*****************************************************************
09/04/01 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 9.212
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************

                    NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS
 
 1  India to pursue three-stage nuclear power programme 
 2  UK eyes opportunites in Dounreay nuclear clean-up
 3  Bangkok Post Homepage Deadly Radiation Leak
 4  Dounreay:   Minter: in the shadow of Dounreay 
 5  Russia: Atomic power station may be solution for environmental 
 6  Nuclear firm bids for Dublin rail deal 
 7  Nuclear waste trains set to go twice safe limit
 8  FOCUS: Japan's nuclear energy policy remains in limbo
 9  Nuclear waste protesters take message to Las Vegas Strip
10  Haggling hides lack of Nevada nuclear clout  
11  Testifying at Extortion Trial May Not End Semnani's Woes 
12  Russia offers another reactor to Iran
13  Experiments test heat in Yucca Mountain
14  Yucca Mountain foes see alternative
15  Nuclear waste protesters hit Strip
16  Nuclear power plans
17  Columnist Susan Snyder: Small towns ready for garden party 
18  Letter: Waiting for bus too dangerous
19  Letter: Expand nuke hearings
20  Nuclear waste protesters hit the Strip
21  Lawsuit threatened as Yucca hearings near
22  Letter: Safety foremost
23  Shipments to state more a matter of when, not if 
24  Government urged to back nuclear power
25  Daily Events Report
26  IAEA Daily Press Review
27  Russia plans to enlarge Iranian nuclear power plant
28  ADAMS: Items of Interest - Tuesday, September 04, 2001
29  Nuclear power isn't 'clean'; it's dangerous  
30  Plutonium shipments will occur  
31  Austrian minister demands closure of disputed Czech nuclear 
32  Newspaper denies Russian secretiveness about nuclear dumping 
33  Bulgaria: Nuclear plant negotiates transportation of spent 

                    NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS
 
 1  Nuclear science flourishing in Kazakhstan 
 2  International Atomic Energy Agency official unlikely to visit 
 3  Pakistan's Restraint 
 4  Castro recalls apartheid South Africa's nuclear capability 
 5  'Waging Modern War'
 6  Japan to reconsider A-bomb law
 7  Baby bones used in nuclear test study
 8  Labor peace at the Flats 
 9  Y-12, ORNL workers not getting fair shake
10  Publication of Regulatory Guide G-225,  Emergency Planning at 
11  For the Nuclear Submarine Kursk, Plans for a Risky Resurrection 
12  Broken Cable Halts Russian Sub Job
13  Radiation Safety Service To Be Set Up During The Kursk's Docking 
14  Atomic museum changing its target 
15  Group Seeks Strict Rules on Beryllium
16  Stamp honors father of the atomic bomb 
17  D-Day for French nuclear sector (Jour J pour le nucleaire 
18  Fallen Heroes: Daghlian, Slotin, Bragg, & Meigs
19  International Conference on Topical Isues in Nuclear Safety
20  Antinuclear activist launches political party
21  Nuclear tests on thousands of Australian bone samples: report 
22  BRIT GIVES OK FOR KURSK LIFT  
23  Government secrets
24  Public Citizen seeks stricter rules on beryllium 

****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                     NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES
*****************************************************************
 1 India to pursue three-stage nuclear power programme 
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Sep 4, 2001


Text of report by Indian news agency PTI 

Hyderabad, 4 September: India will pursue a three-stage nuclear 
power programme aimed at meeting the long-term energy needs of 
the country, according to Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman 
Anil Kakodkar. 

The programme would include maximum utilization of existing 
nuclear power plants, developing indigenous small plants and 
setting up of heavy water reactors with external help, Kakodkar 
said while delivering a talk here Monday [3 September] night. 

To further bolster nuclear power generation, the Department of 
Atomic Energy (DAE) is developing research reactors, 
accelerators, lasers and other advanced technologies, Kakodkar 
said. 

"In future, the DAE plans to expand the existing mechanisms apart 
from initiating new programmes. It is also proposed to increase 
the outlay of the Board of Research and Nuclear Sciences for 
setting up more centres in universities in such as way that the 
UGC's programme is strengthened in the areas of interest to DAE," 
he said. 

A new campus for Bhaba Atomic Research Centre, with a co-located 
academic framework of university status, is also in the planning 
stage, the AEC chairman said. 

Kakodkar also called for an "organic linkage" between research 
centres and industrial units to ensure success of any agency 
working in high-tech areas. 

Source: PTI news agency, New Delhi, in English 1248 gmt 4 Sep 01 
/BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to 
Copyright
*****************************************************************
 2  UK eyes opportunites in Dounreay nuclear clean-up

Planet Ark Environmental News: 

UK: September 3, 2001

LONDON - Britain wants the 4.5 billion pound decommissioning of 
its Dounreay nuclear complex in northern Scotland to help the 
country win contracts in the lucrative international clean-up 
business, the energy minister said last week.

"The world-wide market for decommissioning nuclear research sites 
is already worth hundreds of billions of pounds and growing", 
said Brian Wilson in a statement.

"Decommissioning presents a huge opportunity for the local 
economy which is why we must develop the right skills and 
infrastructure so that the UK in general and the Highlands in 
particular secure as much of this work as possible", he added. 
Britain decided to shut Dounreay, operated by the United Kingdom 
Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA), in June 1998 because the 
facility was judged to have no economic future. It will take 
between 50-60 years before the environmental restoration at the 
site is complete. Built in the 1950s as a centre of nuclear 
research, Dounreay drew increasingcriticism in later years 
following various radioactive leaks and equipment failures.

Stories that polyfilla, a domestic do-it-yourself product used to 
fill wall cracks, was used to bind liquid nuclear waste, 
undermined public confidence in the site and hastened calls for 
its closure. The Dounreay reactor closed in 1994 with the end of 
Britain's programme to develop a fast breeder reactor and 
reprocessing ended in 1996 after a radioactive leak.

REUTERS NEWS SERVICE 
*****************************************************************
 3  Bangkok Post Homepage Deadly Radiation Leak

Current Issues in Thailand - Radiation Leak

August 29, 2001

Cobalt-60 victims stage protest to demand state compensation 
Seeking B4.7m from emergency budget 

Anjira Assavanonda 

Victims of last year's cobalt 60 radiation leak rallied in front 
of Government House yesterday to demand urgent help.

The state had not done enough since the incident in February last 
year, they said.

Victims who were directly exposed to the leak, particularly the 
scrap collectors, were still ill and some were getting worse.

They were weak and short of energy. Some had burns which refused 
to heal and others had lost limbs.

Jitsen Chantarasakha, a collector who at first lost a few fingers 
to radiation burns, now has no fingers left. He did not turn up 
at Government House yesterday amid worsening physical and mental 
health. 

Mr Jitsen was hit by a car last week while he tried to resume 
work. 

The other two collectors, Sonthaya Sapathum, who earlier suffered 
burns on his hands, and Boonthueng Sila, who had injured legs, 
have lost another finger each. 

Sonthaya said he had already gone back to work, but poor health 
had become a big obstacle and he could not earn more than 200 
baht a day.

``That is not enough to feed my family. It's really hard for us. 
Our electricity and water were cut off last week as we don't have 
enough to pay the bills,'' said Mr Sonthaya.

In a petition to Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, the victims 
demanded 4.7 million baht from an Interior Ministry emergency 
budget to alleviate hardship from disasters.

Ida Aroonwongse, of the Alternative Energy Project for 
Sustainability, who headed the protest, said the money would help 
ease their plight while lawsuits were pending in court.

The group has filed papers against Kamol Sukosol Electric Co, 
owner of the cobalt-60 container which was broken open, demanding 
109 million baht compensation. They filed another complaint with 
the Administrative Court, accusing the Office of Atomic Energy 
for Peace of negligence, and demanding 94 million baht.

Ms Ida said it was uncertain how long it would take for victims 
to get compensation.

The group also want faster progress on special medical cards 
which have yet to be issued, a new follow-up committee on 
treatment, and unconditional compensation from the Social 
Security Office to the family of Niphon Phankhan, the scrap-shop 
employee who died from radiation injuries.

Joining the victims yesterday was a group of villagers from 
Ongkharak district in Nakhon Nayok province, who came to protest 
against plans to build a nuclear reactor in their neighbourhood. 

© Copyright The Post Publishing Public Co., Ltd. 1999
*****************************************************************
 4  Dounreay:   Minter: in the shadow of Dounreay 

The Sunday Times: Ecosse:September 2 2001ECOSSE

Many people have disputes with their neighbours - but not about 
radioactive waste polluting their land. Geoffrey Minter tells 
Christopher Cairns about living next door to Dounreay © Under 
siege: property developer Geoffrey Minter and his wife, Michelle, 
in front of Sandside House, Caithness. Their beach has been 
polluted by nearby Dounreay. Photographs: Michael J Scott The 
curse of Dounreay 


The view from the 18th-century library of Sandside House is truly 
magnificent; beyond a walled garden the Caithness coast zigzags 
east in a series of rocky promontories, while in the foreground 
Sandside Bay nestles between aquamarine sea and a tumble of 
grassy dunes. On a clear day, the Orkneys can be seen on the 
northern horizon. 

It was captivating enough for the Mackay clan, who built the 
house and kept the estate over several generations, and the 
Pilkington (glass) family, who were among its more recent 
inhabitants. 

Nowadays the scene also boasts a splendid view of a famous 
Scottish landmark, a listed building and world-renowned 
institution almost single-handedly responsible for, at one time, 
giving Britain a pre-eminent position in a vital field of 
scientific research and development. Not that you often hear 
Dounreay described thus. 

Such is the fear and loathing this place now generates that it is 
hard to look at its sprawling installations behind miles of 
barbed-wire fences, particularly its spherical fast-breeder 
reactor, and not feel a shiver of apprehension, as if Castle 
Greyskull had just loomed on the horizon. 

Geoffrey Minter and his family certainly feel this way - and as 
they own and live in Sandside House, they have to look at it 
every day. Well, serves them right for buying the estate, would 
be the usual response. But Minter claims mitigation. "When we 
bought this place 10 years ago, Dounreay was just another nuclear 
plant. In fact, its reputation was pretty good and there was 
certainly no suggestion it was leaking like a sieve. I had 
absolutely no preconceived ideas about nuclear power stations and 
no reason to believe it would be anything but a good neighbour." 

That, however, was before Dounreay's history of lax environmental 
standards began to surface throughout the 1990s, before highly 
radioactive particles were found on Sandside Bay, and before 
Minter had any dealings with the UK Atomic Energy Authority 
(UKAEA). 

In the four years since the first particle was found on Minter's 
beach, the relationship between the neighbours has deteriorated 
drastically. Once it was claret and smoked Orkney salmon in the 
drawing room or a guided tour and corporate hospitality, now it 
is lawyers' letters and statements to the press. 

The latest public spat has centred on the Reay golf course - the 
most northerly on the British mainland - where Minter threatened 
to withdraw permission for play to continue, fearing possible 
claims from players affected by particles blown there from 
Sandside beach. After the offer from Dounreay of security against 
any such claims, that threat has been withdrawn, but heated 
debate about the real extent of the hazard for players continues. 

As in most cases of this sort, the ill-feeling generated by years 
of bickering has tended to cloud the issues - but for all that 
the dispute is, in essence, a simple one: Minter as landowner 
wants his property cleaned up and wants legal protection against 
any claims for damages from the public, while UKAEA, as polluter, 
maintains it is doing more than enough to clear up its mess and 
that Minter's demands for improved monitoring are unrealistic. 

Minter, meanwhile, has engaged his own scientific and legal 
counsel. But this is not some academic exercise in liabilities 
and costs - medical experts have warned that the most dangerous 
of those particles washing up on the beach (there have been 17 
detected to date) could kill or cause cancers if ingested or 
inhaled. Radiation burns could also occur if they are handled. 
UKAEA denies that the particles are this dangerous. 

An indemnity offer from UKAEA was made to Minter and formally 
accepted last week, which is progress of a sort. The nuclear body 
now pledges to cover any claims made against the estate as a 
result of the contamination. But it still leaves the issue of to 
what extent the beach is being monitored and cleaned up. 

"I am not going to be paid off to go away," Minter says. "This is 
not a case of 'what price your hush money' - I haven't got a 
price. They have got to do this job properly." 

Minter's story is important not just from the human interest 
point of view - 'my neighbours from hell' writ large - but 
because, if Minter is right, it will have taken a private 
homeowner to expose a gaping hole in the ability of the 
government and its agencies to regulate the environment 
sufficiently to guarantee public safety. This homeowner is not 
holding out against state bureaucracy because it is over-reaching 
its authority - Minter is desperately arguing for more 
interference on his land. He believes Sandside Bay should be 
swarming with Land Rovers, men in UKAEA uniforms, Geiger counters 
and metal detectors. 

And, unluckily for UKAEA, Minter is not your average homeowner. 
He has wealth, connections and, most importantly, a highly 
developed sense of justice - especially in matters where 
principle and self-interest so neatly converge. 

A self-made millionaire, Minter, 59, enjoyed an upbringing in 
London and Oxfordshire that was privileged by any standards. But 
he earned his own living as a chartered surveyor, property 
adviser and, latterly, commercial property owner. His business 
interests in London, managed by two of his three children, 
include a successful conference centre in the Strand. 

He discovered Sandside while on shooting holidays in the area and 
had no hesitation in paying £1.25m for the property in 1991. 
Since then he has improved its turnover, not least by opening up 
a lucrative diorite quartz quarry, and the estate would now be 
worth considerably more. The key word there is, of course, 
"would", since the discovery of dangerous contamination on 
Sandside's beach, not to mention the generally bad press Dounreay 
has received, means Minter would probably incur a loss should he 
decide to sell. Which he will not. 

The strain on the Minter family is easily detected behind the 
brave words and the everyday business of running a 10,000-acre 
estate - an activity which almost takes on the appearance of 
diversion. "It has had a huge effect on me and my family," he 
says. "Contending with that organisation [the UKAEA] has been 
extremely frustrating. 

But I suppose that has been balanced by the feeling that I am 
being efficacious by helping to sort out a problem, that I am 
doing my bit for the public good." 

In the garden, Minter's wife, Michelle, is cutting back the 
lobelia with perhaps a little more vigour than would otherwise be 
the case. "I think it is just crazy and it's in danger of ruining 
our lives," she says, wielding the secateurs. "Those people have 
been paid for the job they do over there but I don't think they 
could care less what happens to us or anyone else. But what 
Geoffrey takes on, he takes on with his whole heart and soul and 
he won't stop until he gets what he wants." 

Minter, in truth a little defensive about coming across as the 
typical English aristocrat, his vintage Bentley notwithstanding - 
is quick to point out that he is half Scottish. His mother, a 
Macfarlane, also lives on the estate. He has certainly wasted no 
time in immersing himself in Caithness's commercial and social 
life, and, apart from acting as the chairman of Hunters of Brora, 
the woollen mill, being a key member of the Scrabster Harbour 
Trust and of the Caithness District Salmon Fisheries Board, he 
hosts the Northern Highland College's game-keeping course at 
Sandside. 

He manages, despite the actions of one or two vocal opponents of 
his stance, to maintain a fair degree of local support - a 
remarkable achievement, given the importance of Dounreay as the 
largest employer for hundreds of miles around. 

Charlie Sutherland, a retired quarry worker who skippers Minter's 
launch out of Sandside harbour (for no pay), has lived in the 
area for more than 40 years and believes the days when anything 
Dounreay's management said was accepted by local people as gospel 
are coming to an end. 

"Locals have not wanted to say anything because 99% of them are 
employed there, but it's clear now Dounreay has polluted the 
beach - not only that but it doesn't want to accept that it has," 
he says. "The longer it goes on, the more people realise that 
everything Dounreay says is not true . . . Geoffrey gets support 
because he is batting not just for himself but for the whole 
community." 

What really put the cat among the pigeons was the intervention 
earlier this year of Dr Philip Day, a reader in chemistry at 
Manchester University. On Minter's behalf he and his team of 
radiologists monitored the monitors and concluded in a damning 
report that UKAEA's efforts on Sandside Bay fell considerably 
short of those required to identify and remove all potentially 
hazardous particles. In fact, Day asserts, through a combination 
of using the wrong equipment on the wrong types of vehicles, 
which move too quickly over only limited stretches of the bay, 
Dounreay's staff are probably picking up less than 1% of the 
particles. 

That finding is denied by the UKAEA and the Scottish Environment 
Protection Agency, but Day's report has yet to be officially 
considered. 

Yet there are signs that Minter's doggedness is paying dividends; 
apart from the indemnity offer, the Dounreay Particles Advisory 
Group, a panel of experts, has now agreed to admit the public to 
its hearings and, most significantly, Minter has been assured in 
the last week that the monitoring will, after all, be stepped up. 

Although details of that new regime have yet to be revealed, the 
assurance has been enough for Minter to allow UKAEA personnel 
back onto the beach. He had previously banned them after coming 
to the conclusion that he would prefer no monitoring than merely 
the pretence of it. 

"I know it sounds a little corny or old fashioned and I know I am 
being painted in some quarters as only in this for the money, 
but, to be blunt, I don't need the money," he says. "I genuinely 
want to see this mess cleaned up for the sake of public safety . 
. . sometimes I feel as though I am the only one who remembers 
that this is what it's all supposed to be about." 


Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided on 
*****************************************************************
 5  Russia: Atomic power station may be solution for environmental 
disaster zone 

BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Sep 4, 2001

[Presenter Anna Fedotova] There is a threat of an environmental 
disaster in Chelyabinsk Region. Governor Petr Sumin has even sent 
an open letter to [Russian Prime Minister] Mikhail Kasyanov. 
Waste from the radioactive enterprise Mayak is in danger of 
getting into the local rivers. Yelena Markova reports. 

[Correspondent] The Mayak enterprise, where our country's nuclear 
shield was once forged, is not far from the river Techa. In the 
1950s, radioactive water was channelled into the river in the 
hope that nature would clean everything up. But soon it became 
clear that this was not possible, and the Techa had to be blocked 
off with dams to stop contaminated water from getting into the 
rivers Isset and Tobol. A number of ponds formed. 

The largest pond is number 11. It looks like an ordinary natural 
lake, but its water is contaminated with strontium. Its level of 
radioactivity is ten times higher than normal, although the birds 
do not seem to notice: ducks, geese and even swans have their 
nests here. At one time, employees of the law-enforcement 
agencies used to come hunting here, but they were advised against 
it. Pond number 11 is guarded by the police and surrounded by a 
long dam. 

[Vladimir Yakimov, captioned as chief of water flow technogy of 
the Mayak enetrprise] As concerns their construction, the dams 
between the canal and the pond was built of loamy soil which is 
now absorbing radioactive substances. 

[Correspondent] In last years, the inflow of water exceeds 
evaporation, and there is a danger that the pond will overflow. 
It is already over full by 7m cubic metres. 

[Yevgeniy Drozhko, captioned as deputy director for new 
environmental and technical projects] When we were deciding what 
to do, three possible solutions were considered: the construction 
of a nuclear power station, that's the first possibility. The 
second possibility is installing a facility for absorption 
purification of the water of pond number 11, and the third is 
creation of an evaporation system for this water. 

[Correspondent] These projects are more or less equal in terms of 
cost. The specialists believe that the best option is to build an 
atomic power station. It will not only allow for the surplus 
water to be evaporated, but it will produce power. However, the 
idea is not popular with the Region's residents. People attribute 
all their problems to radiation. 

[omitted: vox pop interview with local resident] However, people 
in the neighbouring villages are willing to work at the new 
station. 

[vox pop interview with woman saying she would happily work at 
the atomic power station because she has several children and 
needs more money] 

[Correspondent] Now the governor has to persuade Moscow and the 
people of his region that an atomic power station is needed. 

Source: Ren TV, Moscow, in Russian 1500 gmt 3 Sep 01 /BBC 
Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to 
Copyright
*****************************************************************
 6  Nuclear firm bids for Dublin rail deal 

The Sunday Times:September 2 2001BUSINESS IRELAND

Tom McEnaney, Irish Business Editor 

A LEADING player in the British nuclear weapons industry has 
emerged as one of two companies in the running for the Luas light 
rail contract in Dublin. 

Serco, whose interests in-clude nuclear weapons research, is 
expected to be shortlisted with Transdev, the French transport 
giant, for the government's £100m-plus project. 

With the closing date for the submission of "qualification 
documents" approaching in less than a fortnight, industry sources 
said Transdev enjoyed a slight lead over its rival. 

Other companies that have submitted preliminary bids include 
National Express, Britain's former national bus company, which 
now operates train and bus services in Europe, Australia and 
America. French transport giant Connex, and Britain's largest 
transport company, FirstGroup, are also in the running. 

Another of the companies dominating the British transport sector, 
Stagecoach, expressed an interest earlier this year, but later 
withdrew. 

At this stage, bidders have to prove they are suitably qualified 
to run a light rail system. 

Transdev has reintroduced trams in France and now operates tram 
systems in Nantes, Grenoble, Orleans and Strasbourg. It has also 
won transport franchises in Nottingham, Oporto in Portugal and 
Melbourne, Australia. 

Serco is loosely described as a contract-management company. 
Along with British Nuclear Fuels and Lockheed Martin, it is a 
major shareholder in AWE Management, whose activities include 
nuclear weapons research, managing Britain's nuclear stockpile 
and decommissioning nuclear weapons. Last month Serco purchased 
the nuclear consulting arm of British firm AEA Technology for 
£75m. Serco was one of the principal beneficiaries of 
privatisation in the UK, winning 400 diverse public contracts 
from prison management to operating Manchester's tram service. 

The five-year franchise on offer is for the first of the three 
lines of Dublin's Luas network. The contract is expected to be 
worth about £20m per year, or £100m during its life. 

Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided on 
*****************************************************************
 7  Nuclear waste trains set to go twice safe limit

Sunday Herald home

BNFL's secret plans to enable trains carrying nuclear waste to 
travel at 60mph is 'a disaster waiting to happen' 

By Rob Edwards Environment Editor

A secret plan to boost the speed of trains carrying radioactive 
waste on the west coast main line will see their potentially 
lethal cargoes travelling twice as fast as the safety limit.

Every week, dozens of 50- tonne flasks containing a deadly 
cocktail of radioactivity are taken by rail from nuclear power 
stations around Britain to the waste reprocessing centre at 
Sellafield in Cumbria. Until now they have all travelled at a 
maximum speed of 45mph in order to reduce the risk of accidents. 
But the Sunday Herald can reveal that their speed is set to 
increase to 60mph, under a plan being discussed behind closed 
doors by Railtrack and state-owned British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL). 
Experts say that the increase will make a lethal leakage of 
radioactivity from a crash much more likely.

Uranium fuel burnt in the nuclear power stations at Hunterston on 
the Clyde coast and Torness in East Lothian is taken by rail to 
Sellafield every few days for reprocessing. The trains pass 
through several heavily populated areas, including Ayrshire, 
Edinburgh and Carlisle. Trains also run regularly from eight 
other nuclear sites around the coast of England and Wales.

John Large, the leading independent nuclear engineer, says that 
some radioactive waste could catch fire and disperse tiny 
particles of plutonium into the air. 'This would be a respiratory 
hazard and could lead to large areas being evacuated, depending 
on the wind and the weather,' he said.

'After Paddington, Hatfield and Selby, the safety of rail travel 
these days leaves a lot to be desired. To ratchet up the 
likelihood of an accident with nuclear freight trains defies 
common sense.' Large, who advises governments on nuclear hazards, 
pointed out that the tests which are designed to ensure the 
safety of nuclear transport flasks had no scientific basis. They 
included dropping a flask nine metres on to a hard surface, which 
is equivalent to an impact of 30mph. But when the flasks start 
travelling at 60mph, Large argued, the impact speeds in accidents 
would be much greater. Collisions with oncoming trains could 
reach combined impact speeds of 120mph or more.

The plan to increase the speed of nuclear trains is part of 
Railtrack's scheme to upgrade the west coast main line from 
Glasgow to London over the next four years .

But BNFL, which runs the nuclear trains through its subsidiary 
Direct Rail Services, has also long-harboured a secret desire to 
boost speeds. A leaked memo showed that the company made the 
suggestion back in 1999, but deliberately 'buried' it so that the 
public wouldn't know, and then dropped it. Now, however, the idea 
has been resurrected, though not yet formally announced. In March 
there was an emergency at Torness when a train carrying three 
empty nuclear flasks was derailed . The accident, which didn't 
cause any leakage of radioactivity, occurred when the train was 
reversing at just 5mph.

'The derailment of nuclear flasks near Dunbar earlier this year 
was a low-speed incident,' said Dr Richard Dixon, head of 
research at Friends of the Earth Scotland. ' It is baffling that 
efforts are being made to speed up highly dangerous nuclear 
shipments. This can only be a recipe for disaster.'

Other environmental groups also laid into the plan . 'To increase 
speeds to twice that which the waste containers are tested to 
withstand in the event of an accident, and using a line adjacent 
to passenger trains travelling at 140mph is a disaster waiting to 
happen,' said Pete Roche from Greenpeace.

BNFL, however, insisted that the transport flasks were safe. The 
nine-metre drop on to an unyielding surface was just one of a 
series of tests 'designed to simulate the most serious credible 
accident scenarios', said BNFL's Janine Claber.

But Martin Forwood, a campaigner from Cumbrians Opposed to a 
Radioactive Environment , pointed out that BNFL had earlier axed 
guard's vans from the trains, leaving drivers to cope with any 
accident on their own. 'Now they want to speed things up. This 
does not exactly smack of putting safety first. '

www.rail.co.uk www.railtrack.co.uk

 ©2001 smg sunday newspapers ltd. no.176088. all rights reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 8  FOCUS: Japan's nuclear energy policy remains in limbo

KYODO NEWS 
                         
By Takashi Miura

TOKYO, Sept. 2, Kyodo - Japan's nuclear energy policy -- with the 
so-called pluthermal project at its core -- is in limbo, with the 
government now paying the price for having neglected to consult 
with people living near nuclear plants when formulating the 
far-reaching plan. 

And in a sign of high-level internal discord, Kyoko Kimoto, a 
former TV broadcaster and a critic, said in mid-August that she 
will take a leave of absence from the Atomic Energy Commission, 
an advisory panel to the prime minister on atomic energy policy, 
blaming the commission for taking a negative stance in dialogue 
with citizens about pluthermal projects. 

Tokyo Electric Power Co. had planned to use plutonium-uranium 
mixed oxide (MOX) fuel in the No. 3 reactor at its 
Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant in Niigata Prefecture, but Kariwa 
residents voted against the plan in a May plebiscite. 

Tokyo Electric Power, about half of whose power generation comes 
from nuclear reactors, is the largest of the nation's 10 electric 
power companies. 

The government of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi has thus 
established a liaison council among ministries and agencies, 
including the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, to devise 
measures to gain public consensus for the pluthermal project, 
which derives its name the combination of plutonium and thermal. 

The measures, unveiled in early August, call for energy education 
at elementary, junior and senior high schools. The education 
ministry has asked that 500 million yen be earmarked in the state 
budget for fiscal 2002 to fund such education through the 
publication of side readers. 

The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry also asked that 700 
million yen be spent to triple the number of visitors to nuclear 
plants to one million annually. 

But analysts doubt whether this kind of ''education'' and 
''publicity'' from above will actually persuade people of the 
safety and necessity of the pluthermal project. 

The original pillar of Japan's nuclear fuel recycling policy was 
the creation of fast-breeder reactors, which use plutonium fuel, 
but the prospects for their development collapsed in 1995 when 
the Monju reactor in Fukui Prefecture leaked plutonium. 

It was then that plans for the pluthermal project surfaced. 
Kansai Electric Power Co. and Tokyo Electric Power planned to use 
MOX at the Takahama and Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plants 
respectively. 

But the Takahama plant was forced to suspend the plan after a 
British company was found to have falsified fuel manufacturing 
data. The Fukushima No. 1 plant was also forced to postpone the 
plan as the Fukushima prefectural government opposed a revision 
in Tokyo Electric Power's construction of a thermal power plant. 

The government's atomic energy officials said the promotion of 
the pluthermal project is a ''national policy'' because it was 
incorporated into a long-term nuclear energy research and 
development program the government fixed last year. 

However, informed sources said that in the process of working out 
the program, there was little discussion about whether or not 
plutonium should be used, and opinions from those cautions about 
nuclear power and citizens opposed to the program were not given 
much weight. 

Currently, a plan exists to construct a MOX fuel processing plant 
in the village of Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture, where a nuclear 
fuel reprocessing plant is being built. 

Analysts have said that if the pluthermal project is revised, the 
plan to build the MOX plant will be favorably affected, but that 
public understanding is difficult to obtain without full 
explanations of the program. 

Tokyo Electric Power is conducting a basic survey about whether 
to locate an ''intermediate storage'' facility in the Aomori city 
of Mutsu, where used fuel that is not to be recycled immediately 
can be stored for up to 10 years. 

The analysts said used fuel can be stored at the intermediate 
storage facility for the time being in order to allow enough time 
for discussions, but stressed the need to stop and consider 
alternatives, including the nonprocessing of the whole volume of 
used fuel. 

2001 Kyodo News (c) Established 1945.
*****************************************************************
 9  Nuclear waste protesters take message to Las Vegas Strip
 
Las Vegas SUN 
 
September 03, 2001 
 
LAS VEGAS (AP) - About 40 protesters wore protective gear and 
wheeled barrels bearing radiation symbols along the Las Vegas 
Strip to encourage attendance at hearings on the storage of 
nuclear waste in Nevada. 

"Our main message here is to get people out to the meetings," 
said Kalynda Tilges, a protest organizer and nuclear issues 
coordinator for Citizen Alert. 

The demonstrators marched Monday among the hordes of Labor Day 
tourists from the Bellagio resort to the Fashion Show Mall. Many 
carried signs that read, "Last chance to tell the DOE: No Yucca 
Mountain Dump!" 

"Nuclear waste never takes a holiday," said Jennifer Viereck, a 
protester. "Those shipments are coming if we don't do something 
to stop them right now." Yucca Mountain, located 90 miles 
northwest of Las Vegas, is the only site under federal study to 
accept 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste from nuclear 
reactors around the country. 

Nevada lawmakers have asked Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to 
personally attend the meetings to hear the views of Nevadans and 
others on the proposed repository. 

Their request delivered over the weekend was the latest in a 
campaign by Nevada officials to pressure Abraham before 
Wednesday's public hearing in North Las Vegas on the Energy 
Department's scientific research at Yucca Mountain. So far, the 
secretary has not responded. 

Tilges said her group is planning another demonstration before 
Wednesday's meeting. 

"The DOE is subverting the public process," she said. "They're 
holding the last public hearing on Yucca Mountain this week with 
very little notice, and without the required final analysis of 
the environmental impacts." 

Nevada lawmakers and Gov. Kenny Guinn are also seeking 
postponement of the public hearings and a 90-day extension of a 
public comment period following the Energy Department's Aug. 21 
release of a preliminary site suitability report on Yucca 
Mountain. 

The DOE argues that the report's data has been available to the 
public in the past, so an extended comment period is not 
necessary, said spokesman Joe Davis. Public hearings also are 
scheduled for Sept. 12 in Amargosa Valley and Sept. 13 in 
Pahrump. 

Abraham is expected to decide late this year whether to recommend 
Yucca Mountain as a repository site after reviewing the results 
of site studies and environmental assessments prepared by DOE 
scientists. 

On the Net: Energy Department: http://www.ymp.gov Citizen Alert: 
http://www.citizenalert.org

All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 10  Haggling hides lack of Nevada nuclear clout  
  
Reno Gazette-Journal
 Monday September 3rd, 2001
 
They have fought over radiation standards and other elements of 
the shibboleth known as “sound science.”
 
They have argued about interim storage and permanent storage, 
trying to stop, or at least slow down, both proposals.
 
They have brandished fornicating metaphors ad infinitum, 
beginning with the Screw Nevada Bill of 1987.
 
And now, they are disgorging their rhetoric over . . . a meeting 
place?
 
Yes, defying all odds, the state’s political elite reached yet 
another nadir -- it’s as if they are trying to constantly burrow 
lower on the spin scale -- on the issue of Yucca Mountain and the 
nuclear waste dump.
 
The congressional delegation and Gov. Kenny Guinn last week were 
outraged -- outraged, I tell you -- to discover that the 
Department of Energy was moving hearings on a site suitability 
report from a Las Vegas hotel to a federal site in North Las 
Vegas. Then, the senators, congressfolk and Guinn sent a letter 
to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham asking him to extend the 
public comment period by 90 days.
 
“Fifteen days notice of the first public hearing does not provide 
adequate time for review and travel arrangements to be made by 
citizens wishing to attend the hearing in person,” thundered 
Senate Majority Whip Harry Reid.
 
And what’s more -- the letter didn’t say -- it doesn’t give the 
governor and the delegation time to gin up interest in the 
hearings so they actually are attended by more than a handful of 
gadflies.
 
So beyond any private contest over whose quote got the best play 
in the media, what did the governor and the delegation hope to 
gain -- beyond, of course, annoying us with their incessant 
rhetorical overload on this topic?
 
Hey, how many of you out there realize the DOE is hell-bent on 
building the dump at Yucca Mountain? How many of you think that 
the feds have spent upwards of $8 billion near the test site just 
to “study” the area? And how many of you think any of the 
political ruling class has any idea how to really stop the 
project other than to delay, delay, delay and then pray, pray, 
pray?
 
It doesn’t help that ex-Gov. Bob List sold his credibility to the 
nuclear industry. List may be a political cipher here but he 
surely is being used in Washington as the industry’s trophy 
governor. 

There really are only two questions here for the public to 
consider, beyond all the silly controversy over a meeting place 
and a comment period. And they are:
 
Does Guinn have the kind of relationship with President Bush 
where the latter actually might help the state as the time draws 
nigh for the DOE to officially recommend Yucca Mountain?
 
And, perhaps more significantly, can Reid use his newfound clout 
to stop the dump?
 
If the answers to those two questions are both “no,” then all the 
press releases and sound bites in the world will go for naught.
 
Jon Ralston, who publishes The Ralston Report, works for 
Greenspun Media Group. He welcomes comments and questions. Write 
him at 2300 Prometheus Court, Henderson, Nev. 89014. Or call 
(702) 870-7997.
 		  
© Reno Gazette-Journal 
*****************************************************************
 11  Testifying at Extortion Trial May Not End Semnani's Woes 

  The Salt Lake Tribune -- 

Tuesday , September 4, 2001    

[PHOTO] Khosrow Semnani was forced to give up control of his 
company, Envirocare of Utah, in the wake of the pay-to-play 
investigation involving him and former state regulator Larry 
Anderson. (Tribune file photo) 
  
 BY JUDY FAHYS

    The way Khosrow Semnani tells it, a former regulator's 
demands for cash and fear of exposure finally drove him to stop 
the shakedown. 

    "Mainly," Semnani testified at Larry Anderson's extortion 
trial last week, "I wanted to stop this madness." 

    But that decision five years ago did not end the craziness 
for Semnani. Since then, the radioactive waste landfill owner has 
fended off lawsuits from Anderson and at least three business 
competitors. 

    He was forced to give up control of his company, Envirocare 
of Utah, while it endured compliance reviews by authorities in 
four state and federal regulatory agencies. 

    And he pleaded guilty to a federal tax charge in the Anderson 
scandal, paid a $100,000 fine and pledged to help the Anderson 
prosecution. 

    It would seem that the conclusion of Anderson's trial might 
finally close the door on those troubles -- especially if 
Anderson is convicted. 

    But, in many ways, the trial has only aggravated the quarrels 
and questions that have hounded Semnani and Envirocare of Utah, 
his multimillion-dollar company. It was something Semnani noticed 
the other day, during a break in his dramatic testimony, when he 
remarked on the faces he saw in the courtroom audience. "My 
competitors," he said uneasily, "they are all out there." 

    None of the governors and lawmakers who have accepted tens of 
thousands of dollars in political contributions from Semnani 
could be seen in the audience, nor family members. Just two of 
Semnani's legal team and his spokesman. 

    Semnani attorney Rod Snow said his client has taken 
responsibility for his part in the alleged scandal. "I'm sure he 
will be happy to get this behind him," Snow said. 

    From the witness stand in U.S. District Judge Tena Campbell's 
courtroom last week, Semnani sat face to face with Anderson. 

    The former state regulator accepted, then rejected a plea 
agreement earlier this year in hopes of beating six federal 
charges and the threat of up to 37 years in jail by telling his 
version of events. Anderson has seemingly staked his freedom on 
convincing a jury that in 1987, he sold Semnani a business plan 
for a radioactive waste landfill in the West Desert for $100,000 
and a handsome 5 percent of the revenue. 

    Anderson, according to his testimony, planned to quit his 
state job as director of Utah's Radiation Control Division, which 
licenses and oversees radioactive waste facilities, once business 
got started. But while he used his role to smooth the way for 
Envirocare, Semnani stopped paying and repudiated the 
partnership, which over eight years had netted Anderson roughly 
$600,000 in cash, gold coins and golf-course real estate. 

    That was about $7 million shy of what Anderson thought 
Semnani owed him for the business plan, so he sued Semnani in 
1996. The businessman countersued, and both wound up being 
charged as criminals. 

    Semnani's 1999 deal with prosecutors spared the businessman 
the expense of living up to his agreement, said Anderson defense 
attorney Jerry Mooney. "Some people will do a lot for $10 
million. It's almost like Powerball." 

    Although Semnani's testimony last week fulfills his 
obligation to the federal government and will finally end his 
quarrel with Anderson, the trial has also provided new fodder for 
Semnani's critics. 

    The trial has renewed criticism about Semnani's coziness with 
public officials, which blurred the lines between business and 
regulator and between private gain and public good. In tapes 
Anderson secretly made in 1995 to catch Semnani admitting the two 
had a business deal, the regulator taunted the businessman by 
accusing him of bribery. 

    On the second day of the trial, over the courtroom 
loudspeaker, the recorded exchanges returned to haunt both men: 

    Semnani: Nobody bribed you. 

    Anderson: The hell you didn't. . . . You did. 

    Semnani: Well, you say that I did. That's [inaudible]. 

    Anderson: I'm just showing you how you sound on the other 
side, Khos. It's the same thing. It's the coin turned over. 
That's exactly . . . 

    Semnani: I never bribed you and even if I had bribed you why 
did you take it? Even if I bribed you why did you take it? Did 
you take it? 

    To be sure, Anderson benefited from the relationship. 

    The two shared a Park City golf-course retreat for five years 
before Anderson signed it away for $490,000, or $185,000 more 
than Semnani's purchase price. 

    Anderson cashed in about $30,000 worth of gold coins Semnani 
had given him. And he occasionally walked away from Semnani with 
$100 bills stuffed in magazines or tucked in envelopes passed off 
in elevators. 

    Semnani also helped Anderson hide money -- or coached him to, 
depending on whom you believe. 

    In 1990, when Anderson needed quick cash to open a Swiss bank 
account, Semnani phoned his stepfather in Paris and asked him to 
dispatch money to a friend in Geneva having trouble settling a 
hotel bill. 

    Semnani repaid that money and wired money to his stepfather's 
brother in France to deposit into the Geneva account in two 
payments of $50,000. 

    Environmental activist Jason Groenewold, watching the trial 
from Campbell's courtroom, remains cynical about Envirocare and 
the dubious regulatory environment that spawned it. He says the 
Semnani-Anderson scandal reflects a "facilitate-don't-regulate" 
attitude toward business in Utah and makes citizens skeptical 
regulators will protect their health. 

    "It was born out of a time of scandal," said Groenewold, a 
frequent critic of Semnani and opponent of Envirocare's efforts 
to expand into new business lines, including modestly radioactive 
nuclear power plant discards. 

    "Can he [Semnani] be trusted to dispose nuclear waste in 
Utah?" 

   Semnani also saw in the courtroom audience another unwelcome 
face, that of attorney Steve Densley, who represents a Texas man 
Semnani is suing for defamation. 

    Kenneth N. Bigham, a former business rival of Semnani's, has 
a simple defense: damage he might possibly have done to the 
reputations of Envirocare and Semnani is negligible compared with 
the damage done by the Anderson scandal. 

    Densley has scribbled notes throughout the trial that 
bolsters the notion that Semnani's credibility already was in 
doubt. 

    "It's an enormous problem for him," Densley said. "The 
defamation suit will only stir it up again." 

   fahys@sltrib.com 
                                                                   
  © Copyright 2001, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on 
*****************************************************************
 12  Russia offers another reactor to Iran

BBC News | EUROPE | 

4 September, 2001, 14:28 GMT 15:28 UK   

The Russian deputy minister for atomic energy says Moscow will 
propose building further nuclear reactors in the southern Iranian 
port of Bushehr. 

Russia is already constructing a nuclear power plant there, but 
the deputy minister, Yevgeny Reshetnikov, said Tehran could order 
at least one more reactor from the Russians. 

The announcement comes as the Israeli prime minister, Ariel 
Sharon, who is in Moscow, is expected to ask Russia to scale down 
its military and nuclear exports to Iran. 

Both Israel and the United States fear that Iran could use 
Russian nuclear technology for military purposes. 

Moscow and Tehran say it will not be, and the BBC defence 
correspondent says Moscow stands to gain important export revenue 
from its sale of arms and nuclear technology. 

*****************************************************************
 13  Experiments test heat in Yucca Mountain

LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL: NEWS: 

Energy Department scientist William Boyle, left, and Los Alamos 
National Laboratory geologist Mark Peters examine a sign inside 
Yucca Mountain that records data on an experiment that simulates 
heat produced by decaying nuclear waste.

Photo by Gary Thompson.

Dust covers the first of nine mock nuclear waste canisters where 
heaters have been running for nearly four years for a study at 
Yucca Mountain on how rock would behave if the mountain is filled 
with 77,000 tons of decaying nuclear waste. Photo by Gary 
Thompson.

A train hauls ventilation ducts out of Yucca Mountain where 
scientists are studying how heat from nuclear waste would affect 
the volcanic-rock ridge, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Photo 
by Gary Thompson.

Monday, September 03, 2001
 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal 
Experiments test heat in Yucca Mountain
 
Scientists need to know how decaying waste will affect 
surroundings in a proposed repository 

 By KEITH ROGERS  
REVIEW-JOURNAL 

 The temperature last week was a sizzling 391 degrees inside a 
sealed cavern more than a mile from the entrance of the Yucca 
Mountain tunnel and 1,000 feet below the ridge top. 

"You could cook a pizza," said Mark Peters, a geologist from the 
Los Alamos, N.M., national laboratory. 

But instead of dough topped with cheese and pepperoni, for four 
years scientists on the Yucca Mountain Project have been using 
electric rods to cook a type of volcanic rock called Topopah 
Spring tuff -- a layer of volcanic ash that fell from the sky 
roughly 13 million years ago. 

It's the same kind of rock as that located where the Department 
of Energy wants to dig a maze of tunnels to entomb the nation's 
highly radioactive waste. 

But before spent nuclear fuel rods can be put in the mountain, 
100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, scientists need to know how 
heat from the decaying radioactive waste will affect the 
surrounding rock and water it holds that trickled down from tiny 
cracks in the mountain. They also want to know how the water's 
chemistry changes. 

The data will be used to predict how a repository and its 
steel-and-nickel waste canisters would hold up centuries after 
tunnels, or drifts, have been stocked with 77,000 tons of spent 
nuclear fuel and other lethal waste. 

Of key interest, Peters said, is how far apart the tunnels should 
be spaced. Heat from the decaying waste, he said, will be used to 
drive away moisture by vaporizing it. This will keep the 
surrounding walls dry enough to prevent rapid corrosion of the 
canisters. 

The arrangement, scientists believe, will also allow water 
traveling downward from the surface to drain away from the 
tunnels. 

Peters, who oversees more than a dozen tests government 
scientists are conducting in the ridge, and Energy Department 
scientist William Boyle, said the preliminary results hold no 
surprises. The rock tends to heat up to the boiling point about 
10 feet into the walls surrounding the waste storage tunnels. 

"It pretty much confirms what we expected would happen," said 
Boyle, a geologist and engineer who has worked on the project 14 
years. 

He said the experiment was designed to give scientists a 
conservative analysis of how the repository will perform when 
peak temperatures are expected to be reached hundreds of years 
after the last canister of waste is put in the mountain and vents 
to the outside air are sealed. Depending on the final design, 
temperatures are expected to range near or above the boiling 
point, which is 205 degrees at the site's elevation. 

Scientists on a government panel -- the Nuclear Waste Technical 
Review Board -- have asked Yucca Mountain scientists to consider 
a design for the repository to operate at relatively colder 
temperatures, on the order of 180 degrees, along with the hotter 
design for up to 300 degrees that they've been pursuing. 

The panel's concern is that water would be more mobile inside the 
mountain at hotter temperatures, possibly increasing the rate of 
corrosion of waste packages. 

The debate on how hot the repository should operate is among the 
topics expected to be aired at public hearings that begin 
Wednesday in North Las Vegas. Other issues will be addressed, 
such as hazards posed by earthquakes and volcanic activity in the 
area and the rate at which surface water will travel through the 
mountain as climate changes during the 10,000-year regulatory 
period for the repository, if one is built. 

Boyle said using electrified rods, like giant curling irons, to 
simulate heat from spent nuclear fuel pellets, is not a new 
technique but the scope and purpose of this battery of tests are 
unique. No other country has come as far along toward building a 
geologic repository for high-level nuclear waste as the U.S. 
effort at Yucca Mountain. 

Under the current schedule, spent fuel from U.S. nuclear power 
reactors could be brought to the mountain for disposal as early 
as 2010, provided that Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham finds the 
site suitable for constructing a repository, President Bush 
approves it, and other political hurdles are cleared. 

"Right now Spain and Switzerland are doing heater tests, and 
Canada, Japan and Sweden have each done one too," Boyle said on a 
visit last week to the mountain. 

"Many of the other tests were not done for a specific site where 
people are considering putting nuclear waste," he said. 

On Dec. 3, 1997, scientists switched on 50 electric rods in the 
walls of a 50-yard-long cavern to mimic temperatures that rock 
layers would reach between waste tunnels. Besides the rods, nine 
"dummy" waste packages were rigged with electric heaters to 
simulate decaying waste. 

"We just want to see what the heat would do with the rock and 
water," Boyle explained. 

He said the goal was to reach a rock-wall temperature of 392 
degrees and keep it there for two or three years. 

Since 1997, the Energy Department has spent $367,000 on 
electricity to power the drift scale heater test. 

Power to the experiment will be shut off some time in January, 
according to Peters. 

Then, scientists will spend up to four years collecting and 
analyzing data on how the rock cools.
 
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2001
*****************************************************************
 14  Yucca Mountain foes see alternative

LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL: NEWS: 

Monday, September 03, 2001
 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal 
 
Transmutation would reduce nuclear waste 
 By TONY BATT  
DONREY WASHINGTON BUREAU 
 
  WASHINGTON --  Even if it is developed into a repository, Yucca 
Mountain does not have enough room to store all the nation's 
projected nuclear waste; that is forcing lawmakers and scientists 
to look at technology that might reduce the amount of radioactive 
spent fuel placed in storage and how long it stays there. 

Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, would have a 
designated capacity to store 77,000 tons of high level nuclear 
waste. Even if the United States does not license any new nuclear 
power plants in the next 20 years, however, the waste inventory 
from existing plants would exceed 100,000 tons, officials said. 

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., sees transmutation as a possible 
solution. Transmutation reduces the volume and toxicity of 
nuclear waste by bombarding it with neutrons from a high-powered 
accelerator. 

"It's like an automobile running its exhaust back through so it 
can be re-burned for more energy," said Gregory Van Tuyle, who 
leads transmutation programs at Los Alamos National Laboratory in 
New Mexico. 

While transmutation would not eliminate the need for a nuclear 
waste repository, it could reduce the storage time from 10,000 
years to 300 years, proponents say. 

Congressional funding for transmutation has grown from less than 
$5 million in 1999 to $34 million this year. For next year's 
budget, Domenici is seeking $50 million for transmutation 
research. 

The Senate approved Domenici's request in July. A House and 
Senate conference will work toward a compromise this fall. 

Domenici is a longtime skeptic of the chances for a nuclear waste 
repository ever opening at Yucca Mountain. The Waste Isolation 
Pilot Plant in New Mexico, for low level nuclear waste storage, 
had the support of the governor and the state's congressional 
delegation, "and it still took us 20 years to get it licensed," a 
Domenici aide said. "Then he looks at Nevada, where the 
opposition to Yucca Mountain is almost total." 

One of Domenici's strongest supporters for transmutation funding 
is Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. 

Environmentalists, usually dependable allies of Nevada on nuclear 
waste issues, adamantly oppose transmutation. 

"Even if transmutation works, you still end up with long-lasting 
nuclear waste that has to be isolated for hundreds of years," 
said Diane D'Arrigo, the radioactive waste project director for 
the Nuclear Information and Resource Service. 

D'Arrigo also expressed concerns that the reprocessing involved 
in transmutation would produce more plutonium for nuclear 
weapons. 

The nuclear power industry supports transmutation research, up to 
a point. Nuclear Energy Institute spokesman Steven Kerekes hedged 
when asked whether the industry would support reducing Yucca 
Mountain's budget to provide more funding for transmutation 
research. "That's a hypothetical, and I'm not going to get into 
it," Kerekes said. 

No one disputes the high costs of a transmutation program. A 
report to Congress in October 1999 estimated expenses would reach 
$280 billion over 117 years. By contrast, the total cost of a 
Yucca Mountain repository is estimated at $58 billion. 

But unlike Yucca Mountain, transmutation would offset its costs 
by producing energy that could be sold, according to Anthony 
Hechanova, a nuclear engineer at the University of Nevada, Las 
Vegas. 

"Each year, these (transmutation) plants would earn about a 
billion dollars, and the 1999 study indicated this could be a 
wash," Hechanova said. 

The reduced toxicity of nuclear waste resulting from 
transmutation could allow the government to store it in regional 
sites other than Yucca Mountain, Hechanova said. 

Van Tuyle says scientific questions about transmutation are 
solved and the only issue holding it back is money. 

Although the Bush administration did not include any funding for 
transmutation research in its budget proposal this year, Vice 
President Dick Cheney lauded the technology's potential in a 
comprehensive energy report. 

International cooperation in transmutation research is a strong 
possibility, according to William Magwood, director of the Energy 
Department's nuclear energy program. 

"We have had very substantive conversations with France, Japan, 
Russian and Switzerland," Magwood said. 

He said Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham signed an agreement with 
France for research in this area, "but at this stage it's just 
exploratory." 

Magwood downplays the notion that transmutation could be the 
magic answer on how to dispose of nuclear waste. He stresses that 
transmutation would be a complement, not an alternative, to a 
nuclear waste repository.
 
webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 
*****************************************************************
 15  Nuclear waste protesters hit Strip

  [Las Vegas Review-Journal] 
  
Tuesday, September 04, 2001
 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal 
 
Goal to encourage attendance during upcoming hearings 
 By LISA SNEDEKER  
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS  

 About 40 protesters wore protective gear and wheeled barrels 
bearing radiation symbols along the Strip on Monday to encourage 
attendance at hearings on the storage of nuclear waste in Nevada. 

"Our main message here is to get people out to the meetings," 
said Kalynda Tilges, a protest organizer and nuclear issues 
coordinator for Citizen Alert. 

The demonstrators marched among the hordes of Labor Day tourists 
from the Bellagio to the Fashion Show mall. Many carried signs 
that read, "Last chance to tell the DOE: No Yucca Mountain Dump!" 

"Nuclear waste never takes a holiday," said protester Jennifer 
Viereck. "Those shipments are coming if we don't do something to 
stop them right now." 

Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is the only 
site under federal study to accept 77,000 tons of highly 
radioactive waste from nuclear reactors around the country. 

Nevada lawmakers have asked Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to 
attend the meetings to hear the views of Nevadans and others on 
the proposed repository. 

Their request delivered over the weekend was the latest in a 
campaign by Nevada officials to pressure Abraham before 
Wednesday's public hearing in North Las Vegas on the Energy 
Department's scientific research at Yucca Mountain. 

So far, the secretary has not responded. 

Tilges said her group is planning another demonstration before 
Wednesday's meeting. 

"The DOE is subverting the public process," she said. "They're 
holding the last public hearing on Yucca Mountain this week with 
very little notice, and without the required final analysis of 
the environmental impacts." 

Nevada lawmakers and Gov. Kenny Guinn are also seeking 
postponement of the public hearings and a 90-day extension of a 
public comment period following the Energy Department's Aug. 21 
release of a preliminary site suitability report on Yucca 
Mountain.
 
This story is located at: 
http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/Sep-04-Tue-2001/news/16917436.html
*****************************************************************
 16  Nuclear power plans

The Scotsman Online 

MINISTERS could order the building of new nuclear power stations in 
Scotland, it was reported last night.

Sources close to the energy minister, Brian Wilson, have indicated 
that, with a number of Britain's existing nuclear power stations 
coming to the end of their lives, it is inevitable that new 
plants will be built north of the Border.

It is thought any new nuclear station would be built on the site 
of existing stations at either Hunterston in Ayrshire, Torness in 
East Lothian, Chapelcross in Dumfriesshire, or Dounreay in 
Caithness. All are due to be decommissioned in 2010.

The majority of ministers on the Whitehall energy review 
committee are said to be in favour of the plan, with even 
formerly anti-nuclear MP George Foulkes convinced of the need for 
more power.

A decision is expected towards the end of the month, with plans 
under way as soon as next year. 
*****************************************************************
 17   Columnist Susan Snyder: Small towns ready for garden party 

Las Vegas SUN 
 
Today: September 04, 2001 at 8:28:49 PDT 

Susan Snyder's column appears Tuesdays, Fridays and Sundays. 
Reach her at snyder@lasvegassun.comor 259-4082.

 The Nevada welcome center in Boulder City is easy to miss.

 The turnoff is on the right as you're heading to Lake Mead on 
U.S. 93, about a half-mile past St. Jude's Ranch for Children.

 The center is a small concrete-block building next to a large 
parking lot. There are five picnic shelters with tables and a 
couple of benches sit on the surrounding asphalt.

 It's OK. But the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, 
which maintains the center, says it can be better.

 So Boulder City urban designer Damon Ohlerking came up with a 
plan that shows just how much better. Ohlerking, who works for 
Boulder City, designed a 10-acre oasis called the Mojave Botanic 
Garden that would educate visitors about the desert landscape 
while giving them a place to rest.

 "The Mojave is the least-understood landscape. We just don't 
know how to love it," Ohlerking said. "And we don't have any 
place to learn to respect it. Imagine making these 10 acres into 
a vision of the Mojave."

 Ohlerking's vision doesn't stop in Boulder City. If one Nevada 
botanical park is good, then 32 are better. His idea, which he 
outlines in a proposal titled "Given the Nature of Nevada," calls 
for placing similar 10-acre parks in such communities as Beatty, 
Goldfield, West Wendover, Ely, Elko and Jean.

 These gateways would break up the monotony for weary travelers 
on Nevada's long, open stretches. Each would provide restrooms, a 
gift shop offering ice cream, coffee and made-in-Nevada items, 
along with carefully planned and explained gardens that would 
showcase each area's flora and fauna.

 "For instance, people are driving in from Kingman (Ariz.). 
They're blitzed out on the landscape that they don't understand, 
and here's a place to explain it all," he said.

 Initial estimated cost of designing and planting 320 acres 
spread among 32 such gardens is about $17 million, he said. And 
it seems the money could be there.

 Two weeks ago Ohlerking, who also is president of the Nevada 
Shade Tree Council, traveled to Carson City with six other 
members of that council and met with Attorney General Frankie Sue 
Del Papa and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. Ohlerking says both 
officials thought the proposal was a good one.

 Del Papa is a well-known supporter of making more green space, 
as she is spearheading the Nevada Trees 2000 project, a statewide 
beautification effort.

 Nevada has lured hundreds of thousands of visitors each year by 
selling a a lifestyle that's fun to visit, Ohlerking said. Now 
it's time for Nevada to sell an image it can live with.

 These gateway gardens will lure a different kind of visitor 
while giving each community a serene spot in which to contemplate 
and relax.

 "I believe Nevada has done a lousy job of marketing itself to 
the rest of the country, and Yucca Mountain (the proposed nuclear 
waster dump) is a result of that," he said.

 "We can change the world's opinion of Nevada. And then why would 
anyone want to send that stuff to the place where you go to 
recharge your soul? "We can do these gardens," Ohlerking said 
with all the passion of an

evangelist. "We can build beauty that's wholesome, that has 
integrity, and that draws on the desert."
 
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 18  Letter: Waiting for bus too dangerous
 
Las Vegas SUN 
 
Today: September 04, 2001 at 9:58:05 PDT 
 
Regarding a story in the Aug. 27 Sun, I'm not surprised somebody 
got injured at a bus stop shelter. They're lucky they didn't get 
killed.

 Sometimes when I sit at a bus stop, I wonder, "If someone 
crashes into me and my son sitting here, will they come after me 
for child endangerment?"

 The one on Valley View by Meadows mall near the Bennett Family 
YMCA seems particularly conducive to pedestrian fatherly 
self-doubts; especially after leaving the DOE Yucca Mountain 
Exhibit, one meditates, "What's my half-traffic-life? A minute 
and a half?"

 I hope those two injured bus patrons sue CAT, the bus shelter 
company and the municipal traffic engineers, who all place them 
and the rest of us bus riders in the high-risk path of harm.

 This city is the most pedestrian-hostile burg on Earth.

  JAMES RICHARD LUCAS 
 
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 19  Letter: Expand nuke hearings
 
Las Vegas SUN 
 
Today: September 04, 2001 at 9:58:05 PDT 

The U.S. Department of Energy's hearings for the Yucca Mountain 
repository proposal need to be expanded to include other areas.

 I live in San Luis Obispo, Calif., where a nuclear plant, Diablo 
Canyon, operates two reactors. Pacific Gas and Electric, the 
bankrupt owner of the nuke plant, has its bid in for Yucca 
Mountain and is suing DOE to get it.

 Now, it is my understanding that the state of Nevada is fighting 
this proposal. We here in San Luis Obispo County are not thrilled 
about it, either. Transportation of over 150 tons of radioactive 
waste from San Luis Obispo County to Port Hueneme via barge, then 
across the state of California via rail, is a scary thought. 
Opportunities will exist for terrorism and accidents, not to 
mention the ugly idea of nuke waste on the ocean.

 We need to quit producing nuclear waste by switching to 
renewable energy sources. Diablo Canyon is a time bomb waiting to 
happen. Creating another one in Nevada is not the solution. The 
DOE should hold a hearing in our county and be prepared to hear a 
resounding "no" to nuke waste transportation.

  SHEILA BAKER  San Luis Obispo, Calif.
 
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 20  Nuclear waste protesters hit the Strip

 Photos: Yucca Mountain protesters | Eugenio Dellasala | Jason Halprin 

Las Vegas SUN 
 
Today: September 04, 2001 at 11:06:06 PDT 
 
 By Lisa Snedeker 
 ASSOCIATED PRESS

 LAS VEGAS -- About 40 protesters wore protective gear and 
wheeled barrels bearing radiation symbols along the Las Vegas 
Strip to encourage attendance at hearings on the storage of 
nuclear waste in Nevada.

 "Our main message here is to get people out to the meetings," 
Kalynda Tilges, a protest organizer and nuclear issues 
coordinator for Citizen Alert, said.

 The demonstrators marched Monday among the hordes of Labor Day 
tourists from the Bellagio resort to the Fashion Show Mall. Many 
carried signs that read,

"Last chance to tell the DOE: No Yucca Mountain Dump!"

 "Nuclear waste never takes a holiday," Jennifer Viereck, a 
protester, said. "Those shipments are coming if we don't do 
something to stop them right now."

 Yucca Mountain, located 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is the 
only site under federal study to accept 77,000 tons of highly 
radioactive waste from nuclear reactors around the country.

 Nevada lawmakers have asked Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to 
personally attend the meetings to hear the views of Nevadans and 
others on the proposed repository.

 Their request delivered over the weekend was the latest in a 
campaign by Nevada officials to pressure Abraham before 
Wednesday's public hearing in North Las Vegas on the Energy 
Department's scientific research at Yucca Mountain. So far, the 
secretary has not responded.

 Tilges said her group is planning another demonstration before 
Wednesday's meeting.

 "The DOE is subverting the public process," she said. "They're 
holding the last public hearing on Yucca Mountain this week with 
very little notice, and without the required final analysis of 
the environmental impacts."

 Nevada lawmakers and Gov. Kenny Guinn are also seeking 
postponement of the public hearings and a 90-day extension of a 
public comment period following the Energy Department's Aug. 21 
release of a preliminary site suitability report on Yucca 
Mountain.

 The DOE argues that the report's data has been available to the 
public in the past, so an extended comment period is not 
necessary, said spokesman Joe Davis.

 Public hearings also are scheduled for Sept. 12 in Amargosa 
Valley and Sept. 13 in Pahrump.

 Abraham is expected to decide late this year whether to 
recommend Yucca Mountain as a repository site after reviewing the 
results of site studies and environmental assessments prepared by 
DOE scientists.
 
Photos: Yucca Mountain protesters | Eugenio Dellasala | Jason 
Halprin Las Vegas SUN main page
 
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 21  Lawsuit threatened as Yucca hearings near
 
Las Vegas SUN 
 
Today: September 04, 2001 at 11:11:05 PDT 
 
 By Mary Manning 
<> 

 Environmental activists say they will sue the Energy Department 
if the agency fails to delay a public hearing on a proposed 
nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain.

 The hearing, the first of three, is scheduled at 5 p.m. 
Wednesday at the DOE's Nevada Operations Office at 232 Energy 
Way, west of Losee Road, in North Las Vegas. The public comment 
period begins at 6 p.m.

 The hearing was originally scheduled for the Suncoast, but the 
DOE changed the venue after resort officials said the hotel could 
not accommodate or provide security for the hundreds expected to 
attend.

 Judy Treichel, executive director of the Nuclear Waste Task 
Force, a Las Vegas-based organization that distributes 
information on Yucca, said two East Coast attorneys who 
specialize in environmental issues have sent a letter to groups 
across the country to protest the hearings.

 "If the DOE refuses to stop the hearing, then we will go to 
court," Treichel said.

 DOE spokesman Joe Davis said he had not seen the letter today 
and, consequently, could not comment.

 "We are carrying out what Congress has ordered," he said. "The 
information gathered at the hearing will be used in the 
decision-making."

 The public hearings will give the public a final opportunity to 
comment on the Yucca Mountain project before Energy Secretary 
Spencer Abraham recommends the site -- which would serve as a 
repository for 77,000 tons of nuclear waste -- to President Bush.

 Public hearings are also scheduled Sept. 12 in Amargosa Valley 
and Sept. 13 in Pahrump.

 Gov. Kenny Guinn and the state's congressional delegation wants 
Abraham to delay the hearings and extend the public comment 
period beyond the Sept. 20 deadline, set by the DOE. On Aug. 21 
the DOE released a 370-page report -- Preliminary Site 
Suitability Evaluation -- that details ongoing work by scientists 
and engineers at the site, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

 Guinn last week threatened to go to court to stop the hearing, 
but state attorneys did not have enough time to prepare a request 
for an injunction, which would have been considered by the 9th 
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. According to the 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act, passed in 1982, all cases concerning 
Yucca Mountain are sent to the appeals court in San Francisco.

 The Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, the state agency 
overseeing Yucca, is encouraging area residents to attend the 
hearing in North Las Vegas and voice their opinions.

 The DOE will broadcast Wednesday's hearing live on the Internet 
beginning at 6 p.m. Residents can access the hearing at 
www.ymp.gov.

 The hearing will also be broadcast beginning at 6 p.m. on Cox 
Cable channels Las Vegas 1 and 39.

 Protests intensified Monday when about 40 demonstrators, dressed 
in nuclear containment gear, marched for two hours on the Strip 
from the Bellagio to the Fashion Show mall.

 "Our main message is to get people out to the meetings," said 
Kalynda Tilges, nuclear coordinator for Citizen Alert who 
coordinated the march.

 "The Department of Energy cannot mute public opposition," 
Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy 
and Environment Program, said. 

All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 22  Letter: Safety foremost
  
[newsobserver.com, Raleigh, NC]

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 2001                            
 		   		   	 		 	
I wish to add my view to the many who are questioning the 
legality and moral issue of storing used nuclear fuel rods in 
water [at CP's Shearon Harris nuclear plant] if dry cask storage 
is safer. 

Though many of us are not nuclear specialists, as Ben Franklin 
said, "there was never an issue too dangerous to discuss it." I 
would at least like to hear what the experts have to say; and 
more importantly, I would like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
to listen to what the experts have to say. Why is CP so afraid to 
discuss the issue and willing to spend millions to skirt the 
issue? That alone should raise red flags for our representatives 
in Washington. Who were they elected to protect? I thought it was 
the citizens -- not the utilities or big business.

N.C. WARN is not a group of crackpot naysayers. They are 
concerned citizens trying to learn all they can about a danger to 
us all. They do not oppose all storage; merely unnecessarily 
dangerous transportation and storage of nuclear waste that has 
the potential of destroying an area the size of our entire state 
for generations to come. Is that so foolish? Their vociferousness 
is the basis of our country.

 As I and my family live in the shadow of the nuclear plant we 
are particularly concerned, but if the plant's storage is 
compromised that becomes a state and national disaster -- not 
just a local one. How can U.S. Sen. John Edwards find any balance 
with the "utilities' needs" in view of this threat to the "public 
safety" [Edwards was quoted in an Aug. 19 N article as saying "My 
view is there needs to be balance between public safety and what 
the utilities need")? Public safety should never have to balance 
with the needs of the utilities! Public safety should never have 
to balance with anything. It should always be foremost.

LUCILLE ZANE Moncure                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
 									 									 									
Observer. All material found on newsobserver.com is copyrighted 
The News & Observer and associated news services. No material may 
*****************************************************************
 23  Shipments to state more a matter of when, not if 

| The Sun News - Myrtle Beach, SC The Associated Press"> The 
Associated Press"> 

     Tuesday, September 4, 2001           <img
    
PLUTONIUM IN S.C. 
 
The Associated Press  

Gov. Jim Hodges has gone so far as to threaten to block the first 
shipment of plutonium to the site unless he had a written 
agreement on when the plutonium would leave. 

Gov. Jim Hodges has gone so far as to threaten to block the first 
shipment of plutonium to the site unless he had a written 
agreement on when the plutonium would leave. 

Gov. Jim Hodges has gone so far as to threaten to block the first 
shipment of plutonium to the site unless he had a written 
agreement on when the plutonium would leave. 

COLUMBIA | While state leaders may disagree with the federal 
government on when plutonium from nuclear weapons will leave 
South Carolina, there is little doubt the radioactive metal is 
coming here. 

State leaders and U.S. Energy Department officials agree the 100 
tons of plutonium being sent to the Savannah River Site is 
important to keep bomb-making materials away from terrorists or 
other nations. 

The site's mission is to take that plutonium and process it into 
fuel for nuclear reactors or immobilize it in glass rods. Either 
way, the end product is supposed to be shipped away from the 
nuclear complex near Aiken. 

Half the shipment is coming

 from Russia as part of a July 2000 agreement between President 
Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin for each nation to 
convert about 50 tons of weapons-grade plutonium to peacetime 
use. 

The agreement was hailed as a way to get some of the plutonium 
out of Russia, where it would be easier to steal or buy from 
unscrupulous scientists. South Carolina should do anything it can 
to help get excess plutonium out of Russia, said former Gov. 
James Edwards, who served as energy secretary under President 
Reagan. 

"Let's get it all in here, even if we have to pay the cost, and 
to pay the Russians for it. I'd be willing to take that much 
quicker than I'd be willing to take the plutonium from Rocky 
Flats, Colorado," Edwards said. 

The Savannah River Site was picked in 1998 to process the 
plutonium. The Energy Department wanted one site to consolidate 
the plutonium. SRS agreed to process it, and a site in Nevada was 
picked to store the plutonium that wasn't converted into fuel. 

But this year, Gov. Jim Hodges and other state leaders said they 
began to notice a shift away from converting the plutonium. They 
worried energy officials might decide to skip the processing step 
and just store the plutonium at SRS, in order to save money. 

Hodges threatened to block the first shipment to the site unless 
he had a written agreement on when the plutonium would leave. The 
Energy Department agreed to talk, but Undersecretary Robert Card 
told Hodges that in order to free up the $650 million currently 
being spent at the Rocky Flats, Colo., former weapons plant, the 
plutonium stored there needs to be transferred to SRS. 

U.S. Rep. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., described South Carolina's 1998 
agreement to host plutonium disposal as "a unique opportunity in 
history." 

"Let's not blow it. If we don't get the plutonium, it will be a 
disaster internationally and locally. We need to do this to make 
the world safer," Graham said. 

Graham thinks it is essential to convert the bomb-grade plutonium 
to commercial reactor fuel as a key to international nuclear 
disarmament. 

"We'll be sending a bad signal to the Russians. The ripple effect 
will be very damaging," said Graham. 

  All content © 2001 The Sun News
*****************************************************************
 24  Government urged to back nuclear power

money.telegraph.co.uk - 

By Sophie Barker  	  	(Filed: 04/09/2001)  

SIR CHRISTOPHER AUDLAND, head of European energy policy at the 
time of the Chernobyl accident, has urged the Government to "give 
a strong lead in favour of nuclear power instead of ducking for 
cover every time it is mentioned".
 
The comments come as the Government considers whether to lift a 
14-year unofficial moratorium on new nuclear power stations, as 
part of its energy policy review.
 
In his submission to the review, Sir Christopher drew on his 
experience as the European Commission's director-general of 
energy in the 1980s when he handled the consequences of 
Chernobyl, a grant for new nuclear stations in the UK and a 
European green energy drive.
 
He said the arguments in favour of nuclear power were "stronger 
than ever", while "the arguments against are weak and largely 
based on half-truths or lies which the public authorities, and in 
many cases the media, do not have the courage to expose".
 
Nuclear power stations do not emit greenhouse gases and are 
reliable and safe while, in contrast to gas, uranium fuel is 
"amply available", Sir Christopher said.
 
However, "on economics, the entire system is skewed against 
nuclear", because, unlike gas-fired or wind power, nuclear energy 
reflects environmental costs such as decommissioning and clean-up 
in its pricing, he added.
 
He concluded that it was "essential" for the Government to bring 
public opinion around, "instead of leaving the field open for a 
comparatively small number of anti-nuclear activists".
 
The Cabinet Office, which is conducting the review under energy 
minister Brian Wilson, has forecast that the share of British 
electricity generated by nuclear stations will slump from 25pc to 
3pc by 2020.
 
A spokesman for Mr Wilson said: "We want UK energy to be secure, 
diverse and sustainable. "Nuclear will be looked at along with 
everything else, with this as an underlying theme."
 
Sir Christopher, who said he "remained in touch with many of my 
former officials", was deputy chancellor of Lancaster University 
in the 1990s and is currently the Queen's deputy lieutenant in 
Cumbria.
 
3 September 2001: BNFL opens talks on plan for nuclear 
station 29 August 2001: Summit fixture fuels nuclear power hopes 
3 August 2001: DTI gives backing to nuclear power 2 July 2001: 
Go-ahead needed on N-power 26 June 2001[News]: Review 'will 
revive nuclear power'  

© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited2001. Terms &Conditions of 
*****************************************************************
 25  Daily Events Report
 
Daily Events Report
                    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
                              Operations Center
                              Event Reports For
                           08/31/2001   09/04/2001
                              ** EVENT NUMBERS **
37902  38254  38255  38256  38257  38258  38259  38260  38261  38262  

Power Reactor                                    Event Number:   37902       

 FACILITY: CRYSTAL RIVER            REGION:  2  NOTIFICATION DATE: 04/09/2001
    UNIT:  [3] [] []                 STATE:  FL NOTIFICATION TIME: 11:08[EDT]
   RXTYPE: [3] B L LP                         EVENT DATE:        04/09/2001
                                                EVENT TIME:        09:54[EDT]
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  RICHARD SWEENEY              LAST UPDATE DATE:  09/03/2001
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  STEVE SANDIN                                              
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         CAUDLE JULIAN        R2      
10 CFR SECTION:                                                              
APRE 50.72(b)(2)(xi)     OFFSITE NOTIFICATION                                
                                                                             
                                                                             
UNIT SCRAM CODERX CRITINIT PWR   INIT RX MODE  CURR PWR  CURR RX MODE   

3     N          Y       100      Power Operation  100      Power Operation  
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 OFFSITE NOTIFICATION TO THE NATIONAL MARINE AND FISHERIES 
SERVICE AS A RESULT OF THE ENDANGERED SEA TURTLES NON LETHAL TAKE 
LIMIT BEING EXCEEDED    
                                                                              
 "On April 09, 2001 at 0940 the 40th non lethal sea turtle take 
in the biennial period occurred.                                                    
                                                                              
 "In accordance with Crystal River Unit #3 Operating License, 
Appendix B, Environmental Protection Plan (Non Radiological),  
'Endangered or threatened sea turtles shall be protected in 
accordance with the Incidental Take Statement issued by the 
National Marine and Fisheries Service (NMFS).'  The NMFS has 
established numerical limits on live takes, lethal takes causally 
related to plant operation, and lethal takes not related to plant 
operations.                                                                  
                                                                              
 "The NMFS must be notified within five days whenever:                        
                                                                              
 a.  The 40th non lethal take occurs in the biennial period, or               

 b.  The third causally related mortality occurs in the biennial 
period, or   

 c.   The sixth non causally related mortality occurs in the 
biennial period.                                                                      
                                                                              
 "The current biennial period for monitoring sea turtle takes 
began January 1, 2001.                                                                     
                                                                              
 "Thus, in accordance with Crystal Unit #3 Administrative 
Instruction 571, Sea Turtle Rescue and Handling Guidance, the 
NMFS must be notified within five days.                                                                   
                                                                              
 "In accordance with Crystal River Unit #3 Compliance Procedure 
151, External Reporting Requirements, this 40th non lethal sea 
turtle take is Reportable as a 4 Hour Report under 10 CFR 
50.72(b)(2)(xi) as this event is related to the protection of the 
environment for which a notification to other government agencies 
has been or will be made."                               
                                                                              
 The licensee will inform the NRC resident inspector.                         
                                                                              
 * * * UPDATE 0944EDT ON 4/10/01 FROM R. SWEENEY TO S. SANDIN * * 
*           
                                                                              
 "On April 10, 2001 at 0859 the 41st non lethal sea turtle take 
in the biennial period occurred."                                                   
                                                                              
 The licensee informed the NRC resident inspector.  Notified 
R2DO(Julian).    
                                                                              
 ***** UPDATE RECEIVED AT 0911 ON 04/17/01 FROM CHRISTOPHER 
PELLERIN TO LEIGH TROCINE *****                                                                
                                                                              
 The 42nd, non lethal, sea turtle take in the biennial period 
occurred at 0810 on April 17, 2001.                                                      
                                                                              
 The licensee notified the NRC resident inspector.  The NRC 
operations officer notified the R2DO (Ernstes).                                         
                                                                              
 * * * UPDATE 1125 EDT ON 5/1/01 FROM DAVID SCHULKER TO FANGIE 
JONES * * *    
                                                                              
 "On May 1, 2001 at 0805 a turtle was identified as the 43rd 
rescued, live sea turtle in this biennial period.  This sea 
turtle will be kept for a short observation period and then 
safely returned to the environment."       
                                                                              
 The licensee will inform the NRC Resident Inspector and the 
National Wildlife and Fisheries Service.  Notified R2DO(Jay 
Henson).                  
                                                                              
 * * * UPDATE ON 5/29/01 BY FERGUSON TO SANDIN * * *                          
                                                                              
 On May 29, 2001 at 0943 two turtles were identified as the 44th 
and 45th rescued, Iive Sea turtles in this biennial period. These 
healthy sea turtles will be kept for a short observation period 
and then safely returned to the environment.                                                                 
                                                                              
                                                                              
 This is Reportable as a 4 Hour Report under 10 CFR 50.72 (b) (2) 
(xi) as this event is related to the protection of the 
environment for which a notification to other government agencies 
has been or will be made. This is an update to event 37902.                                                    
                                                                              
 The NRC Resident Inspector was notified.  The REG2 RDO(Barr) was 
informed.   
                                                                              
 * * * UPDATE 2014 EDT 6/4/2001 FROM RAWLS TAKEN BY STRANSKY * * 
*            
                                                                              
 On June 4, 2001 at 1815, the 46th non lethal sea turtle (Kemp's 
Ridley) take in the biennial period occurred. The license has 
informed the NRC resident inspector.  Notified R2DO (Barr).                                            
                                                                              
 * * * UPDATE 1315EDT ON 6/10/01 FROM CHARLES J. MORRIS TO S. 
SANDIN * * *    
                                                                              
 On June 10, 2001 at 1100, the 47th non lethal sea turtle take in 
the biennial period occurred. The license has informed the NRC 
resident inspector.  Notified R2DO (Bonser).                                          
                                                                              
 * * * UPDATE 0952 ON 8/20/2001 FROM FERGUSON TAKEN BY STRANSKY * 
* *         
                                                                              
 On August 20, 2001 at 0815, the 48th non lethal sea turtle take 
in the biennial period occurred. The licensee as informed the NRC 
resident inspector. Notified R2DO (Payne).                                            
                                                                              
 * * *  UPDATE 1216 ON 9/3/01 BY SCHULKER TO GOULD * * *                      
                                                                              
 On September 3, 2001 at 0845 a turtle was identified as the 49th 
rescued, live sea turtle in this biennial period.  This turtle 
has an injury to the lower jaw and is being transported to the 
Clearwater Marine Science Station for treatment. It has not been 
determined at this time if the injury is casually related to 
Crystal River Operations.                                
                                                                              
 This is Reportable as a 4 Hour Report under 10 CFR 50.72 (b) (2) 
(xi) as this event is related to the protection of the 
environment for which a notification to other government agencies 
has been or will be made. This is an update to event 37902.                                                    
                                                                              
 The NTC Resident Inspector and  other government agencies will 
be notified.  
                                                                              
 Notified Reg 2 RDO(Lesser)                                                   

Power Reactor                                    Event Number:   38254       

 FACILITY: SALEM                    REGION:  1  NOTIFICATION DATE: 08/31/2001
    UNIT:  [1] [] []                 STATE:  NJ NOTIFICATION TIME: 08:35[EDT]
   RXTYPE: [1] W 4 LP,[2] W 4 LP                EVENT DATE:        08/31/2001
                                                EVENT TIME:        04:55[EDT]
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  FORD                         LAST UPDATE DATE:  08/31/2001
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  CHAUNCEY GOULD                                            
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         DAVID LEW            R1      
10 CFR SECTION:                                                              
APRE 50.72(b)(2)(xi)     OFFSITE NOTIFICATION                                
                                                                             
UNIT SCRAM CODERX CRITINIT PWR   INIT RX MODE  CURR PWR  CURR RX MODE   

1     N          Y       100      Power Operation  100      Power Operation  
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE NOTIFIED OF THE RECOVERY OF A 
DEAD LOGGERHEAD TURTLE                                                            
                                                                              
 A deceased endangered loggerhead turtle was recovered from the 
circulating water intake trash bars.  Based on the condition of 
the turtle, it was determined to have been deceased for some time 
and the cause was not directly related to being impinged on the 
circulating water (cw) trash bars.                                                                        
                                                                              
 The NRC Resident Inspector will be notified along with the 
National Marine Fisheries Service                                                            

Hospital                                         Event Number:   38255       

 REP ORG:  MAYO CLINIC                          NOTIFICATION DATE: 08/31/2001
LICENSEE:  SAINT MARYS HOSPITAL                 NOTIFICATION TIME: 09:19[EDT]
    CITY:  ROCHESTER                REGION:  3  EVENT DATE:        08/30/2001
  COUNTY:                            STATE:  MN EVENT TIME:        08:55[CDT]
LICENSE#:  22 26031 01           AGREEMENT:  N  LAST UPDATE DATE:  08/31/2001
  DOCKET:                                                                   
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
                                                JOHN MADERA          R3      
                                                JOHN HICKEY          NMSS    
                                                                             
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  CLASSIC                                                   
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  CHAUNCEY GOULD                                            
                                                                             
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY                                      
10 CFR SECTION:                                                              
LADM 35.33(a)            MED MISADMINISTRATION                               
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 MEDICAL MISADMINISTRATION DURING THE USE OF A GAMMA STEREO 
TACTIC UNIT       
                                                                              
 A CANCER PATIENT WAS UNDERGOING THERAPEUTIC TREATMENTS AND 
RECEIVED A COBALT 60 DOSE GREATER THAN 39% OF THE PRESCRIBED 
DOSE.  THE PRESCRIBED DOSE WAS 20 GRAYS AND THE ACTUAL DOSE WAS 
27.8 GRAYS.   CAUSE OF THE MISADMINISTRATION WAS DUE TO THE TIME 
OF TREATMENT BEING INCORRECTLY ENTERED IN THE TREATMENT UNIT.  
THE PATIENT AND PHYSICIAN WERE NOTIFIED. THERE IS NO ANTICIPATION 
OF ANY ADVERSE AFFECT.                              

General Information or Other                     Event Number:   38256       

 REP ORG:  KANSAS DEPT OF HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT  NOTIFICATION DATE: 08/31/2001
LICENSEE:  UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS HOSPITAL AUTHORINOTIFICATION TIME: 13:30[EDT]
    CITY:  KANSAS CITY              REGION:  4  EVENT DATE:        08/31/2001
  COUNTY:                            STATE:  KS EVENT TIME:             [CDT]
LICENSE#:  18 C801               AGREEMENT:  Y  LAST UPDATE DATE:  08/31/2001
  DOCKET:                                                                   
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
                                                GAIL GOOD            R4      
                                                SUSAN FRANT          NMSS    
                                                                             
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  TOM CONLEY                                                
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  BOB STRANSKY                                              
                                                                             
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY                                      
10 CFR SECTION:                                                              
NAGR                     AGREEMENT STATE                                     
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 AGREEMENT STATE REPORT   MEDICAL MISADMINISTRATION                           
                                                                              
 The wrong radiopharmaceutical was administered to a patient, 
resulting in a dose of 9 rem (90 mSv) to the lower large 
intestine. A technician had picked up two doses:  one Tc 99m dose 
(prescribed for the patient) and one Ga 67 dose. The technician 
then engaged in a conversation with another individual, became 
distracted and inadvertently administered the Ga 67 dose to the 
patient.                                                                     

The hospital will be submitting a written report to the state 
within 15 days.                                                                        

General Information or Other                     Event Number:   38257       

 REP ORG:  TENNESSEE DIV OF RAD HEALTH          NOTIFICATION DATE: 08/31/2001
LICENSEE:  HENRY COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER          NOTIFICATION TIME: 16:10[EDT]
    CITY:  PARIS                    REGION:  2  EVENT DATE:        08/31/2001
  COUNTY:                            STATE:  TN EVENT TIME:             [EDT]
LICENSE#:                        AGREEMENT:  Y  LAST UPDATE DATE:  08/31/2001
  DOCKET:                                                                   
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
                                                MARK LESSER          R2      
                                                                             
                                                                             
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  DEBRA SHULTS (FACSIMILE)                                  
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  BOB STRANSKY                                              
                                                                             
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY                                      
10 CFR SECTION:                                                              
NAGR                     AGREEMENT STATE                                     
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 AGREEMENT STATE REPORT                                                       
                                                                              
 "The licensee called to report that 105 iodine 125 seeds 
totaling 336 millicuries were missing. The seeds were delivered 
to the hospital by Airborne Express on 8/29/01 and records 
indicate they were received by a purchasing clerk at 
approximately 2:00 p.m.. A prostate implant was scheduled for the 
morning of 8/31/01. When the radiation therapy technologist went 
to retrieve the seeds from the nuclear medicine department. the 
nuclear medicine technologist was unaware that any seeds had been 
delivered to the hospital. The clerk who signed for the seeds is 
not at the hospital today and on vacation until Tuesday. The 
housekeeping staff member who cleaned the area on 8/29/01 does 
not recall seeing any container fitting the description of the 
one in which the seeds were packaged and delivered. The Nuclear 
Medicine Department and the Radiology Department have been 
searched and the package not located. The dumpsters were emptied 
and sent to the landfill prior to discovery of the missing 
sources. An investigation is underway at the hospital. State 
radiation control personnel will conduct an onsite 
investigation."                                       

General Information or Other                     Event Number:   38258       

 REP ORG:  TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH           NOTIFICATION DATE: 08/31/2001
LICENSEE:  ATSER CORPORATION                    NOTIFICATION TIME: 17:15[EDT]
    CITY:  HOUSTON                  REGION:  4  EVENT DATE:        08/30/2001
  COUNTY:                            STATE:  TX EVENT TIME:        12:15[CDT]
LICENSE#:  L04741                AGREEMENT:  Y  LAST UPDATE DATE:  08/31/2001
  DOCKET:                                                                   
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
                                                GAIL GOOD            R4      
                                                                             
                                                                             
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  HELEN WATKINS (FACSIMILE)                                 
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  BOB STRANSKY                                              
                                                                             
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY                                      
10 CFR SECTION:                                                              
NAGR                     AGREEMENT STATE                                     
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 AGREEMENT STATE REPORT   STOLEN NUCLEAR GAUGE FOUND                          
                                                                              
 "A yellow box with a Yellow II label was found and Hazmat 
responded to the scene. The box was found abandoned in a dumpster 
at an apartment building. Hazmat's radiation survey meters 
indicated the presence of radioactive material. However, the 
radiation levels indicated were inconsistent with readings 
expected from a gauge. It was later determined the Hazmat team 
had confused µR with mR and the readings were much lower than 
earlier believed.  
                                                                              
 "The city requested assistance to identify the owner of the 
gauge and possibly to take possession of the gauge. Because 
Houston was recently flooded, the city's basement area (with a 
lead lined vault was severely damaged and could not be used to 
temporarily secure the gauge.               
                                                                              
 "It was determined that the gauge belonged to ATSER Corporation 
(L04741). A former employee reported carrying it in his vehicle 
and it was stolen along with the vehicle. The company is still 
investigating. The gauge is a Humboldt, s/n 3612. The source 
serial number of the Cs 137 source is 9842GQ and the Am 241/Be 
source is NJ03905."                                        

Power Reactor                                    Event Number:   38259       

 FACILITY: HARRIS                   REGION:  2  NOTIFICATION DATE: 09/01/2001
    UNIT:  [1] [] []                 STATE:  NC NOTIFICATION TIME: 00:05[EDT]
   RXTYPE: [1] W 3 LP                           EVENT DATE:        08/31/2001
                                                EVENT TIME:        23:08[EDT]
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  JAMES ABRAHAM                LAST UPDATE DATE:  09/01/2001
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  STEVE SANDIN                                              
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         MARK LESSER          R2      
10 CFR SECTION:                                                              
DDDD 73.71               UNSPECIFIED PARAGRAPH                               
                                                                             
                                                                             
UNIT SCRAM CODERX CRITINIT PWR   INIT RX MODE  CURR PWR  CURR RX MODE   

1     N          Y       100      Power Operation  100      Power Operation  
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 1 HOUR SECURITY REPORT INVOLVED SAFEGUARDS SYSTEM DEGRADATION                
                                                                              
 Safeguards system degradation related to detection of area 
boundary. Immediate compensatory measures taken upon discovery.  
The licensee will inform the NRC resident inspector.  Contact the 
Headquarters Operations Center for additional details.                                               

Power Reactor                                    Event Number:   38260       

 FACILITY: SAINT LUCIE              REGION:  2  NOTIFICATION DATE: 09/01/2001
    UNIT:  [1] [2] []                STATE:  FL NOTIFICATION TIME: 08:45[EDT]
   RXTYPE: [1] CE,[2] CE                        EVENT DATE:        09/01/2001
                                                EVENT TIME:        08:15[EDT]
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  JOE HESSLING                 LAST UPDATE DATE:  09/01/2001
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  STEVE SANDIN                                              
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         MARK LESSER          R2      
10 CFR SECTION:                                                              
APRE 50.72(b)(2)(xi)     OFFSITE NOTIFICATION                                
                                                                             

UNIT SCRAM CODERX CRITINIT PWR   INIT RX MODE  CURR PWR  CURR RX MODE   

1     N          Y       100      Power Operation  100      Power Operation  
2     N          Y       100      Power Operation  100      Power Operation  
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 OFFSITE NOTIFICATION TO FLORIDA STATE AND WILDLIFE INVOLVING 
INJURED TURTLE  
                                                                              
 "Notification being made due to a State Notification (Florida 
State and Wildlife) at 0815.                                                           
                                                                              
 "Notification made due to injured immature Loggerhead sea turtle 
being transported offsite for rehabilitation.                                      
                                                                              
 "Notification to offsite agency requires NRC notification 
pursuant to 10CFR50.72(b)(2)(xi)."                                                       
                                                                              
 The licensee will inform the NRC resident inspector.                         

Power Reactor                                    Event Number:   38261       

 FACILITY: DUANE ARNOLD             REGION:  3  NOTIFICATION DATE: 09/02/2001
    UNIT:  [1] [] []                 STATE:  IA NOTIFICATION TIME: 17:52[EDT]
   RXTYPE: [1] GE 4                             EVENT DATE:        09/02/2001
                                                EVENT TIME:        13:08[CDT]
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  MIKE HAUNER                  LAST UPDATE DATE:  09/02/2001
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  BOB STRANSKY                                              
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         PATRICK HILAND       R3      
10 CFR SECTION:                                                              
AIND 50.72(b)(3)(v)(D)   ACCIDENT MITIGATION                                 
                                                                             

UNIT SCRAM CODERX CRITINIT PWR   INIT RX MODE  CURR PWR  CURR RX MODE   

1     N          Y       100      Power Operation  100      Power Operation  
                                                                             
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 HPCI SYSTEM DECLARED INOPERABLE                                              
                                                                              
 "The High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) steam supply line 
drain trap developed a steam leak that required the drain trap to 
be manually isolated.                                                                    
                                                                              
 "At 1308, shortly after isolating the steam trap, the HPCI steam 
supply drain pot high level alarm was received; the HPCI system 
was declared inoperable and a 14 day LCO was entered per 
Technical Specification 3.5.1 Condition F.                                                                 
                                                                              
 "At 1326, the HPCI turbine auto start feature was defeated to 
mitigate the potential damage to the turbine and other components 
from water in the steam supply line.                                                                 
                                                                              
 "Unplanned HPCI system inoperability is reportable under 
50.72(b)(3)(v)(D) as a single train failure that could have 
prevented the fulfillment of a safety function of structures or 
systems to mitigate the consequences of an accident."                                                                   
                                                                              
 The NRC resident inspector has been informed of this 
notification by the licensee.                                                                    

Power Reactor                                    Event Number:   38262       

 FACILITY: LASALLE                  REGION:  3  NOTIFICATION DATE: 09/03/2001
    UNIT:  [] [2] []                 STATE:  IL NOTIFICATION TIME: 22:02[EDT]
   RXTYPE: [1] GE 5,[2] GE 5                    EVENT DATE:        09/03/2001
                                                EVENT TIME:        17:28[CDT]
 NRC NOTIFIED BY:  COVEYOU                      LAST UPDATE DATE:  09/03/2001
  HQ OPS OFFICER:  CHAUNCEY GOULD                                            
                                                PERSON          ORGANIZATION 
EMERGENCY CLASS:          NON EMERGENCY         PATRICK HILAND       R3      
10 CFR SECTION:                                 JACK STROSNIDER      NRR     
ARPS 50.72(b)(2)(iv)(B)  RPS ACTUATION   CRITICA                             
ACCS 50.72(b)(2)(iv)(A)  ECCS INJECTION                                      
AESF 50.72(b)(3)(iv)(A)  VALID SPECIF SYS ACTUAT                             
                                                                             
UNIT SCRAM CODERX CRITINIT PWR   INIT RX MODE  CURR PWR  CURR RX MODE   
                                                                             
2     M/R        Y       100      Power Operation  0        Hot Shutdown     
                                                                             
                                   EVENT TEXT                                   

 REACTOR MANUALLY SCRAMMED FROM 100% DUE TO LOW  VESSEL LEVEL                 
                                                                              
 This report is being made per 10CFR50.72(b)(2)(iv)(B) RPS 
actuation (4 hour notification for U 2), 10CFR50.72(b)(2)(iv)(A) 
ECCS Injection/Actuation (4 hour notification for Unit 2), and 
10CFR50.72(b)(3)(iv)(A) System Actuation not including RPS (8 
hour notification for Unit 1 and 2).                    
                                                                              
 At 1728 CST. Monday, 9 3 01,U 2 was manually scrammed.  
Initiating event appears to be a loss of Bus 241Y, which resulted 
in a loss of feedwater. The reactor was manually scrammed at 
approximately 20 inches before the automatic scram setpoint for 
low vessel water level.  All rods fully inserted.                                                                    
                                                                              
 The Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) and High Pressure Core 
Spray (HPCS) systems automatically started and injected and 
restored Reactor Pressure  Vessel (RPV) level.                                                

A primary containment level 2 isolation occurred and the Reactor 
Recirculation pumps tripped at minus 50 inches as expected.  Unit 
1 was affected due to standby gas treatment auto start and the 
reactor building vent system isolation.                                                       
                                                                              
 The lowest Reactor water level reached was minus 55 inches (106 
inches above the top of active fuel) as indicated by the Division 
2 instrumentation and was recovered to normal level with RCIC and 
HPCS within a few minutes. Approximately 10,000 gallons of water 
was injected.                          
                                                                              
 Bus 241Y was automatically re energized from the (0) Common 
Diesel Generator.                                                                   
                                                                              
 Dry well pressure increased due to the expected loss of primary 
containment cooling.  The highest pressure reached was 
approximately (1) one psig. Primary Containment Cooling has been 
restored.  There are no indications of a leak inside the primary 
containment.                                       

 RPV pressure is being controlled at 800 to 1000 psig by the use 
of RCIC. Main Steam Line drains, and manual operation of Safety 
Relief Valve (as necessary).  RPV level has been restored to 
normal and feedwater is being used.                                                                        
                                                                              
 Subsequent in the Reactor Scram, the 2A RHR Pump failed to start 
when manually initiating from the Main Control Room (for 
suppression pool cooling).                                                                    
                                                                              
 System isolations have been restored with exception of reactor 
water cleanup and the Reactor Recirculation Hydraulic Power Units 
on U 2.                  
                                                                              
 The station is taking action to investigate the cause of the 
initial loss of 241Y and the unrelated failure to start of the 2A 
RHR pump.   At this time, there appears to be a blown fuse for 
the 241Y bus Under Voltage logic which prevented the 2A RHR pump 
from starting.                                     
                                                                              
 The plant is stable.                                                         
                                                                              
 The NRC resident inspector has been notified.                                
 
*****************************************************************
 26  IAEA Daily Press Review
 
IAEA Daily Press Review       Date 2001-09-03 Number 167   

  1. Non-proliferation 
DPRK calls for resumption of inter-Korean dialogue. IAEA likely to adopt
resolution at its upcoming 45th session 	urging DPRK to implement its
obligations under NPT. Australia offers training to DPRK officials on how to
manage 	control system for nuclear materials in accordance with IAEA
requirements. Bush administration confirms it will 	share information about its
proposed MD with China; US imposes trade sanctions on major Chinese arms
	manufacturer after failing to persuade China to stop exports of missile
technology to Pakistan. 
(BBC; IHT; NYT; R - 3/9)
 	 Australia; China; Dem. P.R. of Korea; IAEA; Korea, Republic of; 	Pakistan;
United States of America  	
  
  2. Nuclear power 
 While Temelin-1 resumes testing following three-month shutdown for repairs,
Austrian initiative applies for legal 	block on tests. According to head of
consortium charged with building two LWRs in DPRK, KEDO will begin 	excavation
work for reactors in September and project is "well under way." 								
 		(INT; KYO - 3/9)
  Czech Republic; Dem. P.R. of Korea; KEDO; United States of 	America  
 
  3. Radwaste, fuel 
 Articles on planned decommissioning of Dounreay. 		
 		(R - 31/8)
					 	 United Kingdom  
 
  4. Energy, environment 
 Brazilians could face more energy rationing measures after efforts to reduce
consumption faltered in August. 							
 	(BBC - 1/9)
  Brazil  
 
  5. R 
 Scientists preparing ground for genetically modifying populations of dangerous
mosquitoes, making it impossible 	for them to pass malaria on to humans. Russia
approves programme of International Thermonuclear Reactor 	(ITER) to prepare
Russian organizations and enterprises for full-scale participation in
construction of ITER reactor 	in framework of international co-operation. Thai
Nuclear Reactor Safety subcommittee reportedly remains adamant 	 that
construction of Ongkarak research reactor cannot begin due to inadequate safety
measures. 							
 	(FT; G; R - 3/9)
 	 Russian Federation; Thailand  		 	 

*****************************************************************
 27  Russia plans to enlarge Iranian nuclear power plant
 
[ITAR/TASS News Agency]   
  
Story Filed: Monday, September 03, 2001 1:12 AM EST 

MOSCOW, Sep 03, 2001 (Itar-Tass via COMTEX) -- The Russian 
Nuclear Energy Ministry plans to start talks with Iran late this 
December on building new units of its nuclear power plant, said 
on Monday Russian Deputy Minister for Nuclear Energy Yevgeny 
Reshetnikov in an exclusive interview with Tass. He said that 
designers would go to Iran early in September to submit a 
feasibility report to partners on construction of new units of 
the nuclear power plant. The Iranian side will examine Russian 
proposals, following which the two countries will start talks on 
concluding a contract. 

Reshetnikov did not preclude a chance that the sides may reach 
agreement on building at least another set of the nuclear plant. 

According to the deputy minister, Russian specialists are working 
"full blast" to build the first unit of the station in Bushehr 
where large-size equipment is already pouring in. 

For instance one steam generator was delivered to Iran last July, 
while the reactor is planned to be supplied next November. "All 
work proceeds under schedule," Reshetnikov noted. 

By Veronika Voskoboinikova 

(c) 1996-2001 ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. 

*****************************************************************
 28  ADAMS: Items of Interest - Tuesday, September 04, 2001
 State of Nevada
Agency for Nuclear Projects

ADAMS - Items of Interest Recent Released Documents Added - 
Tuesday, September 04, 2001 

These documents and others may be retrieved at the NRC PERR web 
site

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Item ID: 012430148 Accession Number: ML012390184 Document Date: 
8/23/01 Title: 09/12/2001 Public Meeting Reactor Oversight 
Process Industry/NRC Working Group re Implementation of Revised 
Reactor Oversight Process. Author Affiliation: NRC/NRR/DIPM 
Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430165 Accession Number: ML012390249 Document Date: 
8/31/01 Title: 09/13/2001, Meeting with Nuclear Management 
Company Re FERRET Computer Code for Point Beach, Units 1 and 2 
Author Affiliation: NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD3 Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430164 Accession Number: ML012400213 Document Date: 
8/30/01 Title: 09/13/2001-Callaway Meeting TAC. MB1214 with Union 
Electric Company on Electro sleeve Amendment Application. Author 
Affiliation: NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD4 Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430175 Accession Number: ML012430102 Document Date: 
8/31/01 Title: 8/15/2001Summary of Meeting with Nuclear Energy 
Institute and Operating Pressurized Water Reactor Licensee's on 
Bulletin 2001-01, "Circumferential Cracking of Reactor Pressure 
Vessel Head Penetration Nozzles." Author Affiliation: 
NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1 Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430085 Accession Number: ML012350394 Document Date: 
8/20/01 Title: Army, Department of the Yuma Proving Ground; 
Amendment Request. Author Affiliation: US Dept of the Army, Yuma 
Proving Ground Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430051 Accession Number: ML012350101 Document Date: 
8/17/01 Title: Letter discussing concerns regarding amendments to 
the low-level radioactive waste disposal license held by 
Envirocare of Utah. Author Affiliation: US Environmental 
Protection Agency Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430202 Accession Number: ML012430177 Document Date: 
Title: MEETING WITH NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI) ON NEI-97-06, 
"STEAM GENERATOR PROGRAM GUIDELINES" Author Affiliation: 
Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430072 Accession Number: ML012350318 Document Date: 
8/25/99 Title: Naval Spent Fuel Canister Dry Storage Safety 
Analysis Report-Scope of NRC Review. Author Affiliation: US Dept 
of Energy (DOE) Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430067 Accession Number: ML012350210 Document Date: 
1/30/98 Title: Notice of Proposed Rules or Change R313-15 License 
Requirements For Land Disposal Of Radioactive Waste - General 
Provisions. Author Affiliation: State of UT Dept of Environmental 
Quality Division of Radiation Control Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430095 Accession Number: ML012390201 Document Date: 
8/23/01 Title: NRC Comments on Draft NEI 01-01 (EPRI TR-102348-R1 
Draft E, July 2001) Author Affiliation: NRC/NRR/DRIP/RGEB 
Document/Report Number: 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430040 Accession Number: ML012350063 Document Date: 
8/21/01 Title: Paducah and Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plants - 
Transmittal of Latest Version of Radioactive Material Packaging 
and Transportation Quality Assurance Program, (PTQAP), Revision 
14. Author Affiliation: United States Enrichment Corporation 
Document/Report Number: UEO-1041, Rev. 14 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430158 Accession Number: ML012430081 Document Date: 
8/30/01 Title: SRM-SECY-01-0131 - "Rulemaking Plan: Revision of 
Appendix E, Section IV.F.2, to 10 CFR Part 50, Concerning 
Clarification of Emergency Preparation Exercise Participation 
Requirements for Co-Located Licensees." Author Affiliation: 
NRC/SECY Document/Report Number: SRM-SECY-01-0131 
_________________________________________________________________ 
Item ID: 012430063 Accession Number: ML012350173 Document Date: 
8/26/94 Title: State of Utah Rule313-38. Notice or Proposed 
Rule/Change Radiation Safety Requirements for Wireline Service 
Operation and Subsurface Tracer Studies. Author Affiliation: 
State of UT Dept of Environmental Quality Division of Radiation 
Control Document/Report Number: 
*****************************************************************
 29   Nuclear power isn't 'clean'; it's dangerous  

 By Helen Caldicott, 9/3/2001  

AMONG THE many departures from the truth by opponents of the 
Kyoto protocol, one of the most invidious is that nuclear power 
is ''clean'' and, therefore, the answer to global warming. 

We heard this during the last round of talks in Bonn, and we can 
expect to hear more of the same as we move closer to the next 
round of Kyoto talks that are coming up in Marrakesh in October 
and November. 

However, the cleanliness of nuclear power is nonsense. Not only 
does it contaminate the planet with long-lived radioactive waste, 
it significantly contributes to global warming. 

While it is claimed that there is little or no fossil fuel used 
in producing nuclear power, the reality is that enormous 
quantities of fossil fuel are used to mine, mill and enrich the 
uranium needed to fuel a nuclear power plant, as well as to 
construct the enormous concrete reactor itself. 

Indeed, a nuclear power plant must operate for 18 years before 
producing one net calorie of energy. (During the 1970s the United 
States deployed seven 1,000-megawatt coal-fired plants to enrich 
its uranium, and it is still using coal to enrich much of the 
world's uranium.) So, to recoup the equivalent of the amount of 
fossil fuel used in preparation and construction before the first 
switch is thrown to initiate nuclear fission, the plant must 
operate for almost two decades. 

But that is not the end of fossil fuel use because disassembling 
nuclear plants at the end of their 30- to 40-year operating life 
will require yet more vast quantities of energy. Taking apart, 
piece by radioactive piece, a nuclear reactor and its surrounding 
infrastructure is a massive operation: Imagine, for example, the 
amount of petrol, diesel, and electricity that would be used if 
the Sydney Opera House were to be dismantled. That's the scale 
we're talking about. 

And that is not the end of fossil use because much will also be 
required for the final transport and longterm storage of nuclear 
waste generated by every reactor. 

From a medical perspective, nuclear waste threatens global 
health. The toxicity of many elements in this radioactive mess is 
long-lived. 

Strontium 90, for example, is tasteless, odorless, and invisible 
and remains radioactive for 600 years. Concentrating in the food 
chain, it emulates the mineral calcium. Contaminated milk enters 
the body, where strontium 90 concentrates in bones and lactating 
breasts later to cause bone cancer, leukemia, and breast cancer. 
Babies and children are 10 to 20 times more susceptible to the 
carcinogenic effects of radiation than adults. 

Plutonium, the most significant element in nuclear waste, is so 
carcinogenic that hypothetically half a kilo evenly distributed 
could cause cancer in everyone on Earth. Lasting for half a 
million years, it enters the body through the lungs where it is 
known to cause cancer. It mimics iron in the body, migrating to 
bones, where it can induce bone cancer or leukemia, and to the 
liver, where it can cause primary liver cancer. It crosses the 
placenta into the embryo and, like the drug thalidomide, causes 
gross birth deformities. 

Finally, plutonium has a predilection for the testicles, where it 
induces genetic mutations in the sperm of humans and other 
animals that are passed on from generation to generation. 

Significantly, five kilos of plutonium is fuel for a nuclear 
weapon. Thus far, nuclear power has generated about 1,139 tons of 
plutonium. 

So, nuclear power adds to global warming, increases the burden of 
radioactive materials in the ecosphere and threatens to 
contribute to nuclear

proliferation. No doubt the Australian government is keen to 
assist the uranium industry, but the immorality of its position 
is unforgivable. 

 Dr. Helen Caldicott  is   founding president of Physicians for 
Social Responsibility. This column originally appeared in the 
Sydney Morning Herald.  

This story ran on page 13 of the Boston Globe on 9/3/2001. © 
Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company. 
*****************************************************************
 30   Plutonium shipments will occur  

 Leaders agree that radioactive material will be sent to SRS, 
still fail to concur on when it will leave the state  

 Web posted Tuesday, September 4, 2001
 
 Associated Press 

COLUMBIA - Although state leaders might disagree with the federal 
government on when plutonium from nuclear weapons will leave 
South Carolina, there is little doubt the radioactive metal is 
coming.
 
State leaders and U.S. Energy Department officials agree that the 
55 tons of plutonium being sent to the Savannah River Site are 
important to keep bomb-making materials away from terrorists and 
other nations.

 The site's mission is to take that plutonium and process it into 
fuel for nuclear reactors or immobilize it in glass rods. Either 
way, the end product is supposed to be shipped out of the nuclear 
complex near Aiken.

 --> The Savannah River Site was picked to process the plutonium 
in 1998. The Energy Department wanted one site to consolidate the 
plutonium. SRS agreed to process it, and a site in Nevada was 
picked to store the plutonium that wasn't converted into fuel.

 But this year, Gov. Jim Hodges and other state leaders said they 
began to notice a shift away from converting the plutonium. They 
worried Energy officials might decide to skip the processing step 
and just store the plutonium at SRS in order to save money.

 Mr. Hodges threatened to block the first shipment to the site 
unless he had a written agreement on when the plutonium would 
leave. The Energy Department agreed to talk, but said 
Undersecretary Robert Card told Mr. Hodges that in order to free 
up the $650 million being spent at the Rocky Flats, Colo., former 
weapons plant, the plutonium stored there would need to be 
transferred to SRS.
 
U.S. Rep. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., described South Carolina's 1998 
agreement to house plutonium disposal as ''a unique opportunity 
in history.''

 ''Let's not blow it. If we don't get the plutonium, it will be a 
disaster internationally and locally. We need to do this to make 
the world safer,'' Mr. Graham said.
 

The Augusta Chronicle

*****************************************************************
 31  Austrian minister demands closure of disputed Czech nuclear 
plant 

BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Sep 1, 2001

Text of report in English by Czech news agency CTK Linz, Austria, 
1 September: Austrian Finance Minister Karl-Heinz Grasser demands 
that the Czech Temelin nuclear power plant be closed, he said at 
this year's trade fair in Ried, Upper Austria. 

He said he was for European Union enlargement, but added that 
"all conditions of admission have to be harmonized". Grasser is a 
member of the populist Freedom Party (FPOe), which wants to make 
the Czech Republic's admission to the EU conditional on non 
putting Temelin into operation. 

Grasser stressed that the Temelin issue was of "essential 
importance not only for Upper Austria but also for the whole of 
Austria". According to Grasser, good neighbourly relations must 
be based on "fair acts", which include the need to find "a just 
distribution of costs of EU enlargement." 

Regarding Temelin, the only "joint" solution that would satisfy 
Austrian people is not to put Temelin into operation. Temelin, 
situated some 60 km from both the Austrian and German borders and 
operated by the CEZ power utility, is opposed by the Austrian and 
German governments as well as environmentalists in the two 
countries and in the Czech Republic. They say the plant is not 
safe because it combines a Soviet design and western fuel and 
safety technology. 

Source: CTK news agency, Prague, in English 1241 gmt 1 Sep 01 
/BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to 
*****************************************************************
 32  Newspaper denies Russian secretiveness about nuclear dumping 

BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Sep 1, 2001

The image of Russian indifference and secretiveness about buried 
nuclear waste is a false one as there is in fact scrupulous 
monitoring of burial sites and a detailed database on dumping at 
sea has been compiled, according to the Rossiyskaya Gazeta 
newspaper. A European-funded international project has been 
collecting data on the Soviet and Russian nuclear fleet's 
radioactive waste since 1995. Among the secrets unearthed is the 
real location of the reactor of the icebreaker Lenin, the report 
on whose 1967 dumping en route to its designated Novaya Zemlya 
burial site had been falsified. 

Thus, according to the newspaper, "very important work is being 
done with no false secrecy or peering into keyholes". The 
following is the text of the article by Sergey Ptichkin, 
published in the newspaper on 29 August under the headline 
"Mystery of the disappearance of the Lenin's sarcophagus". The 
subheadings are the newspaper's own: 

In October 1967, the damaged reactor compartment, weighing 350 
tonnes, of the world's first nuclear-powered icebreaker was sunk 
off the shores of Novaya Zemlya. Time passed and they began to 
look at how the highly radioactive load was preserved on the 
bottom of the ocean - there was nothing there... 

[newspaper's ellipsis] 

One of our authors, Marcus Warren, the Moscow correspondent of 
Britain's Daily Telegraph, writing on 8 August under the heading 
"Fresh Mind", mentioned the article "Monitoring that is barely 
acceptable" (Rossiyskaya Gazeta 4 August 2001). He suggested that 
we return to the topic and take a closer look at it. The topic is 
certainly interesting and almost inexhaustible. 

What are we fussing about? 

We recall that in the article which aroused Mr Warren's interest, 
the issue was the start-up of intelligence operations by NATO 
countries in the Barents Sea during the peak period of work to 
raise the nuclear-powered submarine Kursk. As justification, our 
Western neighbours express their usual concern about problems of 
the Arctic's ecology. 

Naturally, it was asserted that Russia is concealing the true 
situation concerning the burial of nuclear waste in that region 
and that is why it is necessary to keep one's eye constantly on 
her, that is, Russia. And it would be better if this eye were 
armed with all types of reconnaissance surveillance devices or, 
to express it more correctly, monitoring devices. 

Problems of ecology have become for some people, not only in the 
West but in Russia, too, a unique eccentricity. For some reason, 
a firm conviction has developed that the entire world is anxious 
about the cleanliness of the Russian environment, whereas 
Russians themselves, in the best case, regard it indifferently. 
And if one tries to get trustworthy information, then one 
immediately encounters the "iron curtain" and vigilant agents of 
the Federal Security Service [FSB]. 

The scandalous process around the case of Capt 1st Class 
[Aleksandr] Nikitin serves as proof of this. As his service 
career waned, he became so "Green" that he offered to give (or 
perhaps sell) to the ecological organization Bellona secrets on 
all buried nuclear waste from spent reactors of the Soviet 
nuclear-powered fleet. This was done with much pomp, as if only 
Nikitin knew all the "terrible" secrets, revealed them and 
suffered because of them. 

In fact, Russia has been scrupulously monitoring its own nuclear 
waste repositories for six years now. And this work has been 
going on within the framework of a large international project! 
The most unique and detailed computerized database has been 
compiled on the dumping of radioactive waste in the sea for the 
entire period of the Soviet/Russian navy's existence. Moreover, 
in the process of the work a discovery was made, one could call 
it sensational, albeit with a touch of scandal. 

From the history of the problem 

The problem of disposing of nuclear waste from ships with 
nuclear-powered units and also damaged reactors arose in the USSR 
at the moment of the birth of a nuclear-powered fleet, some 40 
years ago (the first Soviet nuclear-powered submarine was 
launched in 1957 and was commissioned in 1959). 

The mass arrival of the first nuclear-powered submarines in the 
navy began in the 1960s. At the same time, the first series of 
accidents took place, in the majority of cases associated with 
loss of coolant, over-heating and sintering of nuclear fuel. 

Sometimes this led to radiation discharges, sometimes not. But 
afterwards the nuclear reactors were no longer fit for 
reconditioning. The mechanisms and power-unit systems contained 
built-up radiation and as a rule were severely contaminated with 
radionuclides and thus had to be buried somewhere. 

Secluded bays on the eastern shore of Novaya Zemlya were selected 
as the place for nuclear burials. The island itself was a nuclear 
test range and its water expanses were closed to foreign 
navigation. In addition, the selected bays were protected from 
storm waves and had weak underwater currents. Depths exceeded 30 
metres, which excluded the possibility of the dangerous objects 
being harmed by drifting ice. 

As containers (unique sarcophaguses) for the damaged reactors and 
solid radioactive waste, the hulls of the submarines themselves 
were used. These were manufactured from particularly strong steel 
and are able to remain completely sealed for hundreds of years. 

The facts of the burials were thoroughly documented, but alas, 
not summarized in a separate file, but were kept individually. In 
addition, it was completely natural that these documents should 
be secret. Thus, no-one had a general picture of the nuclear 
cemetery in the Kara Sea. In this sense, public concern was 
completely understandable and justified. 

The first systematic attempt to analyse the situation with the 
waste was undertaken in the very beginning of the 1990s by a 
governmental commission specially appointed by the president and 
led by the well-known ecologist, Aleksey Yablokov. The commission 
managed to overcome numerous bureaucratic obstacles and collected 
as much information as was accessible at the time. Based on it 
the "White Book" came out in 1993; however, it was prepared in a 
compressed period of time and was marred with a number of 
inaccuracies and objectively required augmentation and refining. 

Lazurit's deep-water feat 

The loss of the nuclear-powered submarine Komsomolets and now the 
submarine cruiser Kursk, brought worldwide, although somewhat 
dismal, fame to the Rubin Central Design Bureau in St Petersburg, 
where these submarines were designed. Meanwhile, two other design 
bureaux remained in the USSR and Russia at which nuclear-powered 
submarines were also designed - St Petersburg's Malakhit and 
Nizhniy Novgorod's Lazurit. As experience has shown, the 
submarines of these design bureaux were and still are 
distinguished by their very high reliability and they often 
exceed American submarines in their combat characteristics. 

In addition, it is essential to add that at Lazurit back in 
Soviet times, along with nuclear-powered strike submarines, they 
began to design the world's first rescue submarines, the Lenoks. 
These were built in Komsomolsk-na-Amur. 

Unfortunately, the last Lenok which was fully repairable and 
ready for deep-water modernization had been quietly towed to 
China, having been sold for scrap metal. This occurred by a 
tragic coincidence of events on... [newspaper's ellipsis] 12 
August of last year, on the day when the Kursk was sinking in the 
Barents Sea. And in fact, only the Lenok was ideally suited for 
conducting an effective rescue operation in the situation in 
which the Kursk ended up. 

Nizhniy Novogord has not abandoned its work on means of rescue. 
Considering the latest catastrophes at sea and the prospects for 
intensified work on exploiting petroleum and natural gas deposits 
on the Arctic shelf, Lazurit proposed a project for a 
fundamentally new universal rescue ship. Without doubt, the given 
project should receive state support. Russia simply cannot afford 
to repeat the tragic mistake of a careless attitude towards 
rescue ships. 

However, there was a period when it was necessary to save the 
unique design bureau itself, which was on the verge of being left 
to the mercy of fate. But, by definition, the collective headed 
by the first Hero of Russia in the shipbuilding industry, Nikolay 
Kvasha, could in no way, apparently, "go to the bottom". This 
collective learned to bring submarines to the surface in any 
situation. In addition, it was Lazurit that began to shovel 
through the nuclear rubbish accumulating in the fleet since the 
beginning of the 1960s. 

In 1992 in accordance with an international agreement between 
Russia, the EU, the USA and Japan, the International Science and 
Technology Centre was formed. One of the priority directions of 
this international organization's work was to solve problems 
connected with the ecological legacy of the Cold War. Experts of 
the European Commission immediately valued the unique 
possibilities of the centre's Project No 101 announced by Lazurit 
on the collection and systematization of trustworthy information 
on the real influence of radioactive waste from the activities of 
the nuclear fleet on the actual and potential radio-ecological 
situation in the seas washing Russia's territory. The European 
Union took responsibility for the basic share of the project's 
financing, the execution of which, naturally, was assigned to the 
Nizhniy Novgorod design bureau. The work began in 1995. 

First of all, Lazurit resolved all problems with the, so to 
speak, competent organs. The FSB held the importance of the 
assigned task in complete understanding and raised no obstacles, 
and in fact rendered assistance in overcoming all difficult 
spots. Thus, the Nikitin pattern was excluded from the beginning. 

Included in the comprehensive investigation of the problem were 
145 specialists from such solid centres as, for example, the 
Kurchatov Institute Russian Scientific Centre; the Tayfun 
scientific-production association; all Ministry of Atomic Energy 
design bureaux which created the nuclear reactor designs for 
submarines and surface ships; Murmansk's Atomflot; the navy's 
medical service; and a number of other organizations. Experts and 
consultants from the European Commission's Joint Research Centre 
(Italy) and the national nuclear centres of France and Great 
Britain were also drawn in. The leader of this highly competent 
collective and project, unusual for the creators of 
nuclear-powered combat ships, was the greatest specialist in the 
field of nuclear-powered shipbuilding, Stanislav Lavkovskiy. For 
six years colossal and genuinely investigative research 

was conducted. Data on the burials through the whole history of 
the Soviet (Russian) nuclear fleet was gathered one grain at a 
time; mathematical models were worked out predicting scenarios 
for all possible breaches of containers and escape of 
radionuclides into the surrounding environment; and risk 
estimates were drawn up. 

As of summer 2001, the database on objects with radionuclides 
contained information on 185 ships and vessels with nuclear-power 
units; 44 equipment-servicing ships; and 355 containers holding 
33,000 units of equipment and structures and other radioactive 
contaminated objects. 

When the Russian Federation Ministry of Atomic Energy became 
acquainted with this database and examined it for completeness 
and accuracy, a decision was made immediately to use it in 
preparing the new ecological "White Book 2000". 

Lazurit's service was not only in that it managed to bring 
together and declassify all these individual and secret reports, 
but the creators of nuclear-powered submarines dug up secrets, 
the existence of which no-one had suspected. 

The secret trail of the icebreaker Lenin 

The nuclear-powered icebreaker Lenin had three nuclear reactors. 
In 1965 one of them overheated. Although there was no explosion, 
the reactor went out of service and was not restorable. A 
decision was made to cut out the entire reactor compartment and 
bury it - the compartment and the shielding assembly (the 
radioactive insides of the reactor) separately. 

A container was prepared in the form of a special barge weighing 
350 tonnes. They welded the container with the shielding assembly 
containing nuclear fuel in it and began to tow it to Novaya 
Zemlya. All this happened in the autumn of 1967. According to the 
official report in September the barge was sunk to the prescribed 
depth in Tsivolka Zaliv. If everything had happened as it was 
recorded in the official document, there would be no occasion for 
alarm. 

After a year of the first Russian-Norwegian expeditions to the 
sites of the nuclear-powered submarine burials, the huge barge 
could not be detected. At the same time many small sarcophaguses 
were lying where they were supposed to be lying in accordance 
with the old report. And no alien from a different planet stole a 
container weighing 350 tonnes! Lazurit conducted its own 
investigation and the secret of the disappearance of the most 
dangerous nuclear burial in the Kara Sea was revealed. 

It turned out that the report was falsified. It was established 
that the beginning of the towing dragged on right up until 
October, a time of prolonged storms. Most likely, a critical 
situation developed and it was decided on the tugboat that it was 
better to cut the rope than to drown together with the barge. 
This happened not in September, but on 1 November 1967. 

Nevertheless, the official report indicated the coordinates of 
Tsivolka Zaliv, ideally suitable for dumping a container and 
where it was supposed to be resting in peace and also a September 
date, when the disposal operation was to have occurred based on 
the schedule. An unusual conspiracy of silence reigned for 10 
years. 

However, there was one detail that only the Lazurit specialists 
knew. A representative of the navy's medical service was required 
to be present during such operations to certify the final death 
of the "nuclear genie". And he had the indisputable right to his 
own signature. In that official report of long ago, the military 
doctor did not go against his conscience, but indicated the exact 
date that the cables were cut and the exact coordinates of the 
sinking of the barge with the highly radioactive waste. 

The place for the "funeral" was more than unfortunate! The barge 
could have ended up in the coastal zone of the open sea and not 
in the gulf, but in a zone of the strongest storm waves and sea 
currents and in addition, in shallow water. And this means it 
could be damaged from collisions with drifting ice or from moving 
across the rocky bottom. Considering that this damaged assembly 
alone contained around 60 per cent of the total radioactivity of 
all (!) the waste dumped in the Kara Sea, the situation is by no 
means a joke, but it is also not at a dead end. 

The European Union and Norway, which today are financing the 
International Science and Technology Centre's Project No 101, 
showed great interest in the problem which arose. Considering 
this, Lazurit and Tayfun association specialists from Obninsk 
suggested to them that the work be expanded within the framework 
of the international project and a new expedition be organized 
the next year to the place where the coordinates established the 
sinking of the barge in order, first, to find the ill-fated 
sarcophagus and secondly, to study thoroughly the condition of 
the container. And then work out the means for protecting the 
ocean expanses from a very real threat of radioactive pollution. 

Thus, very important work is being done with no false secrecy or 
peering into keyholes. One would like to believe that the 
International Science and Technology Centre will not lose 
interest in this project which is unique in its openness and 
complexity and that the Russian Federation government will render 
constructive assistance in solving the given ecological problem 
with its many unknowns. Monitoring in the interests of not only 
Russia, but the entire community of northern nations, is by no 
means unacceptable and continues honestly and professionally. 

Source: Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Moscow, in Russian 29 Aug 01 /BBC 
Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to 
*****************************************************************
 33  Bulgaria: Nuclear plant negotiates transportation of spent 
fuel to Russia 

BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Sep 1, 2001

Text of report in English by Bulgarian news agency BTA web site 

Kozloduy (on the Danube), 31 August: The Kozloduy nuclear power 
plant is negotiating with companies that may ensure electricity 
exports as a way of covering the costs of transportation of spent 
nuclear fuel to Russia, the plant's business manager, Tencho 
Popov, said. 

The proceeds from the export of a mere 1,000 kWh of electricity 
can cover the transportation and processing of reactor fuel, 
Popov said. At present, the plant utilizes less than 60 per cent 
of its capacity and generates 18,000 million kWh of electricity a 
year. If it operates at full capacity, the plant can generate 
22,000 million kWh, Executive Director Yordan Yordanov said. 

By 2003 the plant will have filled up all spent fuel storage 
areas. "This problem is becoming a major cause for concern to us. 
Unless it is solved by 2003, we will shut down the plant 
ourselves," Yordanov said. 

The management wants to export the entire amount of radioactive 
material, and negotiations are under way with Russia, which 
manufactures the fuel. 

"We are negotiating with both BNSL and Kozhema. The Russians have 
offered us very attractive terms of spent fuel storage and 
processing. We believe it should go where it came from in the 
first place - Russia," Yordanov said. The option of temporary 
storing reactor fuel on the plant's site will prove commercially 
unviable in the long run because the place will become highly 
radioactive and dangerous, representatives of the nuclear power 
plant said. A decision on spent fuel transportation will be made 
at a 12 September meeting of the consultative council on the fuel 
cycle. 

A decision on the early decommissioning of Units 3 and 4 may 
create prerequisites for a rise in electricity prices because in 
2005-2006 the plant will start servicing a loan for the upgrading 
of Units 5 and 6. The decommissioning of the first two units 
starts on 31 December 2002, representatives of the plant said. 

Source: BTA web site, Sofia, in English 31 Aug 01 /BBC 
Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                     NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES
*****************************************************************
 1 Nuclear science flourishing in Kazakhstan 
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Sep 2, 2001

As Kazakhstan marks the 10th anniversary of the closure of the 
Semipalatinsk nuclear test range, the nuclear industry is 
flourishing. A nuclear reactor on the former test range is ready 
to carry out research to create nuclear rocket engines for the 
Mars space programmes, and talks are under way with Russia and 
the USA, Kazakh Khabar TV reported. Meanwhile, a reactor complex 
at the site is involved in research for the International 
Thermonuclear Energy Reactor project. An excerpt of the report, 
broadcast on 30 August, follows. Subheads have been inserted 
editorially. 

Research is being carried out on the Semipalatinsk test range [in 
East Kazakhstan Region, closed 10 years ago and now the National 
Nuclear Centre], where a solid scientific base remained after the 
stopping of nuclear tests. Grigoriy Bedenko reports. 

[Grigoriy Bedenko, standing near equipment, captioned as a 
journalist] This complicated equipment is called a 
graphite-impulse-type reactor or, in short, a GR. At the moment, 
it has no equals in the world. According to some data, the US 
(?TRIS) unit with identical parameters has not been operating for 
a long time. 

Quite fantastic research on the creation of a nuclear rocket 
engine used to be carried out by the GR reactor 30-40 years ago. 
The most amazing is that it can be continued in the near future. 
Scholars say that a piloted flight to Mars will become real in 
2017. 

[Passage omitted: research belongs to future science; video shows 
people testing equipment] 

The GR reactor complex is situated on platform No 100 of the 
Semipalatinsk test range. There are legends about the unit among 
scholars. The GR reactor was built in 1961. Initially, the topic 
of research was limited by fast-flowing physical processes. At 
that time, the world's science was trying to understand what 
nuclear energy proper was. The GR is said to have been built to 
explode. They tried to simulate an uncontrolled nuclear reaction, 
which resulted in the [Ukrainian] Chernobyl catastrophe a quarter 
of a century later, on this. 

Mars Space Programme 

However, the reactor unexpectedly demonstrated unique 
characteristics. It displayed an instinct of self-preservation 
like a living being. 

[Valeriy Gaydarchuk, captioned as deputy chief engineer of the 
GR] Energy release occurs in the active zone of the reactor, 
which results in its preheating. The rate of the reactor's 
capacity, which is building up, falls with the increase in 
temperature and then the capacity begins to decrease at a certain 
temperature and reaches zero. 

[Bedenko] The GR's unique characteristics assisted in having it 
included in a nuclear rocket engine creation programme. It was 
the height of the space race between the Soviet Union and the 
USA. Having won the moon, mankind seriously thought of piloted 
flights to Mars. An engine was needed to this end that could 
release a large quantity of energy at minimum fuel consumption. 
As a matter of fact, a prototype of such an engine had been 
built. The fuel, nitrogen and hydrogen, was heated up to a 
temperature of 3,000 degrees [C] with the help of nuclear 
reaction and created jet thrust. Soviet scholars achieved better 
results with the GR than Americans. The subject was closed in the 
1980s, but now it is topical again. 

[Gaydarchuk] In principle, at present the GR reactor allows 
research into the building of nuclear rocket engines under the 
Mars space programmes to continue. The reactor is ready for the 
continuation of this work; talks are being held between US, 
Russian and Kazakh scientists to conduct demonstration tests at 
the GR reactor to confirm results received earlier. 

[Bedenko] The GR reactor is currently providing for the safety of 
nuclear power engineering. Japanese firms have been seriously 
interested in its unique characteristics. The first, oldest 
nuclear unit in Kazakhstan will serve for the creation of 
reactors of a new generation. 

Thermonuclear Reactor 

Another more impressive construction of the Semipalatinsk test 
range is the Baykal-1 reactor complex. An IVG-1M unit, a research 
high-temperature gas-cooled reactor [the IVG-1M is normally a 
water-cooled reactor], is situated underground at a depth of 10 
m. The construction is so unique that it has an association with 
the Hollywood blockbuster. 

One understands here how large-scale Soviet scientific programmes 
were. The IVG-1M was commissioned in 1975 and nuclear rocket 
engine elements were tested there until 1990. Some records were 
set: the highest temperature and the highest energy release 
level. 

Research is being held at the unit as part of the ITER programme 
on the creation of the first thermonuclear energy reactor. 

[Passage omitted: Vyacheslav Ganzha, engineer, says design work 
being completed; then construction and commissioning of the 
reactor] 

[Vyacheslav Ganzha, captioned as engineer of the Baykal-1 reactor 
complex] The role of our reactor in the programme is testing and 
researching construction materials of the future thermonuclear 
reactor. Of course, that will help to choose these materials in 
future. That is to say, Kazakhstan plays a sufficiently notable 
role. 

[Bedenko] It is not nucleus decomposition but its synthesis which 
results in energy release in the thermonuclear reactor. The 
isotope of hydrogen, D3 [deuterium 3], which can be received from 
ordinary water, serves as fuel for it. The thermonuclear reactor 
is secure, unlike the nuclear one. 

Scholars say that this is the future of power engineering when 
reserves of uranium and hydrocarbon run low. The ITER programme, 
which involves the USA, Russia, Japan and the European Union, is 
very expensive. One state cannot individually resolve the issue. 
It is pleasant to realize that Kazakhstan has managed to preserve 
the most advanced science. [Video shows people in white overalls 
working at a research workshop in the town of Kurchatov, people 
testing equipment, parts of the reactor; the Baykal-1 reactor 
complex, people in white overalls working the complex command 
point, a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor, parts of the 
gas-cooled reactor; a man implementing an experiment using a 
remote conrol device] 

Source: Khabar TV, Almaty, in Russian 1400 gmt 30 Aug 01 /BBC 
Monitoring/ © BBC.

World Reporter All Material Subject to Copyright
*****************************************************************
 2  International Atomic Energy Agency official unlikely to visit 
North Korea soon 
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Sep 4, 2001

Text of report in English by South Korean news agency Yonhap 
Seoul, 4 September: A visit to Pyongyang by Director of the 
International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Safeguards 
Department, Olli Heinonen, is unlikely to take place for the time 
being as he failed to receive an invitation from the North. 

His visit was originally scheduled for late August to monitor the 
North's freeze of its nuclear facilities. 

"Heinonen was planning to visit North Korea before the IAEA 
directors meeting in Vienna in mid-September to check if the 
country is carrying out the required nuclear safety measures," 
IAEA Chief Spokesperson David Kyd said in an e-mail reply to 
questions from Yonhap News Agency. "But the visit is unlikely to 
come off in the near future as he has yet to receive any 
invitation from the North." 

The IAEA director's planned visit was of particular note as it 
was to come ahead of the Vienna meeting and the 17th 
working-level talks between officials from North Korea and the 
IAEA. The United States has also demanded the communist state's 
"verification" of its nuclear development programmes. 

Source: Yonhap news agency, Seoul, in English 0543 gmt 4 Sep 01 
/BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to 
*****************************************************************
 3  Pakistan's Restraint 


SEP 03, 2001
Pakistan's Restraint
o the Editor:
Re "India and the Bomb" (editorial, Aug. 28):

You stress nuclear restraint in South Asia, but end up advocating 
the same double standard that is mainly responsible for the 
failure of all nonproliferation efforts in the region. While you 
urge American "appeals" to India to restrain its nuclear weapons 
program, you advise Congress to continue nuclear sanctions on 
Pakistan, even though you acknowledge that it was India's nuclear 
tests in 1998 that forced Pakistan to respond. Selective policing 
of the nonproliferation regime is the problem, not the solution.

The question of nuclear sanctions on Pakistan should not be 
confused with other issues. President Pervez Musharraf has 
announced a detailed road map for the restoration of democracy by 
October 2002. Pakistan's cooperation with international 
counterterrorism efforts is well known. Pakistan continues 
forcefully to advocate nuclear restraint so that South Asia can 
avoid a destructive arms race and our resources can be spent on 
urgent economic and social objectives. 

  MALEEHA LODHI
Ambassador of Pakistan
Washington, Aug. 28, 2001

Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information  
*****************************************************************
 4  Castro recalls apartheid South Africa's nuclear capability 
during Angola war 

BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Sep 1, 2001

Durban, 1 September: The Cuban government knew during the Angolan 
conflict about apartheid South Africa's nuclear capability, and 
took steps to protect its troops there, Cuban President Fidel 
Castro said on Saturday [1 September]. 

In a marathon address at the closing ceremony of the NGO forum on 
racism in Durban, he said Cuban troops fighting on the Angolan 
side had adopted special tactics and deployed a thousand 
anti-aircraft units in a bid to reduce the effect of a nuclear 
strike. 

"While we were fighting close to the Namibian border where there 
was the possibility of great battles to be fought in that area, 
the forces of the apartheid regime had seven nuclear warheads, 
and Europe was aware of that," he said. 

He said the technology for the devices had been supplied by 
Israel, which in turn had had aid from some European countries in 
developing its own programme. Although there had been reports 
that South Africa had the bomb, this was admitted only long after 
the end of the Angolan conflict, by then-president FW de Klerk. 

He announced in 1993 that South Africa had made six warheads and 
that all had been dismantled. Castro, who spoke for an hour and a 
half while Deputy President Jacob Zuma waited patiently on the 
dias behind him for his turn, was greeted by a sea of Cuban paper 
flags, and shouts of "Cuba, Cuba" from the several thousand NGO 
delegates in his audience. 

He said the forum was a "symbol of the future", and that he 
realized people were trying to build a new world, in which 
justice prevailed. "We should be hopeful, that is how we conceive 
the world of tomorrow, that is how we conceive the United Nations 
of tomorrow," he said. "There are many obstacles to overcome but 
we are hopeful that a new United Nations system is emerging, 
really new, without the privileges of the veto." 

He was referring to the power of veto enjoyed by major powers in 
the UN security council... 

The closing ceremony, which began late and was still continuing 
as night fell, was due to be followed by a delayed plenary to 
adopt a final declaration and plan of action. The adoption, which 
was to have happened on Saturday morning, was postponed because 
of problems in translating and duplicating draft documents. 

Source: SAPA news agency web site, Johannesburg, in English 
1705 gmt 1 Sep 01 
/BBC Monitoring/ © BBC.
World Reporter All Material Subject to Copyright
*****************************************************************
 5  'Waging Modern War'
        
            September 2, 2001

FIRST CHAPTER
'Waging Modern War'
By WESLEY K. CLARK

'Waging Modern War': A Defeated Victor Reflects on Kosovo 
(September 2, 2001)

I entered military service during the Cold War. Fortunately, we 
never had to fight the war in Europe that NATO was formed to 
deter. Nevertheless, we saw a continuing evolution in the conduct 
of war. Modern war, as defined here, emerged as a function of 
history and culture, as a result of NATO, the media, and 
technology. Local factors, such as the environment or the 
particular characteristics of the enemy forces, had a significant 
impact as well. From the Korean War of 1950-53, through the 
American war in Vietnam, and into the United Kingdom's 1982 
campaign in the Falklands, the U.S. 1989 intervention in Panama, 
and the 1991 Gulf War, and into Kosovo in 1999, the divergence 
from the World War II model of warfare has grown more and more 
pronounced. The evolution hasn't been linear or particularly well 
understood, even within the armed forces in most Western 
countries—but it's there. 

    The divergence began with the Soviet Union's acquisition of 
nuclear weapons. After the wholesale tragedy of World War II and 
the advent of the nuclear age, it soon was obvious that many 
conflicts could not be pushed to "unconditional surrender." It 
was too risky, or too expensive, or too much in conflict with 
other goals and priorities. Lesser objectives usually had to 
suffice. When contemplating conflict with the Soviet Union, it 
became axiomatic in the West, as the Soviet Union acquired 
greater numbers of nuclear weapons, that nuclear war wasn't 
winnable in the usual sense; the consequences of widespread use 
of nuclear weapons by both sides would simply be too destructive. 
The point was to deter it. The absence of war was the victory; 
because if you fought, you couldn't win. If fighting did begin, 
the idea was to defend as long as possible using conventional 
weapons without resorting to the use of nuclear weapons. Then, if 
conventional defense wasn't succeeding, use nuclear weapons in 
some limited way and hope the other side would see the results as 
so terrible that the conflict could be terminated. You would have 
to convince the other side that if the aggression wasn't called 
off, we would use all of the nuclear weaponry in our arsenal. To 
put it another way, crossing the threshold to use force wasn't 
necessarily a decision for all-out war. Hearkening back to World 
War II and the mutual decision among the major belligerents not 
to use chemical weapons in Europe, this theory rested on the 
belief that if the belligerents were rational, both sides would 
see that that it was in their best interests to limit a war once 
it had begun. 

    This strategy in NATO was known as Flexible Response. Defend 
with conventional weapons for as long as possible, then use 
nuclear weapons selectively, keeping full-fledged nuclear strikes 
in reserve. Naturally, the strategy had to be trained and 
rehearsed. In its nuclear exercises, NATO had established 
procedures for political decisionmaking and ordering the use of 
nuclear weapons, and these were extensively practiced. The 
procedures were immaculate: clear, carefully controlled, double 
checked, and carefully secured. Entire communications systems 
were constructed to meet the needs of "nuclear release." NATO was 
defensive. It didn't seek victory, it sought "conflict 
termination." 

    As a major at Supreme Headquarters, Allied Powers Europe 
(SHAPE) in 1978-79, I watched NATO go through training and 
exercises for this strategy. Observing the heavy emphasis on the 
decisionmaking and procedures for the first nuclear releases, I 
was one of many who sensed that our approach was incomplete. We 
never seemed to work our way through what happened after the 
first nuclear release. Disturbingly, during this period and into 
the 1980s, the evidence began to accumulate that the Soviets 
didn't always have the same view, but rather might believe that 
with adequate preparations and stout, integrated air and missile 
defenses around Moscow, the center of their military-industrial 
complex, nuclear war might be survivable and for the best 
prepared, "relatively" won. 

    We recognized a growing asymmetry in the Western and Soviet 
view of the problem, but NATO stuck with its strategy. There was 
another strand of thought that had crept into the thinking of 
some of the European members of NATO, from work done in the 
United States in game theory. This work aimed to take the 
influence of the military beyond "deterrence"—causing someone to 
refrain from doing something by threat of punishment or threat of 
taking away his means to act—and into something called 
"compellence," which was to cause someone to act in a certain 
way. It was a peculiar, or perhaps more generalized form of 
limited war, a conflict not necessarily fought for territory or 
to turn back aggression but perhaps for other purposes. In 
military terms compellence seemed to translate into a certain 
implicit or explicit bargaining through the graduated use of 
force, inflicting ever increasing punishment to convince an 
opponent to change his behavior. It was to be applicable against 
the smaller, nonnuclear states. 

    Many of us in the United States and the Armed Forces had seen 
early on the fallacies of gradualism. It was, after all, the 
thinking that lay behind the early, unsuccessful years of the 
deepening American involvement in the Vietnam War. My personal 
concerns stemmed from an analysis of the 1965-68 air campaign in 
Vietnam known as Rolling Thunder. Writing a thesis for a master's 
degree in military art and science as a captain and student at 
the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, I reviewed as 
much as I could find about Vietnam, reread the Pentagon Papers, 
and researched the problem of contingency operations—operations 
in unanticipated areas that had political aims less sweeping than 
unconditional surrender. 

    It was clear that the U.S. effort to halt North Vietnamese 
support of the fighting in South Vietnam by "signalling" U.S. 
resolve through carefully constrained, politically designed 
bombing, which avoided seeking decisive military impact, had been 
a failure. The question was, why? The answer seemed to have to do 
with the pace and intensity of the campaign, in relation to North 
Vietnamese willpower and determination, and North Vietnam's 
ability to build up resistance to the strikes and repair the 
damage even as it was being inflicted. To successfully "compel," 
I realized, the force applied must be much greater than we had 
been willing to commit at the time, must be intensified more 
rapidly, and must be directed at achieving significant military 
ends. Only when the targeted state realizes that its military 
efforts cannot succeed will it be "compelled" to consider 
alternatives. 

    But apparently this was quite difficult, as I reflected on 
such operations, because in modern democracies, the political 
leaders were usually too hesitant, imposing tough constraints on 
military actions, and military leaders were not bold enough in 
pushing for the real military muscle required to achieve 
significant military objectives. The results, I thought, were 
extended campaigns that could leave democratic governments 
vulnerable to their own public opinion. Forbearance in the 
strikes could be misinterpreted at home or abroad as irresolution 
or incompetence. As mistakes and losses accumulated, the policy 
would appear incompetent in application and foolish in design. 
Campaigns like this were therefore subject to domestic political 
defeat. And that was part of what happened to the United States 
in Vietnam. Once fighting had begun, you had to escalate rapidly 
and achieve "escalation dominance" over an adversary, if you were 
to succeed. And you had to go after meaningful military 
objectives. 

    I came out of the study convinced that the United States 
would again find itself engaged in problems of not only 
deterrence but also "compellence." Little did I suspect that I 
would be in the middle of the action as Supreme Allied Commander, 
Europe, when it occurred. 

    I had my first chance to weigh in with my concerns about 
gradualism when I was a lieutenant colonel. One afternoon in late 
May 1983, I sat in a basement office of the Pentagon with 
Brigadier General Colin Powell as we put the finishing touches on 
a transition plan for the incoming Chief of Staff of the Army, 
General John Wickham. Powell was a rising star, even then, a man 
who had commanded a brigade in General Wickham's division in the 
mid-seventies and was considered one of the best among his 
contemporaries. He had been put in charge of the project. The 
papers had been prepared, addressing such topics as personnel, 
relations with Congress, force structure, and so on. The group of 
fourteen officers who had worked the report had broken up. But as 
we put the papers together in a substantial volume, I noticed 
that we seemed to be missing an introduction. 

    I suggested to Powell that we add a "one-pager" up front, 
containing the two or three most important things for the new 
Chief to consider, and he agreed. Emboldened, I suggested a line 
of argument: "Isn't the most important thing never to commit U.S. 
troops again unless we're going in to win? No more gradualism and 
holding back like in Vietnam, but go in with overwhelming force?" 
Again, Powell agreed, and we put it in the introduction. This 
argument captured what so many of us felt after Vietnam. Perhaps 
this idea made it into U.S. military action, when we intervened 
with overwhelming forces in Grenada in 1983. Certainly the work 
General Powell did leading up to the Gulf War and the Powell 
Doctrine of decisive force were a wholehearted refutation of the 
failed gradualism of Vietnam. 

    Unfortunately, the idea of decisive force never quite made it 
into NATO thinking. It seemed incompatible with nuclear 
realities, and perhaps the limitations of the armed forces of our 
European allies. And, if not well understood, it could seem to be 
a kind of naïve throwback, to an earlier, simpler era of warfare 
that saw a relatively clear separation between the political and 
the military: the fighting started when the talking ended, it 
seemed, and the talking would resume when the fighting stopped. 
This was the kind of misinterpretation that American military 
students and some of their leaders could hang onto, though, 
because it seemed to reflect our American military 
traditions—that when the war begins the civilian leadership will 
turn us loose to win it, applying all the skills and judgment of 
our many years of accumulated professional military experience. 
In fact, that was a misinterpretation: the doctrine of decisive 
force was not incompatible with continued diplomacy, explicit or 
implicit. On the contrary, decisive force—rather than 
gradualism—was precisely what was required to make "compellence" 
a sure success, along with the diplomacy to produce the "way out" 
for the loser. 

    One factor that did make its way into the diplomatic and 
military dialogue within the Alliance was the century-long trend 
to establish legal and diplomatic barriers against the outbreak 
of war, and then to limit war's destructiveness. Extraordinary 
institutions were established to smooth the flow of 
communications between governments. The European Union was itself 
first and foremost a means of binding nations' interests together 
so that they would never again want to go to war against each 
other. For states outside the EU, various legal and political 
confidence-building measures were put in place, intrusive 
measures that made it awkward and difficult for nations to take 
the opening moves of conflict. Building on precedents set at the 
Nuremberg War Crimes Trials of 1946, the prosecution of war 
crimes became a fact, in several different venues, and the 
standards of permissible military actions—the so-called accidents 
of war—were tightened. The use of military force was increasingly 
constrained. The Allies' hideous firebombing of Dresden, which 
reduced the city to ashes and rubble in February 1945, would 
never recur. 

    Hand-in-hand with the growing effort to restrict, hobble, and 
outlaw war-making was a revolution in communications. American 
and European leaders were acutely sensitive to the vast change in 
the flow of information. In Vietnam the battlefield was isolated 
in space and time from the policymakers at home. Instructions and 
guidance from Washington was transmitted electronically, of 
course, but in what we would consider today very small "pipes." 
Military communications thirty years ago flowed in organized 
channels, controlled and monitored by the military itself. The TV 
reports and press copy that came out of Vietnam were also delayed 
for hours or days. It took years for the media to build the 
reporting networks and data flow to bring battlefield events in 
Vietnam out to the public. 

    In the 1990s, all of the information age technologies were 
available—satellite transmission of TV imagery, fax, the 
Internet, a plethora of long-distance phone lines, and cellular 
telephones. 

    The new technologies impacted powerfully at the political 
levels. The instantaneous flow of news and especially imagery 
could overwhelm the ability of governments to explain, 
investigate, coordinate, and confirm. We called it the "CNN 
factor," and people began to speak jokingly of the need to follow 
the itinerary of CNN correspondent Christiane Amanpour, whose 
stunning on-the-scene visuals and reporting could make a distant 
crisis an instant domestic political concern. It was clear that 
the new technologies could put unrelenting heavy pressure on 
policymakers at all levels from the very beginning of any 
operation. 

    New technologies also changed warfare for the military. The 
advent of twenty-four hour news coverage and satellite relays for 
TV meant that the world would certainly be present on every 
battlefield where Western forces were engaged. During the U.S. 
operation against Manuel Noriega in Panama in 1989, the entire 
focus of attention for several hours was the action by U.S. 
forces to rescue a civilian aircrew and others trapped in a 
hotel. Then the whole world heard the daily doses of 
psychological warfare as Noriega attempted to take refuge inside 
the Papal Nuncio's residence and was bombarded out with 
unrelenting rock music. The bright lights of the TV crews that 
observed the U.S. Marines coming ashore in Somalia in December 
1992 were a foretaste of the spotlight under which all NATO 
actions against Yugoslavia would be assessed. Future actions 
could anticipate even more intrusive information collection and 
more intense top-down, media-driven focus. There would be few 
spaces in which blunders or mistakes could remain unnoticed. 

    The technical side of war changed, too. The Gulf War brought 
the first public awareness of new precision-guided, 
aerial-delivered weapons. Though only a small percentage of the 
total weapons used, these systems accounted for a 
disproportionate share of the targets destroyed. It was clear 
within the U.S. Armed Forces that these were the weapons of the 
future. The Navy, which had possessed only a limited 
precision-strike capability in 1990, rushed to retrofit the 
capabilities of much of its air fleet. 

    Consider the almost revolutionary impact of precision strike 
weapons. These pinpoint bombs and missiles were able to strike 
within a few feet, and sometimes a few inches, of the designated 
aim point on a target. The first-generation weapons were 
optically guided, and they required clear weather conditions for 
some portion or perhaps all of their flight. The second 
generation used lasers for precision guidance and also required 
clear weather. The third generation, available during Operation 
Allied Force, relied on the satellite-based Global Positioning 
System, enabling the weapons to work at night or in bad weather. 
Precision weaponry greatly reduced the number of weapons and 
aircraft needed to bring destruction to the battlefield or to a 
strategic target array. This meant that the days of the massed 
air fleets were over. And this, in turn, meant a more rapid 
buildup of forces against a potential adversary, a buildup that 
could occur without national mobilization—political, economic, or 
military. 

    Long-range delivery of precision weaponry further extended 
the reach and blurred the distinctions between war and peace. 
With air-to-air refueling, long-range strike aircraft can strike 
across continents and around the world, reducing even further the 
preparation time before launching an attack. The U.S. Air Force 
reformulated its doctrine, titling it Global Reach-Global Power. 

    The precision bombs and long-range delivery platforms were 
just the tip-end of a system that relied on precision 
intelligence, much of it imagery, that enabled the weapons 
strikes to be planned, checked, and approved. This system, in 
turn, was a result of long-term, sustained investment in 
high-speed global communications, imagery, and analysts. And this 
technology made more detailed and stringent civilian, 
political-level control possible. When political leaders can 
receive updates in real time, they can take a more active role in 
directing the pace and conduct of military engagements. 

    Ground forces had a few new weapons also, but they lacked the 
combination of reliable striking power, action from a distance, 
and controlled risk-taking that airplanes and missiles can 
provide. Ground combat retained the possibility of turning nasty 
and unpredictable at close quarters; its weapons—tanks, ground 
artillery, and infantry fighting vehicles—tend to be more 
numerous and less controllable than the air platforms; and the 
crews are less experienced, and more vulnerable. No wonder that 
political leaders conditioned by the twentieth century's 
profligate losses of military manpower tend to opt first to use 
airpower. 

    One consequence of all these factors was that the old 
separations in time between the military and the political and 
between the echelons of military command were no longer the same. 
Political leaders don't give orders and wait days and weeks for 
results. What we discovered increasingly was that the political 
and strategic levels impinged on the operational and tactical 
levels. Or, to put it another way, any event in modern war has 
four distinct, unequal components: tactical, operational, 
strategic, and political. Sometimes even insignificant tactical 
events packed a huge political wallop. This is a key 
characteristic of modern war. 

    These common perceptions of the needless slaughter of 
warfare, the impact of NATO and its Cold War doctrine, the 
efforts to restrict the violent nature of war and to limit its 
effects, and the impact of the new technologies on policymakers 
and the military itself converged to shape the operations in 
Kosovo. Modern war is the response developed by the democratic 
West after a century of trauma in Europe. It is the answer to the 
trenches and wholesale slaughter of World War I, and it is the 
answer to the devastation of civilian populations by the "total 
war" of World War II. But its concept has been incomplete, and 
the application of military and diplomatic means to wage it and 
win it have not been well understood. 

    Modern warfare is likely to recur in the years and decades to 
come. It remains a fact that military force is the ultimate 
arbiter in international affairs. Diplomacy, the process of 
international relations, has always required the use of influence 
and power, played out to achieve gains or protect against losses. 
In classic diplomacy, military power has always been the ultimate 
card. But there were also diplomatic suasion, economic relations, 
and all other measures of intercourse between nations. Ideally, 
diplomacy relies on the positive, as nations cooperate for their 
mutual benefit. But sometimes issues arise for which positive 
inducements to cooperation don't suffice, or in which positive 
inducements are simply inappropriate. International legal 
pressures, such as war crimes indictments, have now also begun to 
be used to augment diplomatic pressures. 

    In recent years, economic pressures, such as trade and 
investment restrictions, and even cutoffs of trade have become a 
staple of international affairs. During the past decade and a 
half the United States has become accustomed to using its 
economic muscle to sanction nations whose behavior we wish to 
change. But the limitations of the economic instruments of power 
have become increasingly apparent. In the Balkans, for example, 
the economic sanctions implemented against Serbia during the 
early 1990s are widely credited with helping Serb President 
Slobodan Milosevic strengthen his control, through the 
encouragement of black market and smuggling activities. At the 
same time these sanctions imposed burdens on neighboring 
countries like Bulgaria, Macedonia, and Romania, whose leaders 
were unanimous in opposing any extension of the sanctions regime. 

    The imminent entry of China into the World Trade Organization 
will spell the end of trade sanctions as an element of coercion 
against that country. Iraqi oil is back on the world market 
today, though the proceeds are supposed to be used only in 
procuring humanitarian goods. The experience with the total 
economic embargo imposed against Haiti was also instructive, in 
that after the Aristide government was restored to power in 1994, 
economic recovery was made far more difficult by the impact of 
the preceding embargo on small and family-owned businesses. While 
economic sanctions have certainly produced punishment for the 
affected nations, the punishment has often been indiscriminant, 
causing economic deprivation and in some cases contributing to 
more hunger and poverty without impacting those directing the 
offensive policies and practices of the targeted state. 

    If other means of diplomatic suasion fail, the limited 
efficacy of economic sanctions will leave military power as the 
last recourse when pressure is required. It may not be used, or 
even threatened, overtly. In Korea, for example, U.S. forces have 
been stationed in the south for almost fifty years, since the end 
of the Korean War, and demonstrate the determination of the 
United States to assist the Republic of Korea in the event of 
renewed aggression from North Korea. Though the troops have never 
been used, there can be no doubt in the minds of potential 
adversaries what they represent. 

    And there are cases where the deployment of military forces 
can be threatening but still ambiguous. In March 1996 Chinese 
missiles fired toward Taiwan led to American naval deployments 
into the immediate area. No specific public threats were made, 
and no commitments were given, so far as is known, to Taiwan. But 
the deployments nevertheless gave leverage to achieve the desired 
Chinese de-escalation of the crisis. 

    Finally, there are likely to be cases where, for one reason 
or another, it will be necessary to make a more open statement of 
possible military action. U.S. actions against Iraq are a case in 
point, where a continual series of air strikes have been 
conducted since the four-day series of strikes against Saddam 
Hussein's special weapons programs in December 1998. Here the 
United States and its allies have continued to enforce the no-fly 
zones in northern and southern Iraq that were established after 
the Gulf War. When Iraqi forces challenge the air patrols with 
air defense radars or manned aircraft, American and British 
aircraft are directed to strike designated targets. These actions 
serve as a continuing reminder to Hussein that military power 
will be brought against any move to threaten his neighbors, or 
the Kurdish tribes in the north that have been protected by the 
West since 1991. 

    In each of these cases, U.S. and Allied military power is in 
use, will be, or could be, in order to deter, to dissuade, or to 
compel. These, too, are examples of actions that could become 
modern war: not a fight for national survival, but carefully 
restrained and limited action, widely observed and reported by 
the media, and under real-time political control. 

    When it can, the United States will use military power in 
conjunction with its friends and allies. It is a matter of 
distributing the risks and burdens of military action, as well as 
securing essential access and support. And in the case of allied 
action, the United States will have to recognize that its own 
national interests will seldom be the same in nature, intensity, 
scope, or duration as those of its allies and partners. This is 
the unchangeable truth about groupings of states: they have 
differing interests. These may derive from different degrees of 
exposure to the damages of war, varying economic interests in the 
affected region, historical or cultural relationships with 
adversaries, or even different national election procedures or 
timing. Sustaining a common interest sufficient to support 
military power and its use is therefore a matter of high 
statesmanship. The United States will be fortunate indeed if it 
has alliance political and military "machinery" like NATO to 
assist in forging and sustaining shared interests and common 
commitments. 

    NATO has survived numerous crises over its half century of 
existence, crises arising from the differing perspectives and 
interests of its member nations. There was a crisis in 1956, 
caused by the U.S.'s refusal to support British and French 
military actions against Egypt, a crises in the early 1960s 
associated with the U.S.'s reneging on promises to share nuclear 
weapons technology with allies, and a crisis in 1966 when France 
withdrew from the NATO military structure. There were 
longstanding European questions about whether Washington would 
really risk American cities to deter attacks on Western European 
cities. There was a perception of neglect as the United States 
turned its attention to Vietnam, and another crisis brought on by 
the buildup of Soviet theater nuclear forces and NATO's need to 
respond in the late 1970s and early 1980s. With the end of the 
Cold War and the breakup of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union, 
there was concern that NATO would have no purpose, and that the 
profound underlying differences between nations on each side of 
the Atlantic would overshadow their common interest in security. 

    Yet, NATO has survived and adapted, binding together member 
nations on both sides of the Atlantic through its Charter 
document, its consensus-building institutions and procedures, and 
the continuing common interests of its members. NATO is a 
"consensus engine." It was designed and has evolved to harmonize 
varying opinions into a workable, cohesive whole. Economics, 
language, culture, and politics create rifts and rivalries from 
time to time, but on military matters the Atlantic Alliance has 
proved a durable force for teamwork. Leaders and staff from its 
nineteen member nations know each other through the frequent—some 
say, too frequent—meetings. There are summit meetings for heads 
of state, meetings for foreign ministers and defense ministers 
twice each year, and a third meeting only for the defense 
ministers. The top military leaders in each country, the Chiefs 
of Defense, or CHODs, meet separately three times per year and 
then accompany their defense ministers to their meetings. And 
each meeting has its social event the evening before, with the 
transatlantic participants sometimes numbed by jet lag and 
looking for the door early. 

    The mechanics of the Alliance are designed to promote 
agreement on essential minimums. NATO is led and represented on 
the diplomatic level by the Secretary General, always a European, 
normally someone with previous experience as a defense minister 
or foreign minister. The military work at the headquarters is led 
by the Chairman of the Military Committee, always a European 
general who has led his nation's military. This military work is 
the essential preliminary in generating agreement. Issues are 
identified, parsed out, worked, and resolved at the military 
level first in order to facilitate the subsequent political-level 
discussions and agreements that then become orders for NATO's 
military. The Supreme Allied Commander, Europe—known as the 
SACEUR—commands the Alliance's European-based military forces on 
land, sea, and air in accordance with approved directions and 
restrictions from NATO headquarters. He is always an American, 
due to the leading U.S. role in the Alliance and the coupling of 
its deterrent mission in Europe to the American strategic 
deterrent elsewhere. 

    NATO operates bilingually, with English and French as its two 
languages. But in truth, NATO has its own language of acronyms, 
out-of-syntax constructions, and insider code. There is a 
subtlety that reflects not only the nuances of complex issues but 
also the tortuous process of consensus building. Agreements are 
not voted; they are place "under silence." Disagreement is noted 
by "breaking silence" on a proposal. The North Atlantic Council 
meets in different groupings, "ambassadors only," or "ambassadors 
plus four," tailored to promote the most effective exchanges. 

    Javier Solana, NATO's Secretary General, proved himself to be 
a master at using the machinery and language to shape policies 
and build consensus. In a rare quiet moment, I once asked the 
Secretary General the secret of his success. He reflected 
briefly, then said, "Two things. Make no enemies. And ask no 
question unless you know what the answer will be and it is the 
answer you want." 

    The complexities of forging common purpose are today 
compounded by the emergence of the European Union's efforts to 
create a Common Foreign and Security Policy and by the fact that 
Russia is no longer perceived as a military threat to Western 
Europe or the United States. Many in the United States, over the 
past decade, looking at the rapidly growing economic strength of 
countries in the Pacific and east Asia, and especially China, 
have sought to reduce American foreign policy's long-term 
orientation toward Europe. This has added to the stress on 
transatlantic relationships and institutions like NATO. 

    War, of course, is first and foremost a political act. The 
U.S. Constitution assigns the power to declare war to the 
Congress, while the President serves as the U.S. Commander in 
Chief. Other Western nations see the problem similarly. During 
World War I, French Premier Georges Clemenceau famously said, 
"War is too important to be left to the generals." In fact, this 
realization is one of the points of origin for modern war. 
Political leaders make the ultimate decisions, decide the key 
policies, develop or approve the strategy, and supervise the 
execution. Even limited war requires the acceptance of risks and 
losses, embarrassment, and potential failure. Warfare disrupts 
peacetime patterns of commerce and political discourse and can 
consume alternate political goals and efforts. Warfare is thus 
one of the supreme tests for political leaders, and for leaders 
in democracies, it is something to be avoided if possible. 

    Each NATO nation has its own system for providing national 
guidance on matters affecting its security, including direction 
of its armed forces in war. In some parliamentary governments 
there are special groupings of ministers. In France the president 
had unique responsibilities in foreign affairs. In the United 
States, the Armed Forces are directed by the National Command 
Authority, consisting of the President and his Secretary of 
Defense. But the directives and orders themselves usually emerge 
from a system of interagency coordination that brings together 
the information, perspectives, and resources of the Department of 
State, the intelligence agencies, the Department of Defense, and 
sometimes others, under the coordination of the National Security 
Council staff. Issues are raised and developed, options 
considered, and consensus is formed. In some cases, where 
differing agency positions cannot be reconciled or the stakes are 
so high, the decisions are pushed upward, for resolution in small 
meetings of the cabinet secretaries or in the Oval Office itself. 
Of course, differing agency perspectives always remain, to 
bedevil policy execution or to resurface when similar issues 
arise in the future. 

    Thus within the U.S. system, military leaders receive their 
orders from a clear chain of command, but the orders may be 
influenced by a broader set of personalities and agencies. The 
military chain of command provides the hierarchy of leaders, 
institutions, and communications that actually commands the 
forces. Military leaders must give information and advice, 
prepare plans as directed, and respond to queries. However, this 
exchange of information also goes beyond the strict confines of 
the military chain of command. While it may seem desirable in 
theory to separate the military decisionmaking from policy 
formulation, in practice it is impossible. At the top levels the 
generals and admirals stay abreast of the issues and arguments, 
anticipating requests for information or orders for action, and 
engage in a variety of informal exchanges with members of the 
diplomatic community, policymakers in other agencies, and members 
of Congress and their staffs. The top leadership therefore not 
only carries out the orders it receives, it may heavily influence 
their formulation. 

    Military advice is not without profound professional and 
personal implications for the military itself, as well as 
civilians. War risks the loss and destruction of carefully honed 
armed forces, the disruption of well-laid plans for the future, 
and of course, personal embarrassment, failure, defeat, and loss 
of life. None knows better than the military leaders themselves 
the dangers of war; consequently, they are usually the last to 
advocate it. 

    The difficulties and complexities of modern war can be 
measured in part by the difficulties faced by the American 
military in coming to grips with Kosovo. The top leaders in the 
American Armed Forces were still heavily impacted by their early 
experiences in the Vietnam War. We knew about the dangers of 
"political micromanagement," when bombing targets were picked by 
Lyndon B. Johnson's White House and pilots were restrained from 
attacking key enemy airfields and air defense sites. All of us 
knew from personal experience the incredible power of the media, 
which, at least in Vietnam, turned increasingly adversarial to 
the Pentagon and the leadership of the Armed Forces as the long 
war continued. And in the Army, it had long been an article of 
resolve that there would be "no more Vietnams," wars in which 
soldiers carried the weight of the nation's war despite the lack 
of public support at home. 

Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information 
*****************************************************************
 6  Japan to reconsider A-bomb law

 Saturday, September 1, 2001

Korean survivors likely to get medical aid, minister says 

SEOUL (Kyodo) Chikara Sakaguchi, minister of health, labor and 
welfare, pledged Friday to review a Japanese law following a 
demand by Korean survivors of the 1945 atomic bombing of 
Hiroshima and Nagasaki that the Japanese government grant them 
medical allowances.

"Undoubtedly, the measures taken so far have not been sufficient. 
But better late than never, we hope to review it," Sakaguchi was 
quoted by Japanese officials as telling Kim Won Gil, South Korean 
health and welfare minister, in Seoul.

Sakaguchi also told Kim that he envisions inviting a South Korean 
representative to join his ministry's planned panel to study the 
review of the Atomic Bomb Victims Relief Law, they said.

Kim welcomed Sakaguchi's remarks, according to the officials.

A number of Korean survivors returned to Korea after the U.S. 
atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, and 
there are currently some 2,200 survivors in South Korea.

Japan has refused to provide medical allowances to survivors of 
the atomic bombing who live outside Japan.

In June, however, the Osaka District Court ordered a local 
government to pay medical allowances to a Korean survivor who 
lives in South Korea. The local government and the Japanese 
government appealed the ruling the following month.

Commenting on bilateral relations between Japan and South Korea, 
Kim expressed regret that the ties have not been on a "normal 
track" because of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visit Aug. 
13 to Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo and the ongoing dispute over 
Japanese school textbooks, the officials said.

Japan rejected South Korea's demands to make revisions to the 
textbooks, which Seoul says gloss over Japan's wartime aggression 
in neighboring countries.

Sakaguchi arrived in South Korea on Thursday. He is the first 
Japanese Cabinet member to visit Seoul since Koizumi's visit to 
the Shinto shrine, where 14 convicted Class A war criminals are 
honored. Sakaguchi, a member of the ruling coalition's New 
Komeito party, plans to travel to Singapore on Saturday before 
returning to Japan on Tuesday.

The Japan Times: Sept. 1, 2001
*****************************************************************
 7  Baby bones used in nuclear test study

The West Australian

September 01, 2001

By Norman Aisbett
 
PATHOLOGISTS collected bones from up to 20,000 bodies of babies 
and other Australians for use in a little-known nuclear fallout 
study.

Details of the study, which ran from 1957 to 1978, are in a 
report being prepared by the Australian Radiation Protection and 
Nuclear Safety Agency.

An agency spokesman said the report would be sent soon to Federal 
Health Minister Michael Wooldridge.

The agency was bracing for the report's public release, because 
there could be an avalanche of calls from people wanting to know 
if dead relatives were involved.

A protocol for the handling of inquiries was being developed but 
it was a difficult task, given the need to avoid inadvertent 
breaches of privacy.

Dr Wooldridge called for the report in June after the Daily Mail 
newspaper in London alleged that babies and infants who died in 
hospitals throughout the world, including Australia, were used as 
human tissue fodder for radiation testing commissioned by the 
United States Department of Energy. The bodies were reportedly 
sent to the University of Chicago for 15 years from hospitals in 
Australia, Britain, Canada, Hong Kong, the US and South America.

The Daily Mail report also prompted Australia's radiation agency 
chief executive John Loy to confirm that pathologists in Perth, 
Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane had provided bone 
samples for the study, but gave no hint of the numbers involved

Dr Loy said that the study ran for 21 years and was launched as 
part of a review of safety issues surrounding British atomic 
weapons testing in Australia in the 1950s.

The aim was to measure Strontium 90 levels in human bones. 
Strontium 90 is the most dangerous element of radioactive weapons 
fallout.

Dr Loy said that the bone samples were taken from people up to 
the age of 40, including babies - but he gave only a qualified 
denial that the bodies of Australian stillborn babies were 
transported to the US.

The radiation agency "does not appear" to have any evidence to 
support the claim, he said. Another agency spokesman, Brendan 
Elliott, has told The West Australian that most bone samples were 
probably taken without the knowledge of next of kin, and this 
could have legal implications for the Commonwealth. WA health 
authorities declined to comment.

© 2000 West Australian Newspapers Limited
*****************************************************************
 8  Labor peace at the Flats 

Denver Post.com
 
Monday, September 03, 2001  - 

Cleaning up the Rocky Flats atomic bomb factory near Golden 
depends on labor-management cooperation. Fortunately, the 
contract inked this year by the government contractor, 
Kaiser-Hill, and the plant's largest union, United Steelworkers 
Local 8031, encourages just that. 

The U.S. Department of Energy wants Kaiser-Hill to decommission 
Rocky Flats by 2006, a goal that will save Uncle Sam billions of 
dollars and make Colorado safer from terrorist attacks and 
nuclear accidents. But Kaiser-Hill faced a daunting challenge: 
getting employees to work harder so they can lose their jobs. 

Moreover, the cleanup process requires a lot of grunt work under 
difficult conditions: Draining miles of pipes clogged with toxic 
chemicals and radioactive wastes. Scrubbing out glove boxes 
containing plutonium scraps that can spontaneously fission if 
mishandled. Repacking weapons-grade plutonium in high-tech 
containers. Loading tons of nuclear wastes. The workers spend 
long hours on their feet, running dangerous machinery and 
maneuvering heavy loads of some of the world's most dangerous, 
finicky elements. 

To stay safe during these physically intensive tasks, workers don 
special protective suits, including close-fitting hoods and 
respirators. Sometimes, they're assigned to enclosed rooms 
jam-packed with barrels of intensely radioactive plutonium; 
there, their mandatory garb resembles a spacesuit, complete with 
thick oxygen lines that look like spacewalk tethers. 

Between the high temperatures inside the protective suits and the 
stress of working with radioactive materials, it's no wonder 
steelworkers often come off their shifts glistening with sweat. 
But most are smiling. 

DOE guaranteed Kaiser-Hill large bonuses if deadlines and safety 
standards are met. Under the new union contract, Kaiser-Hill 
promised to share those rewards with the rank and file - giving 
the steelworkers a direct monetary incentive to finish the 
mission. 

Under the contract's enhanced benefits, t middle-aged workers 
(the average Rocky Flats employee is 47) will get full pensions 
when they're handed pink slips by 2006. Two-thirds of Rocky 
Flats' steelworkers will be eligible for that package. Younger 
workers receive beefed-up 401(k)s. 

Steelworkers Local 8031 has made itself the kind of 
forward-looking union that American labor must be in the 21st 
century, one focused on members' safety and long-term interests. 

Kaiser-Hill has something to teach American management, too. The 
idea that when a company prospers it should share the wealth with 
workers who made the success possible is rare in today's 
corporate world. But as Rocky Flats' managers discovered, it's 
the only way to get a tough job done right. 
	 
 All contents Copyright 2001 The Denver Post or other copyright 
*****************************************************************
 9  Y-12, ORNL workers not getting fair shake

KnoxNews: Columnists
 		 		
Sunday, Sep 2
                                 
Which of the government's Oak Ridge nuclear facilities - the K-25 
uranium-enrichment complex, Oak Ridge National Laboratory or the 
Y-12 nuclear weapons plant - posed the greatest hazard to 
workers? 

This type of question has floated about for years, drawing debate 
and speculation in the Oak Ridge workforce. Interest grew after 
the U.S. Department of Energy acknowledged (belatedly) that 
workplace exposures caused health problems and after Congress 
authorized a compensation program, albeit a limited one, for sick 
workers. 

The comparative risk of one facility vs. another is not easy to 
gauge. Hazards undoubtedly varied according to job title and 
location, even within the same plant. Indeed, it probably makes 
little sense to compare one plant to another except in broad 
overviews. 

But here's something truly nonsensical: 

Although thousands of former workers at the Oak Ridge nuclear 
facilities are eligible for free medical screenings, thousands of 
others are not. 

For example, DOE has funded a screening program for hourly 
workers at the K-25 plant. The DOE has funded a similar program 
for former construction workers on the Oak Ridge reservation. 

But, for whatever reason, the federal agency has not coughed up 
money for a screening program to identify health problems among 
thousands of retired laborers at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant 
and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Why? 

Well, that's not clear. DOE did not respond to repeated questions 
about whether a grant was available to the Atomic Trades and 
Labor Council, the umbrella organization that represents union 
workers at Y-12 and ORNL. 

Some retired blue-collar workers are upset with the ATLC 
leadership, pointing out that union leaders at K-25 and the 
construction trades went to bat early for their workers and got 
help without a hitch. 

Carl "Bubba'' Scarbrough, president of the ATLC, said he's doing 
everything he can to get the $500,000 needed to start a permanent 
center for health evaluations. He said it's critically important 
because the medical screening can identify some of the problems 
before symptoms take hold and improve the chances of recovery. 

"I've got 40 pages of paperwork I've generated,'' Scarbrough said 
this week. 

The union boss said he has tried to push the proposal before the 
DOE officialdom, but he said the contacts keep changing at agency 
headquarters in Washington. On the local front, Scarbrough said 
he's gotten no help at all from DOE or the National Nuclear 
Security Administration, which oversees the Y-12 defense 
activities. 

"DOE has taken absolutely zero action,'' he said. * 

 HOT WATER:  Some progress has been reported in the evaluation of 
water quality at the Oak Ridge K-25 plant, but the issue remains 
as contentious and controversial as ever. 

Also, the project could be stalled for lack of money. A number of 
current and former K-25 employees came forward last year with 
evidence that cross-connections in the water pipelines created 
the potential for contamination of drinking-water supplies. 

A sampling program by DOE contractors found that the plant's 
current water system is safe, and the federal agency sanctioned a 
project to review the historic water operations at K-25. 

The investigation team recently issued a progress report that 
confirmed there were problems, including cross-connections with 
chemical-laden water systems used for cooling operations or 
fire-fighting. But the duration of these events or the health 
implications to workers have not been assessed at this point. 
Meanwhile, DOE has not committed money beyond the study's second 
phase, which is nearing completion, and even if the water probe 
continues there will be plenty of challenges. 

The Coalition for a Healthy Environment has accused DOE of 
covering up information and has chastised federal officials for 
not notifying Rust Engineering workers they probably drank 
contaminated fire water when working out of trailers at the site. 

Several activists are pushing for a criminal investigation and 
want to halt DOE's current demolition of buildings at K-25 until 
the hazards have been fully evaluated. 

Senior Writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for 
the News-Sentinel. He can be reached at 865-482-9213 or at 
twig1@knoxnews.infi.net. This column is also available on the Web 
at www.knoxnews.com/editorsview/munger/ 

Copyright 2001 The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co.               
*****************************************************************
 10  Publication of Regulatory Guide G-225,  Emergency Planning at 
Class I Nuclear Facilities and Uranium Mines and Mills 

[Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission] <img

Information Bulletin
 
 01-14 
  2001-08-31 
 
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has published a new 
regulatory document, Regulatory Guide G-225, <I>Emergency 
Planning at Class I Nuclear Facilities and Uranium Mines and 
Mills</I>.
 
Regulatory Guide G-225 provides guidance for licence applicants 
on the development of emergency measures that satisfy the 
requirements given in the Nuclear Safety and Control Act  and its 
regulations. The document describes the elements of emergency 
preparedness and response that licence applicants should 
typically consider when they are developing plans and programs to 
prevent or mitigate the effects of accidental releases. It takes 
into account the comments received on the draft version of the 
guide that the predecessor to the CNSC, the Atomic Energy Control 
Board, issued for public consultation in November 1999.
 
The guide applies to applicants for a CNSC licence to operate a 
Class I nuclear facility, and to applicants for uranium mine and 
mills licences.
 
Regulatory Guide G-225, <I>Emergency Planning at Class I Nuclear 
Facilities and Uranium Mines and Mills</I>is available in English 
or French on the CNSC website (www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca). A paper 
copy of the document in either official language may be ordered 
from:
 
Communications Division Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission P.O. 
Box 1046, Station B 280 Slater Street Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5S9 
CANADA
 
Telephone: (613) 995-5894 or 1-800-668-5284 (Canada only) Fax: 
(613) 992-2915 E-mail: publications@cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca
		 		 		   		 		
© Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
*****************************************************************
 11  For the Nuclear Submarine Kursk, Plans for a Risky Resurrection 

SEP 04, 2001

By PATRICK E. TYLER

T. PETERSBURG, Russia — For nearly 400 days since two mysterious 
torpedo room explosions ripped open the nuclear submarine Kursk, 
causing the deaths of all 118 Russian crewmen, the 505-foot 
vessel has been nestling into the sediments on the bottom of the 
Barents Sea.

Periodically, Russian warships on guard above the wreck have 
thrown live hand grenades into the water, to ward off any prying 
foreign submarines that may be interested in scavenging the 
Kursk's weapons, codes or electronics.

Now, a fleet of high-tech salvage vessels is taking over from the 
warships. If all goes according to plan — and little has so far — 
a Dutch lifting barge called the Giant 4, tethered by eight 
anchor lines, will raise the Kursk from the seabed later this 
month using 26 computer-controlled hydraulic jacks in an 
operation that, its designers say, can be accomplished in 12 to 
16 hours.

But the raising of the Kursk, one of the largest and most complex 
salvages ever attempted, is fraught with dangers. The crews must 
avoid disturbing the Kursk's twin nuclear reactors and jostling 
its lethal payload of unexploded torpedoes and 22 supersonic 
cruise missiles, still snug in their 30-foot launching canisters. 
Each carries a warhead packed with nearly 1,000 pounds of high 
explosives.

Russian officials say the risks are outweighed by their duty to 
the perished crew as well as the Arctic environment. In November, 
during the first examination of the interior of the submarine by 
Russian divers since the Aug. 12 explosion, 12 bodies were 
recovered, but perhaps 100 more remain entangled in the wreckage 
of the control room or locked in the rear compartments, where 
sailors fled the onrushing sea, then waited in darkness — some 
writing farewell notes to loved ones — for the rescue that never 
came.

President Vladimir V. Putin, criticized in an emotional encounter 
with the families of Kursk crew members for the navy's inability 
to stage a rescue, returned to the Kremlin and told Russia's 
leading submarine designer, Igor D. Spassky, that the sub had to 
be lifted to pay tribute to the crew and to give proper burial to 
the bodies that could be found.

"He promised that to the relatives, and our president is from a 
category of people who keep their word," Mr. Spassky said in an 
interview at the Rubin Design Bureau in St. Petersburg last week. 

Looking on is a nervous Europe, where there are always fears of 
another Chernobyl-style radiation spill. Big salvage projects can 
produce big disasters. In 1974, when the Hughes Glomar Explorer 
latched onto a Soviet Golf-class submarine that sank in 17,000 
feet of water northwest of Hawaii — part of a secret recovery 
scheme conceived by the Central Intelligence Agency and the Navy 
— the stresses of the lift broke the submarine apart, sending 
large pieces crashing back to the bottom.

The Kursk will be raised from relatively shallow waters, less 
than 350 feet, but the Kursk weighs nearly 10 times as much as a 
Golf-class submarine. And if Kursk breaks apart and spills the 
highly radioactive contents of its reactors in the Barents Sea, 
the results will threaten one of the most productive fishing 
grounds in the Arctic.

"This is a big, supermodern military object which has 22 
supermodern missiles on board with big warhead charges — not 
nuclear — but powerful charges, and two reactors, and all this in 
the center of an area which is in economic use in shallow 
waters," Mr. Spassky said. "I cannot conceive that such an object 
could be left on the ocean bottom."

Even recoveries from shallow depths can be tricky. The United 
States Navy recovered the submarine Squalus after it went down in 
243 feet of water off Portsmouth, N.H., in May 1939, but the 
recovery vessels dropped the boat twice before getting it back 
into port, where it was renamed the Sailfish and served in World 
War II.

"This is the biggest lift ever made from the seabed," points out 
Malcolm Dailey, the senior contracts manager with the Dutch heavy 
lift and transport company Mammoet who is directing the Kursk 
lift. But even so, he seemed to be full of confidence last week 
that — weather permitting — it will be done safely.

"Our idea is to peel the Kursk off the bottom," said Mr. Dailey, 
49, a Briton who now lives in Houston. "The sub is laying at a 
five-degree angle and her bow is stuck into the mud that is the 
consistency of chewing gum." In the year since the sinking, the 
mud has risen nearly 10 feet around the bow.

Standing on the deck of the Giant 4 the other day as it prepared 
to depart Amsterdam for the Arctic waters near Kursk, Mr. Dailey 
said that while he worried about radiation accidents and torpedo 
and missile explosions during the lifting of the Kursk, his 
biggest worry was how to break the suction force of a 17,000-ton 
ship stuck in the mud. Explosions are one thing, but "mud is 
mud," he said. The slimy bottom sediments may make the hull seem 
as if it were glued to the earth.

Moreover, Mammoet must ensure that it does not pull harder than 
the hull of the Kursk can withstand. One great unknown is what 
hidden structural damage the Kursk suffered along the hull, its 
ribs, frames and bulkheads when the second and most devastating 
explosion went off with the force of 10,000 pounds of TNT and 
produced a shock wave as powerful as an earthquake of 3.5 
magnitude.

Much of Mr. Dailey's strategy is focused on the first three to 
four hours of the lifting sequence when he will raise only the 
tail of the Kursk, then slide a cable underneath the hull that 
two auxiliary ships on the surface will pull along the keel 
trying to separate the Kursk from the mud.

"This is to create a gap to get water between the submarine and 
the soil so she will want to come up and we can minimize the 
breakout force," Mr. Dailey said. 

This "breakout force" is his nightmare. In the worst case, the 
lifting barge would pull with thousands of tons of pressure 
against the Kursk only to have it suddenly pop free of the 
bottom, surge upward like a yo- yo toward the barge, then fall 
back to the bottom, yanking the barge with a tremendous whiplash 
that could damage or destroy the lifting equipment. Working with 
Mammoet are Smit Tak, a marine subsidiary of Smit International 
and Halliburton Subsea, a Norwegian subsidiary of the American 
energy and construction giant formerly headed by Vice President 
Dick Cheney. Mammoet won the contract on the strength of its 
pledge to raise the submarine this year; the company said only 
bad weather could excuse failure.

The preparation for raising the Kursk has taken months, and a 
complex choreography of engineering tasks must be executed in the 
next few weeks, or the threat of Arctic storms will shut down 
operations until spring.

"Good weather is a rare thing in this region," said Timur B. 
Amirov, the engineer who commissioned the Kursk from the 
Severodvinsk shipyard in 1994. Working in double shifts, 
Severodvinsk workers this summer built the two submersible 
pontoons that will slide under the port and starboard sides of 
the Giant 4 after it has lifted the Kursk. The extra flotation 
will help with the transport of the Kursk to a drydock at 
Roslyakovo 150 miles away.

Russian and European divers, meanwhile, working from mid-July to 
the end of August, cut 26 holes in the Kursk's hull to provide 
lifting points for the expandable plugs that will be lowered from 
the Giant 4 and inserted into the hull.

The engineers had two options to lift the Kursk, cranes or 
hydraulic jacks. Mammoet opted for jacks, which can lift a 
greater load, with more than two dozen of them spread along the 
submarine's hull.

The lifting lines are actually bundles of 54 steel cables 
attached to the plugs that, once inserted into the submarine, 
will expand hydraulically and wedge themselves under Kursk's ribs 
for the lift. 

No holes were cut in the Kursk's sixth compartment — where the 
twin 190 megawatt reactors sit, still generating a low level of 
heat — because the reactor containment vessels are so close to 
the hull that the huge lifting plugs could not be inserted 
without damaging them. 

Each of the 26 lifting units will bear about 750 tons of the 
Kursk's weight. Tests conducted at Russia's Krylov Institute in 
St. Petersburg demonstrated that each bundle of cables could 
actually bear at least 2,000 tons each — nearly triple the load 
that should be necessary to do the job — before the testing 
device broke. 

Before the lift, the most important task is slicing off a 45- to 
50-foot section of the Kursk's destroyed bow, where torpedo 
fragments and even complete warheads could be hidden in the 
debris.

"In the area where the slicing of the compartment will take 
place, I can say with confidence there are no torpedoes left," 
said Rear Adm. Mikhail Motsak, chief of staff for the northern 
fleet. "But there may be torpedoes in the other corners of the 
first compartment, which are littered with metal debris. That is 
why we take serious security precautions." No divers will be in 
the water during the cutting.

So much of Kursk's bow is destroyed, and so much mud has settled 
in the first compartment, that Mammoet's engineers feared it 
might break off during the lift, or start shimmying in a way that 
would destabilize the lift. The Russian navy plans to raise the 
bow section separately next year as part of its investigation 
into the explosions.

Still, the cutting could be tricky and already has caused delays.

The cutting tool is actually a huge chain saw of abrasive 
cylinders strung on a cable stretched between two suction 
moorings and operated remotely by Smit Tak engineers.

The moorings are really just giant pipes that stand on the bottom 
and then suck themselves into the seabed mud as water is pumped 
out of their interior. 

The saw is operated remotely between the moorings in a back-and- 
forth motion controlled from the MT Carrier barge that Smit Tak 
towed to the Barents Sea. Last month, however, the MT Carrier was 
forced to retreat to Kirkenes, Norway, for modifications when 
tests showed that the Kursk's hull — a sandwich of high-tensile 
steel and sound dampening material — was tearing up the cylinders 
on the chain saw, threatening to break the carrying cable. The 
solution was to add spacers between the cylinders.

After more tests on the saw, the cutting operation could begin 
this week. When the Giant 4 barge arrives from Amsterdam, the 
stage will be set for the lift.

A Global Positioning System accurate within a meter will be fixed 
on the front and rear of the barge to help the crew keep it 
precisely over the Kursk.

As the 26 lifting units are attached to the sub by divers, echo 
sounders and radiation monitors will be mounted on the Kursk to 
provide a real-time stream of data to the computers aboard the 
Mayo, the support ship that will serve as a command center for 
the lift.

That's where Mr. Dailey will be, surrounded by a fleet of 
civilian support ships and Russian warships charged with 
responding to dozens of contingencies that might arise if 
something goes wrong.

If Mr. Dailey succeeds in coaxing the Kursk out of the mud, 
engineers on the barge will test the load on each of the 26 jacks 
to determine the weight of the Kursk minus its bow. They will 
also try to locate its center of gravity, a critical calculation 
so as to avoiding stresses that could cause the hull to snap and 
to keep the boat level in the ascent.

As the estimated 15,000 tons of steel and machinery rise, the 
barge will continue to ride up and down on waves up to 10 feet 
high, but the jacks and the Kursk will stand in isolation from 
the motion of the sea surface. They will be able to do so thanks 
to computer-driven "heave" compensators on the barge. The heave 
compensators operate like huge shock absorbers mounted under the 
lifting jacks, which are suspended high above the deck of the 
Giant 4. The shock absorbers are filled with liquid nitrogen, 
chosen because it is not explosive and is quick to respond to the 
motion of the sea.

"Oil is too slow and air will explode in some circumstances," Mr. 
Dailey said.

It will take 12 to 16 hours to travel a little more than 300 feet 
from the bottom to a submerged position directly underneath the 
Giant 4, whose underside has been modified to conform to the 
Kursk's contours, with shaped sockets cut out to receive the tail 
fin and conning tower of the Kursk like a glove.

"If all of the systems they have lined up work as they are 
designed to work, then it ought to work out nicely, but like any 
other engineering feat, there are likely to be some glitches," 
said J. Brad Mooney Jr., a retired rear admiral who in 1964 was 
the test pilot for the bathyscaph Trieste II more than 8,000 feet 
down into the Atlantic to find the United States nuclear 
submarine Thresher, which had sunk the year before. 

The Kursk will be squeezed with 2,000 tons of pressure against 
the Giant 4 and the contoured supports welded on its hull to hold 
the Kursk in place for the 150-mile ride into port, where the sea 
and current will create some of the most complex and dangerous 
"hammering" forces between the sub and the Giant 4 as they are 
towed at four knots.

Two routes have been selected for this risky passage. One, in 
open sea, would take less than two days. A second, hugging the 
coast and passing behind Kildin Island, could take much longer, 
if the Giant 4 has to evade Arctic storms and high seas.

Finally, when the Kursk, lying hidden under the sandwich of barge 
and pontoons, prepares to slide into drydock at Roslyakovo, just 
north of Murmansk, the submarine will be raised high enough to be 
visible.

Once the Kursk is in drydock, Giant 4 and the pontoons will 
detach and slide out, leaving the Kursk like a silent leviathan 
for the post-mortem of the Russian navy. 

The first task will be the removal of the bodies still aboard.

Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company | Privacy Information   
*****************************************************************
 12  Broken Cable Halts Russian Sub Job
 
Las Vegas SUN 
 
Today: September 04, 2001 at 12:00:35 PDT 
 
MOSCOW (AP) - Workers used a remote-controlled saw to start 
cutting through the sunken Kursk's mangled fore section Tuesday 
but had to stop abruptly because of a broken cable, delaying a 
crucial stage in the operation to raise the Russian nuclear 
submarine. 

The underwater saw sliced 5 feet deep into the steel hull early 
Tuesday before a cable guiding its chain of drum-shaped teeth ran 
across a rock and broke, said Larissa van Seumeren, spokeswoman 
for the Dutch company Mammoet, which is working to raise the 
Kursk. 

The delay was the latest of several setbacks in the ambitious 
international operation to lift the massive submarine from the 
Barents Sea floor, where it has sat since explosions on board 
sank it last August, killing all 118 men aboard. 

"We have 25 percent of the cutting completed," Van Seumeren said 
in a telephone interview. "We used the cutting equipment for two 
hours and fifteen minutes, but after that we had a little 
setback, because the guideline that guides the sawing chain 
broke." 

Van Seumeren said divers and remote-controlled submersible 
vehicles were working to fix the problem, but would not say how 
long it might take. 

The saw, a line of cylindrical drums covered with an abrasive 
layer and strung on a cable between two suction anchors, had 
encountered some problems during tests but representatives of 
Mammoet said they had been fixed. 

Despite its speed, the saw has so far only cut through the 
Kursk's light outer hull, the chief of staff of Russia's Northern 
Fleet, Adm. Mikhail Motsak said Tuesday during a video conference 
from the Peter the Great cruiser, parts of which were broadcast 
on Russian television. 

Tackling the far stronger inner hull will be tougher. Salvage 
workers want to cut off the submarine's damaged first compartment 
and leave it on the seabed because Russian officials fear 
unexploded torpedoes may remain in the bow. Experts involved in 
the rescue effort also fear the fore section could be torn off 
while the Kursk is being raised, throwing it off balance. 

Mammoet is raising the Kursk in a joint venture with another 
Dutch company, Smit International, under a contract with the 
Russian government estimated to be worth about $65 million. 

Most officials are still sticking to the original Sept. 15 target 
date for raising the submarine to the surface. However, with the 
weather expected to worsen, they have warned that a slight delay 
is possible. 

Deputy Prime Minister Ilya Klebanov, who is overseeing the 
operation, said Tuesday that the Kursk would be brought to a dry 
dock near the port of Murmansk by Sept. 25 - five days behind the 
original plan. Motsak was less optimistic, saying it could be 
delivered between Sept. 25 and Oct. 2. 

The Russian Navy's weather service said Tuesday that it expected 
cyclones to rage in the area in the second half of September, 
complicating the salvage effort. 

The operation to raise the Kursk, which is expected to last 
approximately eight hours, will require calm seas. Storms could 
also disrupt efforts to bring the submarine to dry dock. 

On the Net: 

Official Web site for salvage operation: http://www.kursk141.org 
Dutch consortium's Web site: http://www.kursksalvage.com

All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 13  Radiation Safety Service To Be Set Up During The Kursk's Docking 
In The Ship Yards
 
 Pravda.RU 

Sep, 03 2001   

  For the period when the Kursk nuclear submarine will stay in 
the dock of the ship yards of the Roslyakovo township, a special 
radiation safety service will be created with the attraction of 
leading specialists from the garrisons of the Northern Fleet, the 
Russian Hydro-Meteorological Service and the Russian Kurchatov 
Research Institute (Moscow). The journalists were informed about 
it on Monday by the head of the Radiation Protection Service of 
the Northern Fleet, Alexander Denskevich. According to him, this 
Service will control the radiation background in the territory of 
the ship yards and the Roslyakovo township, and will also take 
water samples. Apart from that, all the members of the Radiation 
Protection Service will be given individual dosimeters. Alexander 
Denskevich said that the radiation situation in the area of 
lifting the Kursk submarine is being controlled round-the-clock. 
At the present time it is estimated as normal. 

The appearance of an abnormal situation, according to him, is 
hardly possible. However, it cannot be fully excluded. If it 
happens, there is a plan of actions to be followed. 

Only the submarine's reactor poses a potential danger for the 
life and the health of the people, say the specialists from the 
Northern Fleet. According to their assurances, the unloading of 
the combat charges, which will be carried out in the Roslyakovo 
ship yards in conditions of the fully hermetically sealed 
reactor, does not pose any danger.

 RIA 'Novosti'

   Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU". When reproducing our materials 
*****************************************************************
 14  Atomic museum changing its target 

The Dallas Morning News: Texas/Southwest
 
 Albuquerque center increasing exhibits on peacetime nuclear uses 
09/04/2001
 By ED TIMMS / The Dallas Morning News 

 ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.  A menacing collection of missiles and 
aircraft, along with one of the largest U.S. nuclear bombs ever 
built (minus the parts that go boom) surround a nondescript 
building on Albuquerque's Kirtland Air Force Base. 

  National Atomic Museum  James K. Walther shows one of the most 
recognizable exhibits: a copy of "Fat Man," the bomb dropped on 
Nagasaki.    

Nonfunctional versions of "Little Boy" and "Fat Man," the atomic 
bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II, are 
on display inside,along with other nuclear weapons developed by 
the United States to counter the threat of the former Soviet 
Union's nuclear arsenal. 

The National Atomic Museum is touted as having the world's 
largest unclassified collection of exhibits chronicling the 
development of nuclear weapons. For most of its history, other 
uses of nuclear technology received much less attention. 

But that's in the process of changing. 

Plans call for moving the museum off the Air Force base, doubling 
its size and dramatically increasing the space dedicated to 
nonmilitary nuclear technology. And to reflect the changed 
emphasis, the National Atomic Museum ultimately will become the 
National Museum of Nuclear Science and History. 

"There just has not been a very strong attempt, until now, to 
create a facility that can adequately tell the whole story," said 
museum director James K. Walther. 
                                                                    
Some of the museum's exhibits already focus on more peaceful uses 
of nuclear technology, such as one that describes the scientific 
contributions of Nobel laureate Marie Curie, co-discoverer of 
radium. But Mr. Walther said there's simply not enough room to 
feature more exhibits on non-weapons technology, such as nuclear 
energy or the use of nuclear technology in food preservation. 

The heavy emphasis on weapons also was a natural outgrowth of its 
heritage. Created in 1969, the museum is owned by the U.S. 
Department of Energy and operated by the nearby Sandia National 
Laboratories. The museum's charter, however, is much broader. 

Roughly half of the exhibition space in the new building, to be 
located in Albuquerque's Balloon Fiesta Park, will be dedicated 
to nonmilitary nuclear technology. As exhibits that deal with 
no-military applications of nuclear technology are developed, the 
benefits and potential problems  such as dealing with nuclear 
wasteand the risks of radiation exposure  will be addressed. 

The other half of the exhibition area will incorporate much of 
the weapons technology currently on display. 

   National Atomic Museum    

 Features:  Displays of nuclear weapons, missiles and aircraft. 
Exhibits include the Manhattan Project, nuclear weapons 
development during the Cold War, Russian nuclear weapons, the 
scientific contributions of Marie Curie, the history of arms 
control and nuclear medicine. 

 Location:  Wyoming Boulevard, Kirtland Air Force Base, 
Albuquerque, N.M. A visitor must show a driver's license, vehicle 
registration and proof of insurance to Air Force personnel at the 
Gibson or Wyoming gates of Kirtland to receive a car pass. 

 Hours:  9.a.m. to 5 p.m. daily, except Christmas Day and New 
Year's Day. 

 Admission:  Adults, $3; Youth (7-18) and Seniors, $2; Children 6 
and younger, free. 

 Web address:  www.atomicmuseum.com 


"It's important to inform the public about the history of the 
atomic bomb, the very early work in nuclear physics," said Ben 
Benjamin, 78, a museum volunteer who was part of the Manhattan 
Project, the massive wartime effort to develop an atomic weapon. 
"The bomb, I think, was one of the greatest scientific 
achievements in our history." Mr. Benjamin witnessed the 
detonation of the world's first nuclear device on July 16, 1945. 
As a civilian, he had worked on precision optics in Minneapolis. 
After he joined the Army, he ended up working on photo-optics for 
the top-secret project. 

Before the explosion, Mr. Benjamin recalled, rumors about what 
would happen were rampant. 

"There was lots of speculation, from it being a dud to ... 
fissioning the nitrogen in the air, which would consume the 
nitrogen all around the Earth." 

The museum's current exhibit also details the role of nuclear 
weapons through the Cold War, a time when the specter of a 
nuclear war was very real and schoolchildren, in "duck and cover" 
drills, were taught to crawl under their desks in the event of a 
nuclear attack. 

Mr. Walther said that the museum strives to present a balanced 
view on nuclear weapons. 

"We're not in the opinion business," he said. "We present the 
material, the facts as we can best determine ... and let people 
draw their own personal conclusions." 

When the museum relocates, perhaps by 2005, government support 
will decline and a private nonprofit foundation will have an 
increasing role. Mr. Walther said the new location will be more 
accessible and should draw in more visitors, especially during 
Albuquerque's annual balloon festival. About 80,000 people now 
visit annually. 

Some foreign visitors, Mr. Walther said, are surprised that they 
can walk through the museum and view the weapons. But everything 
on view is unclassified. 

"If you see the outside of a nuclear weapon from 1950, you're not 
going to be able to build one," Mr. Walther said. "In fact, the 
Internet contains much more material than we're allowed to 
present." 

2000 EPpy Award for Best specialized selection in a newspaper 
*****************************************************************
 15  Group Seeks Strict Rules on Beryllium

JS Online: 

 Associated Press  Last Updated: Sept. 3, 2001 at 4:44:18 a.m.  
 
WASHINGTON -  A watchdog group wants government to lower the 
amount of the metal beryllium that U.S. workers can be exposed to 
while on the job. The metal has been linked to a fatal lung 
disease.
 
Public Citizen, a nonprofit group founded by Ralph Nader, argues 
that the current standards set by the Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration are lax and put workers at risk.
 
The metal is used in electronics, recycling, machining and dental 
industries because it is lightweight and resilient. Public 
Citizen wants the exposure standard for beryllium particles 
changed from 2 micrograms per cubic meter to 0.2 micrograms per 
cubic meter.
 
``OSHA's failure to adopt a standard that will protect workers 
from unnecessary beryllium exposure is unconscionable,'' said 
Peter Lure, director of Public Citizen's health research group. 
``Every day the agency ignores this issue, tens of thousands of 
workers are needlessly exposed to this life-threatening hazard.''
 
Public Citizen said it was filing a petition with OSHA seeking 
the changes. OSHA spokeswoman Bonnie Friedman said the agency had 
not received the petition as of Friday afternoon and declined to 
comment on it.
 
Public Citizen is also asking for rules that would mandate annual 
blood testing for all workers who deal with the metal.
 
Beryllium disease once was associated primarily with the defense 
industry, where the metal was used in nuclear weapons, but it is 
increasingly common among workers in private and consumer 
industries.
 
The disease, caused when the metal's dust slowly damages the 
lungs of people who have been exposed, is rare, incurable and 
often fatal.
 
The number of beryllium disease cases among workers in private 
industries has increased in the past few years, according to the 
National Jewish Medical and Research Center in Denver, a leading 
respiratory disease hospital.
 
The Labor Department is providing compensation for workers who 
contracted beryllium disease while working at weapons plants. The 
law provides medical care and $150,000 to sick workers.
 
On The Net:
 
Public Citizen: http://www.citizen.org
 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration: 
http://www.osha.gov/
*****************************************************************
 16  Stamp honors father of the atomic bomb 

 September 3, 2001 
 BY JIM RITTER STAFF REPORTER   

Fermilab, U. of C. plan centennial tributes  -->
 
Fermilab scientists thought it was a long shot when they asked 
the U.S. Postal Service to issue a stamp honoring the lab's 
namesake, Enrico Fermi.

 Fermi directed the first nuclear chain reaction, designed atom 
smashers, helped build the atomic bomb and won the Nobel Prize. 
But he doesn't have the commercial appeal of Elvis Presley, 
Marilyn Monroe and other pop culture icons commemorated by the 
postal service.

 To the scientists' surprise, the stamp was approved, and it will 
be issued during the upcoming centennial celebration of the great 
physicist's birth on Sept. 29, 1901.

 Fermilab, near west suburban Batavia, is planning a symposium, 
and the University of Chicago, where Fermi worked, will hold a 
stamp ceremony, lectures, a Fermi memorabilia display and a Web 
site contest. The high school student who develops the best 
Enrico Fermi Web site will win $700.

 During the 1930s, Fermi and colleagues in his native Italy 
bombarded uranium with slow neutrons. Fermi later realized he had 
split the atom. Fermi won the Nobel Prize in 1938 for that work. 
His family accompanied him to Sweden to receive the prize, and he 
took the opportunity to escape Italy's fascist regime.

 In 1942, Fermi came to the University of Chicago, where he built 
the first controlled, self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction. The 
experiment, under the west stands of the university's Stagg 
Field, led to atom bombs and nuclear power plants.

 In a chain reaction, a uranium atom splits apart, releasing 
neutrons. These neutrons smash into other uranium atoms and split 
them apart, releasing more neutrons, which split more atoms, and 
so on. Fermi's crew created a chain reaction by assembling a 
large pile of purified uranium. When an occasional atom 
spontaneously split apart, the neutrons it emitted would hit 
other atoms. The pile also contained graphite bricks, which 
controlled the speed of neutrons, and control rods, which stopped 
the chain reaction by soaking up neutrons.

 Fermi conducted the experiment on Dec. 2, 1942. At 3:36 p.m., he 
looked at the instruments, computed the increasing neutron counts 
on his slide rule and announced, "the reaction is 
self-sustaining." Then he uncorked a bottle of Chianti.

 After World War II, Fermi established the Institute of Nuclear 
Studies at the U. of C., later renamed the Enrico Fermi 
Institute.

 He helped design the university's synchrocyclotron, at the time 
one of the world's most powerful atom smashers.

 Fermi was among the few physicists who excelled at both theory 
and experiment. He also was a popular teacher, said retired U. of 
C. physicist James Cronin, who took several of Fermi's courses.

 "He was an extremely clear teacher," Cronin said. "All of the 
principles he talked about were very simple."

 Fermi died in 1954. In 1969, the Fermi National Accelerator, 
better known as Fermilab, was named in his honor.

 The Fermi stamp shows a 1948 photo of the physicist at his 
chalkboard. The stamp also depicts a model of the carbon atom. 
Graphite is a form of carbon, and without it, Fermi could not 
have produced the chain reaction that ushered in the Nuclear Age.
 
Daily Southtown Pioneer Press Post-Tribune Star Newspapers 
Suburban Chicago Newspapers Copyright 2000, Digital Chicago Inc.                    
*****************************************************************
 17  D-Day for French nuclear sector (Jour J pour le nucleaire 
francais) 

Le Figaro - France; Sep 3, 2001


Slightly nine months after the creation of Topco, the holding 
intended to head the whole of the French nuclear power sector, 
the industrial group is expected to be created today following 
the shareholder assemblies of each of the companies involved. The 
new name for the company will be officially unveiled this 
afternoon. 

This will mark the culmination of the rationalisation of the 
sector, leading to the birth of the world number one in the 
sector, with a consolidated turnover of 10bn euros. The operation 
will have been concluded a month and a half ahead of the 
provisional timetable. This comes as both China and the US have 
committed themselves to nuclear power. 

                  Abstracted from Le Figaro 

*****************************************************************
 18  Fallen Heroes: Daghlian, Slotin, Bragg, & Meigs
 
 Children of the Manhattan Project 
   
In Memoriam
 
   Peter N. Bragg       Douglas P. Meigs       Harry K. Daghlian       Louis P.
Slotin    
   Sept. 2, 1944       Sept. 2, 1944       Sept. 15, 1945       May 30, 1946    

  The above four men, three Americans and one Canadian, all died 
in the line of duty.  By any interpretation, they were heroes. 
However, one of them has never been so honored.  Please help us 
correct this injustice.  Read Here!   
  
The Philadelphia Incident
 
  On September 2, 1944, a group of engineers, some civilian, some 
military, were working on an experimental facility at the 
Philadelphia Navy Yard when, without warning, it exploded.  Peter 
Bragg and Douglas Meigs, both civilian engineers assigned to the 
Manhattan Project, were killed; five others were critically 
injured.  If you do nothing else on this web site -  YOU MUST 
READ

The Dragon Bites...Twice!
 
  In August of 1945 and again, in May 1946, two Los Alamos 
scientists were exposed to lethal doses of radiation while 
performing experiments to determine critical mass.  These 
experiments, performed at the Omega Site, were commonly referred 
to as "Tickling the Tail of the Dragon".  Although several months 
apart, both accidents occurred on a Tuesday and both on the 21st 
of the month...and, both men died in the same hospital room at 
the U.S. Engineers Hospital at Los Alamos.   


  Send mail to gadget1945@msn.comwith questions or comments about 
this web site. Copyright © Jan. 1, 2000, 2001; Society for the 
Historical Preservation of the Manhattan Project 
*****************************************************************
 19  International Conference on Topical Isues in Nuclear Safety
 
Vienna, Austria   
3 - 6 September 2001   
INFORMATION SHEET
                                        
     [View the Programme, Timetable, Poster Session and Poster Guidelines] 

  1.  BACKGROUND  


     Topical Issue Papers
    
      Risk informed decision making  (247k)    
      Influence of external factors on safety  (57k)    
      Safety of fuel cycle facilities  (102k)    
      Safety of research reactors  (84k)    
      Safety performance indicators  (91k)    


In 1991, the IAEA organized an international conference on ’The Safety of
Nuclear Power: Strategy for the Future’. Recommendations from the 1991
conference prompted actions in subsequent years to advance nuclear safety
worldwide. One of those actions was the establishment of the Convention on
Nuclear Safety, which entered into force in October 1996. The first review
meeting of the Convention’s Contracting Parties was held in April 1999. The
meeting identified a number of external factors and circumstances which could
have a significant impact on nuclear safety if they were not counteracted.
These included: (a) deregulation of electricity markets; (b) maintaining
competence in industry, regulators and research institutions; and (c) lack of
economic resources in some countries. 

In 1998, the Agency held an ’International Conference on Topical 
Issues in Nuclear, Radiation and Radioactive Waste Safety’. The 
nuclear safety issues discussed during the conference were: (1) 
safety management; (2) regulatory strategies; and (3) 
backfitting, upgrading and modernization of nuclear power plants. 
Senior nuclear safety decision makers at the technical policy 
level reviewed these issues and formulated recommendations for 
future actions by national and/or international organizations. On 
the safety management issue, recommendations were made to monitor 
safety performance by using indicators.

Recommendations on the regulatory strategies issue indicated the 
need for further work on utilizing PSA and on optimizing the 
prescriptive nature of regulations, as well as on the future 
availability of competent professionals. Substantial progress has 
been made, and continues to be made by Member States in enhancing 
the safety of nuclear power plants. At the same time, more 
attention is being given to other areas of nuclear safety. The 
safety standards for research reactors are being updated and new 
standards are planned on the safety of other facilities in the 
nuclear fuel cycle. It seems appropriate at this time to analyse 
current topical issues and determine priorities for future work 
and areas needing international consensus building. 

  2.  OBJECTIVES  

The objective of the conference is to foster the exchange of 
information on topical issues in nuclear installations safety, 
with the aim of consolidating an international consensus on: 

    + the present status of these issues; 

    + priorities for future work; and 

    + needs for strengthening international co-operation, 
including recommendations for future activities for the IAEA. 



  3.  THEMATIC SCOPE  

Five current topical issues have been identified by the 
Conference Programme Committee as subjects for technical 
sessions. Each topic encompasses both general ‘policy’ issues and 
more specific technical issues. The topics and a selection of 
related issues are listed below. 

Issue papers have been prepared in advance of the Conference to 
provide an overview of each topic and the related issues. Further 
information on the issues will be presented in the form of 
invited keynote papers and contributed papers. 

The Conference will cover the following main topics: 

 Topical Issue 1: Risk-informed decision making   ( 247k)  
  General issues:   

    + Risk-informed decision making: pros and cons. 

    + The value and limitations of PSA techniques and results in 
underpinning risk-informed decision making. 

    + Consistency between risk-informed decision making, 
defence-in-depth and good engineering practice. 

    + Risk informed decision making: a way to improve regulatory 
effectiveness? 

    + Risk criteria and safety goals to be used in risk-informed 
decision making: dealing with uncertainties. 


  Special issues:   

    + Experience with risk-informed decision making. 

    + The legal basis for risk-informed decision making. 

    + Using risk indicators as the basis for safety 
classification of structures, systems and components. 

    + Quality requirements for a PSA to serve as a basis for 
risk-informed decision making. 

    + PSA expertise at the utility and the regulatory body when 
using risk-informed decision making. 

    + Ownership and updating of PSA by utilities. 

    + Need for international standards for PSA to support 
risk-informed decision making? 

    + How to consider organizational factors and safety culture 
in risk-informed decision making. 

    + Concept of ‘risk neutral’ decisions. 

    + Treatment of multiple changes in the installation.
 

 Topical Issue 2: Influence of external factors on safety   ( 57k)  
  General issues:   

    + Pressures arising from economic deregulation and 
competitive electricity pricing and their possible role in 
encouraging or discouraging improved nuclear installation safety 
in the long term. 

    + Implications of political decisions on early closure for 
the safety of nuclear installations. 

    + Role of the regulator in not unnecessarily hindering the 
competitiveness of nuclear installations while ensuring that 
safety margins are not eroded under these changing circumstances.
 

  Special issues:   

    + Experience of utilities and regulators who have been 
through or who are embarking upon these changes; lessons learned 
in how to achieve a positive safety outcome while avoiding the 
obvious pitfalls. 

    + Downsizing utilities and/or regulatory bodies while 
maintaining safety margins. 

    + Effect of executive reward systems on safety. 

    + The image of the nuclear industry among the business 
community and during the economic transition of the electrical 
supply industry.
 

 Topical Issue 3: Safety of fuel cycle facilities   ( 102k) 
[Note: this topic excludes nuclear power plants, research 
reactors, uranium mining, waste management and disposal 
facilities] General issues:   

    + Lack of international safety standards. 

    + Extensive reliance on operator and administrative controls 
to achieve safety. 

    + Chemical and toxic risks associated with the nuclear risk. 

    + The variety and diversity of technologies and processes 
used;
 

  Special issues:   

    + The disposition of radioactive materials within the 
facility. 

    + The operator’s ‘hands on’ involvement in operations and the 
frequent changes in operating modes. 

    + Dominant risk to the facility operator: setting of 
criteria. 

    + Consideration of criticality accidents. 

    + Emergency preparedness. 


 Topical Issue 4: Safety of research reactors   ( 84k) General 
issues:   

    + Ageing of equipment and structures in operating research 
reactors. 

    + Uncertain status of many research reactors (more than 200) 
that are shut down but not decommissioned without clear 
definition of safety precautions and preservation measures. 

    + Lack of regulatory oversight and in many cases lack of a 
regulatory framework. 

    + Insufficient independent peer reviews of safety. 

    + Lack of an international convention to cover the safety of 
research reactors. 


  Special issues:   

    + Systematic (periodic) reassessment of safety. 

    + Obsolescence of equipment and lack of maintenance. 

    + Loss of expertise and corporate memory. 

    + Lack of quality assurance programmes. 

    + Lack of clear utilization programmes and consequent lack of 
financial support. 

    + Financing of safety measures (safety reassessment, safety 
upgrading, dismantling and decommissioning). 

    + Ownership of shutdown reactors. 

    + Safety assessment of different modes of utilization, 
including experiments. 

    + Emergency preparedness. 

    + Training and qualification of regulators and operators. 

    + Safety implications of new fuels.
 

 Topical Issue 5: Safety performance indicators   ( 91k) General 
issues:   

    + Characterization of operational safety attributes through 
safety performance indicators. 

    + Comprehensive sets of indicators at plant, national and 
international level. 

    + Assessment of overall safety performance through 
aggregation of indicators. 

    + Safety performance indicators as mechanisms for public 
communication. 

    + Advantages and limitations of safety performance 
indicators. 


  Special issues:   

    + Adaptation of generic safety performance indicators to 
plant specific circumstances. 

    + Data collection for safety performance indicators. 

    + Experience with selection of indicators, setting targets, 
monitoring trends and triggering actions. 

    + The use of safety performance indicator displays. 

    + Indicators to monitor safety culture. 

    + Development and use of qualitative safety performance 
indicators. 

    + Use of additional indicators to address issues such as 
industrial safety attitude and performance, staff welfare and 
environmental compliance. 

    + Indicators of the effectiveness of the nuclear regulatory 
authorities. 

    + Communicating safety outside the nuclear community. 



  4.  PARTICIPATION  

The Conference is directed at a broad range of experts in the 
area of nuclear safety, including professionals from the 
different disciplines involved in the safety of nuclear power 
plants, installations in other parts of the fuel cycle, and 
research reactors. It is aimed at both licensees and governmental 
officials, including persons from regulatory bodies and senior 
policy makers. 

All persons wishing to participate in the meeting are requested 
to complete a Participation Form and send it as soon as possible 
to the competent official authority (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 
national atomic energy authority) for subsequent transmission to 
the Conference secretariat. A participant will be accepted only 
if the Participation Form is transmitted through the government 
of a Member State of the International Atomic Energy Agency or by 
an organization invited to participate. 

Participants whose designations have been received by the 
Conference secretariat will be notified directly two to three 
months before the meeting. 

  5.  PROGRAMME STRUCTURE  

The Conference programme will be structured as follows: 

    + An   opening session   will address the Conference objectives. 

    +   Five technical sessions   will address the topical issues 
outlined in Section 3 above, based on: 

      + summary presentations of the issue papers prepared in 
advance of the Conference; 

      + summary presentations by rapporteurs of contributed 
papers; and 

      + invited keynote presentations.
 

After the discussions in the technical sessions, conclusions and 
recommendations will be drawn up. 

    +   Poster sessions   will be organized for presentation of 
contributed papers. 

    +   Panel discussion   on ‘Maintaining Competence'. 

    + A   concluding session   will summarize the main 
conclusions and recommendations of the Conference. 

  6.  CONTRIBUTED PAPERS AND POSTERS  

Concise papers on issues falling within the scope of the 
Conference may be submitted as contributions to the Conference. 
These papers will not be presented orally, but will be summarized 
and introduced by a rapporteur, as indicated in Section 5. A book 
of contributed papers will be distributed to all participants 
upon registration. The poster session will include topical poster 
presentations by IAEA staff on recent major achievements in the 
Agency’s nuclear safety programme, including the status of 
revision of the Safety Standards Series. Comments or questions on 
the contributed papers can be raised in the appropriate technical 
sessions. Authors of contributed papers are encouraged to present 
the substance of the paper in the form of a poster. Instructions 
for the preparation and submission of contributed papers and 
posters are given in the Appendix. 

The  deadline  for the submission of contributed papers is  28 
February 2001 . 

  7.  DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS/PROCEEDINGS  

A preliminary programme, together with detailed information on 
accommodation and other relevant topics will be sent to all 
officially designated participants in June 2001. The final 
programme and the book of contributed papers will be distributed 
during registration. 

The Proceedings, which will be published by the IAEA after the 
Conference, will contain the introductory presentations, summary 
presentations of the issue papers (as well as the issue papers 
themselves), rapporteurs’ reports of contributed papers, 
chairpersons’ summary reports for each session, and the results 
of the concluding session. The Proceedings can be ordered, at a 
discounted price, during the Conference. 

  8.  EXPENSES  

There is no registration fee for participation in the Conference. 

  9.  VENUE, DATE AND WORKING LANGUAGE  

The Conference will be held from 3 to 6 September 2001 at IAEA 
Headquarters in Vienna, Austria. The registration desk will be 
open from 8:00 a.m. on Monday, 3 September 2001 and the opening 
session will start at 10:00 a.m.. The working language of the 
Conference will be English. 

  10.  SECRETARIAT  

The address of the Conference Secretariat is as follows: 
 Conference Secretariat
 c/o International Atomic Energy Agency
 IAEA-CN-82
 Wagramer Strasse 5
 P.O. Box 100
 A-1400 Vienna
 Austria, Europe
 
Telephone No.: (+43) - 1 - 2600(0) plus extension
 Telefax No.: (+43) - 1 - 26007
 Email: )  

The General Co-ordinator of the Conference is Mr. J.Versteeg, 
Safety Co-ordination Section, Department of Nuclear Safety 
(telephone extension: 22551, e-mail: ). The technical programme 
co-ordinator is Mr. L. Lederman, Division of Nuclear Installation 
Safety, Department of Nuclear Safety (telephone extension: 26070, 
email: ). Conference organization is provided by Ms.H. Schmid, 
Conference Services Section, Division of Conference and Document 
Services (telephone extension: 21316, e-mail: ). The Editor for 
the conference proceedings is Mr. G. Ramesh, Publishing Section 
(telephone extension: 22510, e-mail: ). 

  11.  CONTACT POINTS AND REGISTRATION  

The Participation Form should be sent to the competent official 
authority (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, national atomic energy 
authority) for transmission to the Conference Secretariat (see 
item 10 above). Subsequent correspondence on technical matters 
should be addressed to the Conference Co-ordinator and 
correspondence on administrative matters to the IAEA Conference 
Service Section. 

  12.  VISAS  

Designated participants who require a visa to enter Austria 
should submit the necessary application to the nearest diplomatic 
or consular representative of Austria as soon as possible. Please 
note that Austria is a Schengen State and therefore persons who 
require a visa will have to apply for a "Schengen visa" at least 
14 days before entry into Austria. In States where Austria has no 
diplomatic mission, visas can be obtained from the consular 
authority of a Schengen Partner State representing Austria in the 
country in question.  [As of September 1999, the Schengen States 
are: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxemburg, 
Netherlands, Portugal and Spain.]      

                                A P P E N D I X
                                        

          Guidelines for The Preparation and Presentation of A Poster
                                        

  1.  GENERAL  

Information on a poster should attract attention. It should 
therefore be limited to the most important facts only. 

  2.  PREPARATION OF A POSTER Each poster author will be assigned 
a poster board with the size 85 cm high and 115 cm wide.
 
All display material should be prepared in advance. It should 
preferably consist of smaller sections which can be mounted on 
the board in the poster area.
 
The top of the poster should display, in lettering not smaller 
than 3 cm in height, the following information:
 

 Title of Presentation, Names of Authors, Affiliations
 
 The text of the poster should be easily readable from a distance 
of 2 to 2.5 m. Machine typed characters are too small. Use heavy 
lettering   at least 1 cm high  .  

 The poster should be divided into: 


    + Introduction 
    + Method 
    + Results 
    + Conclusions 


or an equivalent division. It is advisable to leave details and 
explanations for the face-to-face discussions. 

  3.  PRESENTATION AT THE MEETING  

Poster authors are kindly requested to be at their posters for 
discussion with interested participants during the relevant 
poster session on Wednesday, 5 September from 14:00 -15:30 as 
indicated in the meeting programme.
 
Text and presentation should be in English. 

  PLEASE NOTE that further details on the possibilities for 
arranging the displays in the POSTER area will be given at the 
beginning of the meeting.     
  
Back to listing of IAEA Meetings in 2001 
*****************************************************************
 20  Antinuclear activist launches political party

ABC Politics - 04/09/01 : 

Long-time antinuclear activist Helen Caldicott today launched her 
own political party in Sydney.
 
Dr Caldicott is calling the party "Our Common Future" and is 
waiting on registration.
 
She says regardless of registration, she will stand as an 
Independent in the Senate in the upcoming federal election.
 
Dr Caldicott, who is opposed to the building of a new nuclear 
reactor in Sydney's Lucas Heights, says she will also emphasise 
her opposition to the privatisation of the health system and 
other services.
 
"I founded it because as Gore Vidal says we have one political 
party with two right wings in Australia and I don't think any 
party is really looking at the full spectrum," she said.
 
"The Greens are good but I'm deeply concerned with the way 
society is going and we're being privatised to the hilt and we're 
losing everything we've ever owned, we're losing our compassion 
and we're becoming Americanised." 

© 2001 Australian Broadcasting Corporation 
        
*****************************************************************
 21  Nuclear tests on thousands of Australian bone samples: report 

  ABC News - 04/09/01 : 

A report has revealed bone samples were taken from tens of 
thousands of Australians to test the effects of fallout from 
nuclear testing. 

Between 1957 and 1978, nearly 20,000 bone samples were taken from 
post-mortem examinations in most states and territories, and 
Papua New Guinea.
 
The samples were taken from stillborn babies and people aged up 
to 80-years-old. 

Research to determine the effects of nuclear fallout on bone 
tissue were first carried out in the United States and Britain, 
and then Australia. 

A report by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear 
Safety Agency, reveals for most of the 21-year testing program, 
samples were taken from every autopsy on people aged less than 
40. 

In 1969, hospitals were offered $50 bonuses for providing bone 
samples.
 
The Federal Health Minister, Michael Wooldridge, says he is 
concerned the informed consent of families was not sought. 

Dr Wooldridge says the Government is looking at the best way to 
inform family members of those involved. 

 Identification 
 
The Federal Health Department is considering the best way to 
inform families of people whose bones were used in an 
international program to measure the health effects of nuclear 
testing. 

The head of the Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, 
John Loy says information will be provided to family members who 
want further information about the program.
 
"As I understand it it was not uncommon practice for pathologists 
in certain circumstances to remove organs and use them for other 
purposes, and of course those things have been inquired into in 
other contexts this was a program that had been set up for 
certainly what was seen at the time and what still can be argued 
as being a worthwhile thing to do in itself," he said. 

border="0"> © 2001 Australian Broadcasting Corporation 
*****************************************************************
 22     BRIT GIVES OK FOR KURSK LIFT  

Daily Record
 
© 2001 Trinity Mirror Digital Media Scotland Limited or its licensors.

A BRITISH expert has flown out to Russia to decide whether to 
give the go-ahead for the raising of the Kursk. 

Dr John Large has been called in by the Dutch salvage consortium 
Smit and Mammoet to advise on the radioactive safety of lifting 
the submarine from the bottom of the Barents Sea. 

Dr Large, head of the nuclear safety committee overseeing the 
raising of the submarine, said the bow section - which still 
contains a number of weapons - will be cut off in the next couple 
of days. 

It was in the bow that the explosion that caused the loss of the 
118 crew last year happened. 

Dr Large said: "I believe the risks are now minimal." 

*****************************************************************
 23  Government secrets
 
  [charlotte.com]       

  Published Monday, September 3, 2001 

   Proposed new law would do a lot of harm  

 A very bad piece of legislation is creeping forward in the 
United States Congress. It would broaden punishment for those who 
reveal government secrets.

 It has been inserted in the Intelligence Authorization Act, an 
appropriations bill that funds various intelligence-related 
agencies and activities. It is this year's version of a bill 
passed by both houses of Congress last year before being vetoed 
by President Clinton. 

The legislation would make it a felony, punishable by up to three 
years in prison, for any active or retired government employee to 
willfully disclose classified information knowing that the person 
receiving the information was not authorized to have it.

 Is it important to protect government secrets? Of course it is. 
And current law already provides for that. However, criminal 
prosecution requires that the information relate to the national 
defense and that the individual leaking the information believe 
that it would be used to injure the United States.

 This proposed new law would extend punishment even to 
whistleblowers who were seeking to serve the public's legitimate 
interests. And it would ignore a central issue: Government 
officials routinely abuse the classification process for their 
own convenience or to cover up their own behavior. At the height 
of the Vietnam War protests, the FBI was found to be keeping 
classified files of newspaper clippings.

 Among the matters that would not have come to light under the 
proposed law: the Pentagon Papers; Iran-Contra abuses; government 
radiation and biological warfare experiments on unwitting 
Americans; safety violations in nuclear weapons manufacturing and 
nuclear power plants.

 The spirit of American law is that government information does 
not belong to the government but, rather, to the people. This 
bill is inconsistent with that spirit and should be rejected. 
  
*****************************************************************
 24  Public Citizen seeks stricter rules on beryllium 

Oak Ridger Online --> 

Story last updated at 10:15 a.m. on Monday, September 3, 2001

 from staff and wire reports  

WASHINGTON -- A watchdog group wants government to lower the 
amount of the metal beryllium that U.S. workers can be exposed to 
while on the job. The metal has been linked to a fatal lung 
disease.

 Public Citizen, a nonprofit group founded by Ralph Nader, argues 
that the current standards set by the Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration are lax and put workers at risk.

 The metal is used in electronics, recycling, machining and 
dental industries because it is lightweight and resilient. Public 
Citizen wants the exposure standard for beryllium particles 
changed from 2 micrograms per cubic meter to 0.2 micrograms per 
cubic meter.

 "OSHA's failure to adopt a standard that will protect workers 
from unnecessary beryllium exposure is unconscionable," said 
Peter Lure, director of Public Citizen's health research group. 
"Every day the agency ignores this issue, tens of thousands of 
workers are needlessly exposed to this life-threatening hazard."

 Public Citizen said it was filing a petition with OSHA seeking 
the changes. OSHA spokeswoman Bonnie Friedman said the agency had 
not received the petition as of Friday afternoon and declined to 
comment on it.

 Public Citizen is also asking for rules that would mandate 
annual blood testing for all workers who deal with the metal.

 Beryllium disease once was associated primarily with the defense 
industry, where the metal was used in nuclear weapons, but it is 
increasingly common among workers in private and consumer 
industries.

 The disease, caused when the metal's dust slowly damages the 
lungs of people who have been exposed, is rare, incurable and 
often fatal.

 The number of beryllium disease cases among workers in private 
industries has increased in the past few years, according to the 
National Jewish Medical and Research Center in Denver, a leading 
respiratory disease hospital.

 The Labor Department is providing compensation for workers who 
contracted beryllium disease while working at weapons plants. The 
law provides medical care and $150,000 to sick workers.

 Several current and former workers have said they were exposed 
to beryllium while working at the Department of Energy's Oak 
Ridge facilities.

All Contents ©Copyright  The Oak Ridger  
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************