meanwhile, Bechtel National's contract is based on $690 million budgets in 2002 and 2003. It likely will be renegotiated, Bechtel and DOE officials said. CH2M Hill's tanks work The budget to safely maintain the tank farms and prepare wastes for glassification would drop from $370 million in 2001 to $314 million in 2002 for basic maintenance, pumping wastes from single-shell tanks and monitoring double-shell tanks. But preparing to send wastes to glassification is in budget limbo. And removing solid wastes from the single-shell tanks isn't funded. Bechtel Hanford's river work This is removing contaminated soil from near the river, demolishing and sealing old reactor complexes and tackling underground contamination. Despite good track records, these projects don't have top priority. So they've been on thin budget ice each year. In 2001, this program received $128 million. The administration wants to cut that to $101 million in 2002. DOE's Richland office wants to sacrifice some legally mandated 200 Area studies in return for accelerated river shore cleanup -- seeking $178 million in 2002 for the work. If the sacrificed 200 Area work was added, the total cost would be $236 million. Bechtel's contract expires next year, and DOE's Richland office wants to add the accelerated cleanup to the new contract proposal. The administration's 2002 budget does not match that plan. Other issues The 2002 budget request wants to cut the Richland office's "site integration" money from $35.2 million to $19.8 million. This money covers special grants, payments in lieu of taxes to local governments and Hanford Advisory Board expenses. DOE has not detailed those cuts. Back to top stories Copyright 2000 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 3 Plutonium shipment won't affect Pantex Amarillo Globe-News: Local News: 05/03/01 By Max Albright The start of shipments of plutonium scrap from Rocky Flats in Colorado to the Department of Energy's Savannah River, S.C., plant for storage will have no effect on the Pantex Plant near Amarillo. The Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant is being closed and cleaned up. This round of Rocky Flats plutonium material will not be going to Pantex, said Karen Lutz, a DOE spokeswoman in Golden, Colo. Brenda Finley, of DOE in Amarillo, said Pantex is not receiving the plutonium. Shipments of plutonium pits from Rocky Flats to Pantex ended in 1999, said Jennifer Thompson, a spokeswoman for Kaiser-Hill, the contractor that is cleaning up Rocky Flats. The pits are round, follow shells of the nuclear weapons that provide the weapons' potential thermonuclear blast, according to the DOE. In Amarillo, Mavis Belisle of the Peace Farm - a group that monitors nuclear weapons - said the shipment plan will not affect Pantex. "It was never scheduled to come here," Belisle said. The plutonium will be shipped by trucks pulling specially designed trailers, with transportation operations directed by the DOE Albuquerque, N.M., office, Lutz said. The truck routes are classified secrets, Lutz said. Bernie Pleau of Albuquerque DOE said he couldn't comment on the routes. Belisle said she thinks the trucks will go north of Amarillo. Belisle said anti-nuclear groups don't consistently monitor such trucks. Plutonium metals and weapon parts and raw plutonium from Rocky Flats will be shipped in containers that have been certified as safe for the material, Thompson said. However, plutonium oxide will stay put in Rocky Flats. The oxide, which appears as plutonium dust or rust, is a result of oxygen's affect on plutonium. Container designs to ship plutonium oxide have not been certified as safe, and so plutonium oxide will not be shipped yet, DOE officials said. ***************************************************************** 4 Chao: Compensation program near Daily news from Louisville, Kentucky and Southern Indiana from courier-journal.com Friday, May 4, 2001 Sick nuclear workers may see checks in fall By Nancy Zuckerbrod, Associated Press PADUCAH, Ky. -- Labor Secretary Elaine Chao told current and former workers at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant yesterday that a program to compensate employees who got sick from working at nuclear weapon plants should be up and running by July 31. That deadline was set by Congress, and Chao said last month that she might have trouble meeting it. But she said yesterday that the Labor Department should be able to process the claims on time as long as the White House approves the agency's draft regulations by the end of this month. If that happens, people could start getting checks by the fall, Chao estimated. ''Many workers at Paducah -- including some of you here today -- not only gave your labor, but they also gave their health. And now it's time for the government to compensate these workers,'' Chao said after touring the facility, which these days enriches uranium for commercial use. The program approved last year by Congress offers lifetime medical care and $150,000 to ailing workers who were employed in the government's nuclear weapons complex, at factories that worked for the Energy Department, or at nuclear test sites in Alaska and Nevada. The program is limited to those with cancer associated with radiation, silicosis or chronic beryllium disease. Eligibility rules for some workers have been set by law, and the Labor Department must work out qualification guidelines for the rest. Soon after taking office, Chao tried to shift control of the program to the Justice Department. She said that department was better suited to oversee the program but changed her mind last month amid criticism from lawmakers. The lawmakers were upset by the job Justice has done running a compensation program for former uranium miners and people who lived downwind of nuclear test blasts. ''It really made me mad, because our lawyer said we don't want it with the Justice Department -- that they'll never do anything,'' said Martha Harding Alls. After her father, Joe Harding, died in 1980, his bones were found to contain 1,700 to 34,000 times the expected concentration of uranium. Yet while he lived, Harding was denied compensation because records showed he was only exposed to small levels of radiation. Sitting in a union hall with Chao and retired workers, Alls said she couldn't help thinking about her father's struggle. ''If only they had listened to Daddy,'' she said. But Alls praised Chao's visit and said she was optimistic about the compensation program. ''We just thought we'd never hear anything -- that it would always be a cover-up,'' Alls said. Chao said she planned to hire 300 employees to help administer the new program, and she announced the department would open small offices in Paducah and around the country to help workers process claims. She also said the department would need people to review appeals. ''It is a humongous task, which was why as you can tell I was a little bit concerned that we were not going to be able to meet the deadline,'' Chao said. Copyright 2001 The Courier-Journal. ***************************************************************** 5 Chao: Compensation may begin in early fall - By Joe Walker Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com--*270.575.8650* @@UPLOAD_TIME:200105032314 The Paducah Sun Paducah, Kentucky Friday, May 04, 2001 *The labor secretary’s visit followed a decision that her agency would oversee the program, which will pay sick workers $150,000.* LANCE DENNEE/The Sun--Plant tour: U.S. Labor Secretary Elaine Chao talks with plant General Manager Howard Pulley. Sick Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant workers and their families could start receiving compensation checks early this fall if the mechanics of the program run smoothly, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao says. Chao, who visited the plant Thursday and later spoke with sick retired workers, said the speed of the "very ambitious" process depends heavily on filing proposed regulations by May 31, as mandated by Congress, "and we expect to meet that deadline." She said a draft was submitted earlier this week to the Office of Management and Budget, Congress' accounting arm, which has pledged to hasten its normal 90-day review process. Assuming the schedule is met, the Department of Labor will begin taking applications July 1 and the final rules will be effective July 31, Chao said. She urged workers to apply promptly, and said checks could be in the mail starting two months after the rules are finalized. "I can promise the workers and the community that we will give our all to put the program in place as quickly as possible," Chao said, "and with as much concern for those who have been made ill as humanly possible." Chao also said Paducah was chosen for a resource center — one of at least nine nationwide for sick nuclear workers — to help people understand the system and file claims. Although a site has not been picked, the center will be staffed with local personnel, she said. Chao promised to have a national toll-free call center ready by the end of May, and said workers will be able to download application forms from the department's Web site. Within two months, a team will hold meetings here to answer workers' questions, she said. Her visit followed a decision that her agency, rather than the Department of Justice, would oversee the program, which will pay qualifying sick workers or their surviving families $150,000 and future medical costs. Although claims are subject to review, workers are guaranteed compensation if they have specified illnesses related to exposure from radiation, beryllium or silica. Also eligible are sick workers at the Honeywell plant in Metropolis, Ill., which supplies uranium hexafluoride for enrichment at Paducah. Chao, wife of U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, who sponsored the sick-worker legislation, drew the ire of union officials and others earlier this year when she proposed turning the program over to the Justice Department. She said Thursday that she reconsidered after becoming convinced that the Labor Department could handle the claims. "Admittedly, it's a great deal of work, so you can understand my concern," Chao said. Her agency must hire 300 claims adjusters, reviewers and clerical people by July 31 to meet the demands of the program, one of four for sick workers under the Labor Department umbrella. The new program targets about 700,000 nuclear workers nationwide and 10,000 at Paducah, said Shelby Hallmark, acting head of the Office of Worker Compensation Programs. Those eligible for benefits are only a fraction of that number, he said, but there still could be 50,000 claims during the first year. Workers at Paducah and other uranium enrichment plants are "carved out" of the legislation to ease and expedite their claims, Chao said. Before discussing the program with news media, Chao chatted with employees in the plant lunchroom, talking about their jobs and lives and looking at family photographs. She then took a bus tour of the sprawling facility and spent considerable time asking questions in the control center, where virtually every aspect of the plant is constantly monitored. One of her interviewees — Don Loe, a 33-year operator — said the facility is unlike any other at the plant. "When I first walked in, it sort of reminded me of the Starship Enterprise, and they said 'you're going to fly it.'" Loe said he appreciated Chao's kindness and curiosity. "I think it's important for anyone in politics to know what we're doing, how we're doing it and that we should continue doing it." Chao ended her plant stay by meeting with leaders of the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union local, which represents more than half the plant workers. She then drove to the local's meeting hall on Cairo Road to talk with sick workers and their families. Union President David Fuller said her trip to Paducah was important, considering that sick employees have waited a long time for help. "I think it's entirely appropriate that she should come here to announce this," he said. "I hope it works as well as she says she thinks it's going to." Although there was speculation Chao would name Dr. David Michaels to head the program, she said nothing about him. Michaels was a central figure in a Department of Energy investigation into past practices that sickened workers, as well as their health testing. He has said he would like to be involved in planning and drafting final details of the compensation program. Fuller said he made suggestions to Chao about trustworthy people to lead the program. "I wouldn't want to say who we suggested, but obviously, David Michaels has been deeply involved in this and we have a lot of faith in him," Fuller said. "If somebody suggested him, I think he would be a wonderful choice." ***************************************************************** 6 Retired workers take wait-and-see attitude on plan The Paducah Sun Paducah, Kentucky Friday, May 04, 2001 *Most retirees who met with the labor secretary said they are encouraged, but will remain skeptical until they are compensated.* By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com--*270.575.8650* LANCE DENNEE/The Sun--Retired worker meets--Former gaseous diffusion plant employee Jack Hill of Paducah talks with U.S. Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao at the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union hall. Having heard promises come and go, retired workers who are sure they got sick working at Paducah's uranium enrichment plant during the Cold War say they will wait until the checks arrive to embrace a new compensation program. "I think I'm eligible for the $150,000, but they've got a long way to go, a long road ahead of them setting all this up," Bill Ross said after meeting with Labor Secretary Elaine Chao. "And I told her that." Chao spoke with Ross and others Thursday in Paducah to explain offering them $150,000 lump-sum payments and medical benefits. Those eligible must have specified illnesses, including various cancers, related to exposure to radiation and other toxins. She said the program should be in place by the end of July and that the first compensation checks should be issued two months later. Ross worked in some of the riskiest areas of the plant, including a now-closed building where uranium, contaminated with highly radioactive plutonium, was fed into huge process buildings. "I was exposed to all the radiation out there at one time or another," he said. "You come into contact with a lot of things over 35 years." In 1993, he underwent surgery to remove 80 percent of his cancerous pancreas and four inches of intestines. "I guess I'm one of the lucky ones, really," he said. "I lived to tell about it." Ross took advantage of a new mobile CAT scan offered by the government and atomic workers' union to help screen illnesses. In February, technicians found a suspicious white spot on his lungs and advised him to get checked again later this month, which he plans to do. "I'm hoping it's not cancer and I'm hoping it's not asbestosis," Ross said. Former co-worker Roger Hunt spent more than 37 years in maintenance at the plant, working on the maze of lines and equipment used to enrich uranium for use in nuclear fuel. He remembers replacing compressor seals without a respirator as the plant raced its sister facilities in Ohio and Tennessee to see who could return equipment to use the fastest. At times, uranium dust was thick in the buildings, he said. "We were young and gung-ho, and we competed like mad," Hunt said. "There wasn't anyone out there that breathed more of it than I did." In 1989, Hunt developed breast cancer, rare for a man, and he believes he is one of only two male plant workers to have had the disease. His breast was removed, and soon doctors took out half his thyroid because of an odd-looking spot. Based on the list of eligible illnesses, Hunt believes he is entitled to $150,000, but says he will believe it when he sees it. "It's hard for me to be optimistic, but I think it's helped me today," he said of talking with Chao. "I believe they will work through this. I believe what she says, that they will try to do everything they can." Some retirees left the meeting early, saying they had heard enough, but most stayed until the end. John Hack, who worked at the plant for four years in the early 1950s, said he helped recover plutonium-contaminated uranium from recycled nuclear fuel. Others were exposed to highly toxic beryllium by milling precious metals from nuclear weapons parts and burying them at the plant, he said. Hack blames his scarred lungs on breathing uranium dust and fumes from trichloroethylene, a widely used, toxic cleaning solvent that has since been banned. He also coughs and gags because of problems with his nose and throat. Like other retirees, he said the proof will be when the checks come. "Let's just say I have encouragement, but I'm going to wait and see," Hack said. "Because politicians have a way of promising you the moon." ***************************************************************** 7 Claims offices to open near nuclear weapons plants thedailytimes.com - 2001-05-04 WASHINGTON -- Special claims offices will be set up near nine nuclear weapons plants to help job-sickened workers file for benefits under the nation's newest entitlement program, the Labor Department said Thursday. The offices will be set up at Piketon, Ohio; Paducah, Ky.; Hanford, Wash.; Oak Ridge, Tenn.; Savannah River, S.C.; Los Alamos, N.M.; Nevada Test Site, Nev.; Portsmouth, Ohio; Rocky Flats, Colo.; and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho. Labor Secretary Elaine Chao announced that decision in Paducah, where she also met with some cancer-stricken workers who may be eligible for federal benefits. A new program that is supposed to take effect July 31 offers $150,000, plus lifetime medical care to workers at nuclear weapons plants who contracted cancer, silicosis or beryllium disease because of on-the-job exposure. In addition to the nine new claims offices, the department said it will expand its existing offices in Cleveland, Seattle, Denver and Jacksonville, Fla., to handle the expected crush of applications from nuclear workers and heirs of deceased workers. Chao said Thursday that the Labor Department should be able to process the claims on time as long as the White House approves the agency's draft regulations by the end of this month. If that happens, people could start getting checks by the fall, Chao estimated. TVA must pay whistleblower CHATTANOOGA -- A federal review board has awarded compensatory damages to a Tennessee Valley Authority whistleblower who lost his job after raising safety concerns at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant. The Labor Department review board ordered TVA to pay $50,000 in damages and court costs to Curtis Overall of Cleveland, Tenn. In 1995, Overall was removed from his job overseeing the ice condenser system at Watts Bar when he found 171 broken screws at the bottom of the condenser system. His request to inspect the problem was dismissed by superiors, who were trying to start the plant after 20 years of construction. Overall, who was reinstated at TVA and received back pay, has left the agency over allegations TVA officials still were retaliating against him. That complaint is still pending before an administrative law judge. Blount Food Pantry has garden seeds The Blount County Food Pantry has garden seeds available for 25 cents per package. The Food Pantry is located at 931 E. Broadway, Maryville * The entrance to Old Tuckaleechee Road next to East Lamar Alexander Parkway (U.S. 321) across from the Strawgberry Patch Inn in Townsend will be closed for two weeks beginning Monday for road construction. ***************************************************************** 8 Special claims office to open June 15 at Nevada Test Site Today: May 04, 2001 at 9:56:34 PDT Las Vegas (AP) - The federal government says it'll open a special claims office June 15th for former Nevada Test Site nuclear weapons workers. The Labor Department offices will handle paperwork from job-sickened workers applying for benefits under the nation's newest entitlement program. The Nevada office will be one of nine nationwide. The department says it will also expand four other existing offices. The program offers 150 thousand dollars plus lifetime medical care to workers who contracted cancer, silicosis or beryllium disease because of on-the-job exposure at nuclear weapons plants. A special toll-free number to handle inquiries about the program should be set up by the end of May. If everything goes according to schedule, people could start getting checks by the fall. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 9 Center planned for ex-workers at test site LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL: NEWS: Friday, May 04, 2001 DONREY WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The government plans to open a center in Las Vegas this summer to help former Nevada Test Site workers claim benefits for radiation and lung-related diseases linked to their employment, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao said Thursday. A location has not been announced yet for the office, which should be in operation by the end of June, Nevada lawmakers said. The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, passed by Congress in 2000, provides $150,000 payments and medical benefits for nuclear weapons workers suffering illness from their exposure to radiation, beryllium or silica. Chao said centers will open near eight current or former weapons plants. A toll-free call center and a Web site with downloadable claim forms are in the works, she said. Chao said the Labor Department will expand existing workers compensation offices in Seattle, Denver, Cleveland and Jacksonville, Fla., to maintain cases under the program. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2001 ***************************************************************** 10 Fallout BayArea.com: SF Weekly How nuclear researchers handled -- and grossly mishandled -- the Cold War's most dangerous radioactive substances at a top-secret lab inside the Hunters Point Shipyard. The same shipyard the city wants to remake as San Francisco's newest neighborhood. Story By Lisa Davis 05/02/2001 For a long time now, San Francisco's leaders have dreamed of a new development along the city's waterfront, a 500-acre community where citizens promenade along San Francisco Bay, artists display their talents in a variety of new cultural institutions, and children frolic in new green spaces. In the dream, the community has offices and stores and more than 1,800 brand-new homes overlooking a bayside scene that includes one especially inviting aspect, a half-moon beach that curves in from a quiet arm of the bay. The beach has a gentle hillside immediately behind it, and, if everything goes according to plan, that hillside will become a park where the dogs and children of this dreamy future will be able to play and enjoy panoramic bay views -- on top of a toxic waste dump and just yards from a former nuclear research laboratory that handled, and significantly mishandled, large amounts of the most dangerous and long-lived radioactive poisons produced during the Cold War. An *SF Weekly* investigation of the environmental history of the San Francisco Naval Shipyard at Hunters Point -- land the city hopes to acquire and transform into a master-planned community -- has found troubling evidence that the Navy conducted nuclear research and mishandled radioactive waste on a vastly greater scale than has yet been revealed. For 23 years following World War II, the Hunters Point Shipyard was the site of the military's largest facility for applied nuclear research -- the top-secret Naval Radiological Defense Laboratory. Over the course of its life, according to government documents declassified at the request of *SF Weekly*, the NRDL handled nearly every kind of radioactive material known to man -- including, at one point, enough plutonium to kill 15 million people. The shipyard is also well known as a site where Navy ships were decontaminated after being irradiated in atomic weapons tests. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************