*****************************************************************
10/04/01 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 9.234
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS
1 Warning over cost of nuclear power generation
2 BNFL given go-ahead for new nuclear plant
3 'Economic benefits' outweighed Mox plant concerns
4 This Government is dangerously infatuated with the nuclear industry
5 Small turnout for nuclear dump site hearing in Carson City
6 SRS again meets goal on radioactive waste
7 Operator files to dismantle 1st commercial nuke reactor
8 Irish premier vows to battle Blair over Sellafield
9 Stupidity of nuclear shipments to Japan
10 NRC Issues Final Rule on Storage of Certain "Greater than Class
11 Britain OKs Nuclear Fuel Plant
12 Mox prompts mixed reaction
13 Sellafield wins fight to open spent fuel plant
14 Nuclear plant gets go-ahead
15 House panel OKs bill on security for nuclear plants, waste
16 Security measures close lakes near nuclear power plant, energy center
17 State kicks DOE out of hearing site
18 Daily Events Report
19 Forest fires threaten Russian nuclear waste site
20 Sellafield move may cause legal battle
21 MOX plant set up in 1996
22 Campaigners to wage long fight against BNFL
23 SRS again meets goal on radioactive waste
24 Pickering nukes a 'real risk'
25 Russia to resume building Ural nuclear plant in 2004 after two
26 Fury over Sellafield plutonium decision
27 Ireland says Sellafield decision "defies logic"
28 Sellafield: THE LONG ROAD TO A LICENCE
29 Nuclear fuel go-ahead
30 Government to challenge Sellafield expansion
NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS
1 'Bin Laden bought nuclear weapons'
2 PML(N) rejects US assistance for N. security
3 Nuclear material missing from Kazakh cosmodrome, Kazakh
4 Health officials begin testing for clues in Fallon cancer cluster
5 Los Alamos Lab to Settle for $9.5M
6 Preliminary Fallon well tests show radiation, no pollutants
7 Reid announces lineup for Henderson anti-terrorism summit
8 Lawmakers to consider improvements to sick workers program
9 Preliminary tests show no pollutants in 100 Fallon wells
10 Debris, Weeds Shadow China's Nuclear Weapon Site
11 A closer look: Pakistan's nuclear arsenal
12 Improvements to sick-workers program being considered
13 U.S. debates how to assure safety of nuclear weapons
14 Pakistan presents a nuclear dilemma
****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES
*****************************************************************
1 Warning over cost of nuclear power generation
Financial Times; Oct 4, 2001 By ANDREW TAYLOR
Nuclear generation will remain uneconomic unless electricity
prices rise or the industry receives state help, according to
forecasts compiled by the government's energy review team.
It concludes that by 2020 nuclear power will remain more
expensive than wind generation and will cost roughly the same as
electricity produced from power stations burning specialist green
energy crops.
Even coal is expected to be competitive with nuclear costs, after
allowing for carbon removal and cleaning of exhaust gases.
Natural gas is expected to remain the cheapest fuel, even though
a growing proportion will need to be imported. Concern that
Britain could be held hostage by energy exporters from unstable
regions was one of the reasons for the energy review.
The investigation by Downing Street's performance and innovation
unit is considering ways, including building new nuclear power
stations, to meet energy demands for the next 50 years. It is due
to report by the end of the year.
All but one of Britain's nuclear power stations, Sizewell B in
Suffolk, are due to close by 2023.
Forecasts prepared by the energy review advisory group expect
nuclear costs to be in the range of 3.2p to 4.1p a kilowatt hour
by 2020. This compares with current power station sale prices of
1.8-2p kWh.
Robyn Jeffrey, chief executive of British Energy, the country's
biggest nuclear generator, told the review body last month that
power station prices needed to rise to at least 2.5-3p kWh to
justify new construction.
The review body forecasts expect production costs of wind
projects and biomass developments to fall over the next two
decades as technologies improve and sales increase.
Costs by 2020 are expected to have dipped to 1.5-2.5p kWh for
onshore wind schemes. Offshore developments currently costing
about 5-6p kWh are expected to fall to 2-4p. Biomass costs are
expected to fall from 5-6p currently to 3-4p.
Electricity produced from natural gas at combined cycle heat and
power stations is expected to have the lowest costs at 1.8-2.1p
kWh.
Copyright: The Financial Times Limited
*****************************************************************
2 BNFL given go-ahead for new nuclear plant
© 2001 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd
By Steve Connor Science Editor
04 October 2001
'Economic benefits' outweigh Mox plant concerns
Leading article: This Government is dangerously infatuated with
the nuclear industryThe Government gave the go-ahead yesterday
for British Nuclear Fuels to operate a controversial plutonium
plant at Sellafield, in Cumbria, which opponents argue could
become a terrorist target.
Ministers announced that BNFL was justified in making plutonium
mixed oxide (Mox) fuel at Sellafield on the grounds that the
plant would earn more than £150m during the course of its
lifetime, despite it having cost £473m to build. Margaret
Beckett, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs, said that in addition to the financial returns, the
Government had also taken into consideration the wider risks and
benefits of allowing the Sellafield Mox Plant to operate.
Mrs Beckett said: "The Secretary of State for Health and I have
considered all the information relevant to the justification for
the manufacture of Mox fuel... We have concluded that the
manufacture of Mox fuel is justified."
BNFL, which finished building the plant in 1996 and had been
waiting for permission to operate it, said it was delighted by
the decision.
But environmentalists and scientists opposed to the production
and shipping of Mox fuel, said it would lead to an unacceptable
risk of a terrorist attack as well as environmental pollution.
Pete Roche, of Greenpeace, said: "The Sellafield Mox Plant will
not only add to Sellafield's environmental contamination, and
nuclear waste mountains, but now, after the dreadful events of 11
September, [it] will exacerbate the world-wide problem of nuclear
proliferation."
Frank Barnaby, of the Oxford Research Group of scientists, said
that it would be relatively easy for terrorists to make crude
nuclear devices from stolen Mox fuel by separating out its
plutonium content.
"The size of the nuclear explosion from such a crude device is
impossible to predict. But even if it were only equivalent to the
explosion of a few tens of tons of TNT it would completely
devastate the centre of a large city," Dr Barnaby said.
The manufacture of Mox fuel would mean transporting large
quantities of plutonium around the world by ship, which could
also become terrorist targets, said the opponents of the
Government's decision.
Before BNFL can begin Mox production at the new plant it must
first obtain consent from the Health and Safety Executive under
the terms of its operating licence. This is expected within
weeks.
*****************************************************************
3 'Economic benefits' outweighed Mox plant concerns
© 2001 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd
Sellafield: After 10 years, five separate public consultation
exercises and a scandal over falsified data, plant finally wins
government approval
By Steve Connor Science Editor 04 October 2001
BNFL given go-ahead for new nuclear plant
Leading article: This Government is dangerously infatuated with
the nuclear industry
The long road to a licence
1991: Decision made to build the Sellafield Mox Plant (SMP).
1994: BNFL given planning permission for SMP.
1996: Construction completed at a cost of £300m. Maintenance and
upgrading bring total cost to £473m.
20 Aug 1999: BNFL becomes aware of fabrication of quality-control
data in the smaller Mox demonstration facility making fuel
pellets.
10 Sept 1999: The Independent informs BNFL of impending article
on data falsification. BNFL tells Nuclear Installations
Inspectorate (NII).
14 Sept 1999: The Independent publishes article. BNFL tells
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kansai Electric that
falsification does not affect shipment on its way to Japan.
16 Sept 1999: BNFL admits falsification is more extensive than
thought, but still only affects Mox pellets still at Sellafield.
8 Nov 1999: NII writes to Japanese Embassy in London saying
falsification has affected two lots of pellets in Japan shipment.
15 Dec 1999: BNFL discovers a third affected lot in Japan.
16 Dec 1999: Japanese told of wider falsification, leading to
demands for suspension of shipments.
18 Feb 2000: NII sets 15 recommendations before it will allow the
restart of Mox production at Sellafield. BNFL subsequently
decides to close down the demonstration facility and rely on
operating the SMP.
3 October 2001: Government gives the go-ahead for SMP operation.
Steve Connor
The Government's decision to permit the manufacture of plutonium
mixed oxide (Mox) nuclear fuel at the Sellafield reprocessing
plant in Cumbria comes as little surprise to commentators
familiar with the industry.
Five separate public consultation exercises, a scandal over
falsified safety data and a total loss of customer confidence did
not, in the end, outweigh the economic benefits of earning up to
£150m over the lifetime of the Sellafield Mox Plant.
Yet these potential earnings will still not cover the £473m cost
of building the plant, a state-of-the-art operation where lasers
and computers control the making of Mox fuel rods from
reprocessed nuclear fuel. Nor do the profits take into account
the enormous costs of decommissioning the contaminated components
of the Mox plant when its working life comes to an end within the
next 20 years.
The last consultation, by the accountants Arthur D Little, which
was told to ignore the costs of building the plant in its
financial analysis, nevertheless concluded that "there is a
robust economic case for proceeding with the Sellafield Mox
Plant".
British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL), which runs the Sellafield complex,
made the decision to build the Mox plant about 10 years ago and
was granted planning permission in 1994, with construction
completed two years later.
The rationale behind the plant was to exploit the reprocessed
waste from Sellafield's giant Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant –
known as Thorp – to make fuel that could be burnt in the nuclear
reactors of the countries from where the waste originated.
This fuel, made from the mixed oxides of uranium and plutonium,
was supposed to complete the reprocessing cycle, enabling BNFL to
send back the plutonium in the waste to the country of origin – a
legal requirement – in the form of a product that the company
could sell at a profit.
Unusually, BNFL had to build the plant before it could apply for
a licence to operate it – a situation which would not occur in
any other industry. This process turned out to take nearly five
years.
Mox is made in the form of inch-long ceramic pellets which are
slotted into stainless steel rods that are loaded into a nuclear
reactor.
An alternative fuel, however, is uranium which is now much
cheaper than it was when the decision to build the Mox plant was
taken.
Gordon MacKerron, an economist from the University of Sussex,
told the Commons Trade and Industry Select Committee last year
that the fall in uranium prices means there is now no commercial
logic behind Mox fuel.
However, BNFL said yesterday that it has received definite orders
for 40 per cent of the nuclear waste it reprocesses from abroad,
which is enough to make the Mox plant break even.
Norman Askew, the company's chief executive, said: "Our customers
have been extremely patient with us and we can now get on with
the business of manufacturing fuel for them and to repay the
commitment that they have shown us."
However, the Japanese, who are the most important customers for
Mox, are understandably nervous about agreeing to take the fuel.
The one and only assignment of Mox, made in a small demonstration
plant at Sellafield, is being returned from Japan because it was
subjected to data falsification by BNFL workers.
The falsification scandal, revealed by The Independent in
September 1999, happened when workers cut corners by using old
measurements of Mox pellets while compiling quality control log
sheets.
BNFL denied at the time that the falsified data had affected Mox
fuel on its way to Japan but within weeks it had to make an
embarrassing retraction and admit that it had misinformed both
its customers and the public.
Opponents of the Mox plant argue that not only is it
uneconomical, but its operation is a danger to the environment,
mainly because of the risks attached to shipping plutonium around
the world.
Frank Barnaby, of the Oxford Research Group, said: "The use of
Mox will increase the risk of nuclear-weapon proliferation by
countries and, perhaps more seriously, the risk that terrorist
groups will acquire Mox and fabricate a crude nuclear explosive.
"The steps of chemically separating the plutonium oxide from
uranium oxide, converting the oxide into plutonium metal, and
assembling the metal or plutonium oxide together with
conventional explosive or produce a nuclear explosion are not
technologically demanding," he said.
*****************************************************************
4 This Government is dangerously infatuated with the nuclear industry
© 2001 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd
04 October 2001
BNFL given go-ahead for new nuclear plant
'Economic benefits' outweigh Mox plant concernsIn his speech to
the Labour Conference yesterday, the Home Secretary, David
Blunkett, declared that securing the basic safety of the
population has been the most fundamental business of Government
down the ages. So it was doubly strange that, shortly after Mr
Blunkett had sat down, his Cabinet colleagues at Environment and
Health, Margaret Beckett and Alan Milburn respectively, announced
a decision that does nothing to improve the safety of the British
people – permission to BNFL to operate the Mox nuclear
reprocessing plant.
If there was one nightmare even more appalling than the one the
world has had to live through since 11 September, it would be
dealing with the aftermath of a terrorist attack using nuclear
devices. And yet that is precisely what has been brought a
significant step closer with this Mox facility – basically a
factory to produce plutonium, the raw material for nuclear
weaponry.
If Mr Blair does not yet fully appreciate the dangers of nuclear
proliferation then a study of Pakistan would provide the
opportunity to reflect on them. The Prime Minister would not be
so undiplomatic, of course, but he might otherwise think aloud
about what the precise security arrangements for the Pakistani
nuclear arsenal are, and how easy it would be to disable or
remove nuclear warheads in the event of a militant Islamic regime
taking power in Islamabad. We do not need any more plutonium
waiting to be captured by a new generation of international
terrorists.
It is not as if there is some urgent demand for more plutonium.
Ten years ago, when the Mox project was started, uranium, the
other main source material for nuclear power, was very expensive,
so there was a strong economic case for manufacturing plutonium,
quite apart from the need for a reliable supply for military
purposes. Today, uranium is very much cheaper than plutonium and
the economics of the plant have been overturned. True, the
Government hired some accountants to make the financial case for
the plant, but they could only do so if they disregarded the
£470m that it cost to build.
As for the military side, the United States and Russia have spent
most of the past decade dismantling their nuclear arsenals, and
there is more than enough plutonium around for legitimate
military purposes.
The strongest grounds against operating the Mox plant as with the
rest of the nuclear industry, remains safety. It is not just that
we have seen BNFL staff falsifying records. Nor is it just a
matter of the number of "incidents" – accidents in plain language
– that have been covered up over the years.
Those factors are gruesome enough to contemplate, but the
starkest caution that can be sounded against nuclear power is
simply the fact that no system can be safe enough to protect us
against the peculiar toxic nature of plutonium. And especially
when the Mox plant will generate an increase in the volume of
nuclear waste and plutonium being transported vast distances to
and from Japan. The stakes, in terms of the enormous risk to
human life and limb are simply too great, especially when the
dangers of proliferation and possible terrorist intervention are
added to the equation. Not for nothing have the Americans ordered
immediate air-force cover for their nuclear power plants, which
are as vulnerable as ours to airborne assault of the type we saw
used to such devastating effect in New York and Washington.
The case for nuclear power and its associated reprocessing
facilities has never been very strong; after 11 September the
Government's enthusiasm for all things nuclear is indefensible.
*****************************************************************
5 Small turnout for nuclear dump site hearing in Carson City
Nevada Appeal
October 4, 2001
Geoff Dornan, Appeal Capitol Bureau
Short notice from the Department of Energy and a last minute
change of location forced by the state pretty much assured a weak
turnout for Wednesday's Carson City hearing on the Yucca Mountain
project.
In the first hour of the hearing at the Carson Nugget, only about
a dozen people showed up including three reporters and a
researcher from the Legislative Counsel Bureau. By 6 p.m., only
about 20 people had showed and a half-dozen had given testimony.
The process was led off by retired UNR professor Jim Roberts who
favors putting the nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain.
He told the Department of Energy that, especially in the wake of
the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington D.C., one
storage site would be much easier to protect than the 70 places
around the country where high level nuclear waste is now stored
-- almost all above ground.
"I favor the Yucca site not because it is desirable or inevitable
but because it is imperative," he said.
Roberts said those 70 existing sites are "poorly protected
against terrorism" and ripe for attack that could scatter
radioactive waste across large areas.
"A central storage of spent fuel rods would provide far fewer
terrorist targets and the central storage could be more easily
protected," he said.
But Kaitlin Backlund, executive director of Citizen Alert, said
Yucca Mountain won't make any of those 70-plus sites any less
vulnerable to terrorism, that they would still be prime targets.
She said it will just add the dangers of transporting all those
waste containers thousands of miles across country.
And Sarah Walker, who described herself as a fourth-generation
Nevadan, urged DOE and Congress to charge science with finding
another solution than just burying the waste north of Las Vegas.
"It amounts to a huge Las Vegas-style wager and, if DOE loses,
Nevadans will have to pay the price," she said.
"There are and will be other solutions, better solutions," she
told DOE officials.
Carson Mayor Ray Masayko added the capital's residents have made
it clear they don't want Yucca Mountain.
"The science hasn't been fully defined or the transportation," he
said. "It's premature at this point in time."
He too called on DOE and Congress not to rush the decision.
The public meeting was one of nearly 30 such hearings announced
just a couple of days ago. The meeting schedule didn't formally
appear in the Congressional Record until Wednesday -- the day of
the first meetings.
State officials including Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa
protested the DOE decision to go ahead with the meetings across
the state saying, for one thing, there wasn't sufficient notice.
But state officials added to the problem in Carson City less than
24 hours before the hearing when they "disinvited" the Department
of Energy, telling them to hold the hearing somewhere other than
the Capitol.
"Because of concerns for crowd control, safety and staffing
needs, we must cancel our authorization for you to use the Old
Supreme Court Chambers in the Nevada state Capitol Building,"
stated the letter from Cultural Affairs interim director Scott
Sisco.
Steve Brocoum, assistant manager of the office of licensing and
regulatory compliance for DOE, said they received that letter
Tuesday night. Those who showed up were greeted by notices on the
front door to the Capitol saying the meeting had been moved to
the Nugget.
Those factors compounded the area's traditionally weak turnout
for events involving Yucca Mountain.
Tuberculosis case at Fritsch Elementary School Nevadans to get
warnings on preparing for terrorist attacks Small turnout for
nuclear dump site hearing in Carson City Storey residents speak
up on Yucca Mountain Bush asks for up to $75 billion stimulus 6
killed in Greyhound bus crash after passenger attacks driver
Convict wins hearing in challenge of trial lawyer's competence
Forward this article to a friendMessage: Your name: Your e-mail
address: To e-mail address:
Copyright Nevada Appeal. Materials contained within this
*****************************************************************
6 SRS again meets goal on radioactive waste
Columbia, S.C.
Thursday, October 4, 2001
AIKEN (AP) -- The Savannah River Site has met its goal for the
fifth year in a row to turn high-level liquid radioactive waste
into glass, officials said Wednesday.
The facility, which formerly made material for nuclear bombs,
poured 227 canisters of liquid radioactive waste in the fiscal
year that ended Sept. 30. Officials had wanted to produce at
least 220 canisters of glassified waste this fiscal year.
About 4.5 million pounds of waste have been glassified since the
program began in 1996. It will take 20 to 25 years to finish
turning the site's high-level inventory into glass, said Dean
Campbell, an SRS spokesman.
The canisters are slated to be shipped and stored underground at
federal repositories.
? Copyright 2001 The State-Record Company
*****************************************************************
7 Operator files to dismantle 1st commercial nuke reactor
KYODO NEWS
Japanese Chinese Members Subscribe 2001/10/05 updated
TOKYO, Oct. 4, Kyodo - Japan Atomic Power Co., which builds and
operates nuclear power plants for electricity utilities, on
Thursday filed with the government to dismantle the first
commercial nuclear reactor in Japan.
The 93 billion yen plan to dismantle the reactor at Tokai Power
Station in the village of Tokai, located in Ibaraki Prefecture
northeast of Tokyo, is scheduled to start Dec. 4, with
dismantling and decommissioning slated for completion in fiscal
2017.
The filing was made with the Ministry of Economy, Trade and
Industry in conformity with the law on nuclear reactor
regulation. The governments of Ibaraki and Tokai were also
notified of the filing, Japan Atomic Power officials said.
Tokai Power Plant started operating the graphite-moderated,
carbon dioxide gas-cooled reactor in 1966 as the first commercial
nuclear power station in Japan.
Unlike more commonly used light-water reactors, the Tokai reactor
was powered by natural uranium, the only such facility in Japan,
and was far less cost-effective than other reactors. The expense
was the reason for its shutdown in 1998.
For the next 10 years, the reactor will remain sealed for
radiation to diminish, according to the officials. In the
meantime, various other nearby facilities such as
fuel-replacement units and heat exchangers will be removed, they
said.
In the seven years after this decade, the reactor and other core
equipment will be dismantled.
Japan Atomic Power estimates 177,000 tons of waste will be
generated in the process. Of this, 18,000 tons will be standard
radioactive material.
So-called ''clearance level'' materials, which emit only minute
amounts of radiation and are normally not classified as
radioactive, will come to an estimated 45,000 tons.
Japan Atomic Power will explore ways to recycle nonradioactive
material, while radioactive materials will be buried at locations
still undetermined, the officials said. Spent Japanese nuclear
fuel has already been shipped to Britain.
The Tokyo-based company has so far set aside 52 billion yen for
dismantling costs, but is considering asking Tokyo Electric Power
Co., which bought power from the station, for financial help.
2001 Kyodo News (c) Established 1945.
*****************************************************************
8 Irish premier vows to battle Blair over Sellafield
Ananova -
The Irish Prime Minister is to contact Tony Blair to demand plans
for a new mox fuel facility at the Sellafield nuclear plant be
scrapped. Bertie Ahern has vowed to fight the British Government
to stop the site producing the radioactive fuel for sale around
the world.
He says there are fears in Ireland that terrorists could attack
nuclear cargoes on the Irish Sea going too and from the plant.
Officials from the two Governments had planned to meet to discuss
the issue, but he said Britain had gone back on its word to wait
until then to make a decision.
"The announcement yesterday to go ahead with the commissioning of
the mox plant is difficult to comprehend on a number of grounds,"
he said.
"In the light of the tragic events we would have expected a new
look at safety and exposure to risk."
He added: "We will continue to do everything we possibly can,
both legally and politically on every front, to stop the British
Government from continuing with the proposals."
Mr Ahern added that the Government would challenge the decision
under European Union and United Nations law if necessary.
He would also seek redress through the Ospar Convention - a group
of North Atlantic countries concerned with maritime issues.
Officials from both Governments will meet on the issue tomorrow
and Mr Ahern intends to contact Mr Blair directly to register his
disapproval.
Story filed: 13:58 Thursday 4th October 2001
Copyright © 2001 Ananova Ltd
*****************************************************************
9 Stupidity of nuclear shipments to Japan
Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian |
Thursday October 4, 2001 The Guardian
It is unspeakably stupid to give BNFL the go-ahead to transport
nuclear explosive material 13,000 miles across open waters to
Japan (Ministers back Mox despite terror fear, October 1). But it
is not surprising, as the Labour leadership has not taken
terrorist threats seriously, despite the rhetoric of the past
three weeks from senior ministers, who seem belatedly to have
woken up to threats.
On Tuesday, the Labour conference was asked to endorse a 120-page
document from the party's national policy forum. It includes 16
pages on Britain in the World, prepared by an "expert" group
including the then foreign secretary, Robin Cook, the defence
secretary, Geoff Hoon, and overseas development secretary Clare
Short. These 16 pages - prepared before September 11 - mention
the word "terrorism" just once in passing in an analysis of
global priorities, demonstrating the low priority given by Labour
leaders to the terrorist threat before the US atrocities.
Some of us were not so complacent. I have made several
submissions on the terrorist dangers posed by the Sellafield Mox
plant to the public consultations held over the past three years.
Now ministers, in the face of the real and present danger of
terrorism, which were set out clearly years before the recent
terrorist outrages, are about to endorse the international trade
in nuclear explosives. I hope they will remain publicly
accountable for their crass actions when the inevitable terrorist
intervention, with predictably appalling consequences, occurs.
Dr David Lowry Stoneleigh, Surrey dlowryrmb@compuserve.com
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001
*****************************************************************
10 NRC Issues Final Rule on Storage of Certain "Greater than Class
C" Waste in an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Facility
Press Release - 2001 - 120 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA
No. 01-120 October 4, 2001
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is publishing
amendments to its regulations to allow storage of
power-reactor-related "greater than Class C" radioactive waste in
an independent spent fuel storage installation or a monitored
retrievable storage installation. The amendments also clarify
that the licensing responsibility for this waste remains under
federal jurisdiction.
"Greater than Class C" waste is a form of low-level
radioactive waste with high enough concentrations of long-lived
radioactive materials that it is generally unsuitable for
near-surface land disposal. It is so named because its
radioactivity exceeds the NRC concentration limits established
for Class C low-level waste, which can be routinely buried in a
low-level waste disposal facility.
Greater than Class C waste at nuclear power plants
includes irradiated metal components from reactors, as well as
filters and resins from reactor operations and decommissioning.
Unlike the other classes of low-level waste which may be disposed
of in near-surface facilities, greater than Class C waste is
generally considered not suitable for near-surface disposal. The
authority to possess this type of radioactive material is
included under the reactor license.
The amendments allow licensing for interim storage of
greater than Class C waste in a manner consistent with licensing
interim storage of spent fuel (high-level radioactive waste) and
would maintain federal jurisdiction for storage of such waste.
This will provide public health and environmental protection in a
manner comparable to that which is currently required for storage
of spent fuel at an independent spent fuel storage installation,
which may be located on or off the reactor site. This rulemaking
also will provide reactor licensees with flexibility in selecting
a regulatory approach to storing reactor-related greater than
Class C waste after termination of their Part 50 license.
The amendments respond to a 1995 petition from the
Portland General Electric Company on storage of greater than
Class C waste from its Trojan nuclear plant in Oregon, which is
in the process of being decommissioned.
The NRC believes the rule change is necessary because (1)
previous requirements did not adequately address storage of
reactor-related greater than Class C waste; (2) there were
jurisdictional issues regarding NRC and Agreement State authority
over reactor-related greater than Class C waste storage
activities; and (3) it will reduce regulatory burden on
licensees, NRC and Agreement States. (Agreement States are states
that have assumed regulatory authority over certain radioactive
material.)
The NRC published a proposed rule on this subject for
comment last June, and made minor changes as a result of the 18
comment letters received.
The amendments will be published shortly in the Federal
Register, and will become effective 30 days after publication.
*****************************************************************
11 Britain OKs Nuclear Fuel Plant
Las Vegas SUN
October 03, 2001
LONDON (AP) - The government Wednesday approved the start of
operations at a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant that has drawn
strong criticism both at home and in Ireland.
Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett and Health Secretary Alan
Milburn said work could begin on the manufacture of mixed oxide
(MOX) fuel in the reprocessing plant at the Sellafield nuclear
site on the coast of the Irish sea in northwest England.
Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace immediately attacked the
decision, saying the transport of plutonium to the plant,
dangerous at any time, was especially worrisome in the days after
the Sept. 11 terror attacks in the United States.
The Irish government, which has routinely voiced concerns about
the operation of the Sellafield complex which is only 150 miles
from the Irish coast, said the British decision "defied logic in
the current climate of international terrorist threats."
The new operation is intended to make mixed oxide fuel from
plutonium and uranium separated from spent fuel derived from the
thermal oxide reprocessing facility already operating at
Sellafield.
The MOX facility was completed in 1996, but the commercial
go-ahead was held up for financial reasons and after the
operators of a MOX demonstration plant at the site admitted to
falsifying records.
A report last year by the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate also
found management incompetence, complacency and a "lack of safety
culture" at Sellafield.
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
12 Mox prompts mixed reaction
BBC News | ENGLAND |
Wednesday, 3 October, 2001, 15:24 GMT 16:24
The Mox fuel plant at Sellafield was built in 1996
The decision to approve the mixed oxide (Mox) plant at Sellafield
has been welcomed and condemned in Cumbria.
The UK plant, which has been mothballed since it was built in
1996, will reprocess used plutonium to make fuel for nuclear
power stations. For those concerned with jobs and the local
economy there was mainly relief that the waiting was over.
If the plant had not been given the go-ahead it would have been
devastating for the economy
John Kane, GMB
But some environmentalists are calling the decision "disgraceful
and dangerous".
Unsurprisingly, for an area dependent on one major employer, the
future of the plant was a major concern.
BNFL said the decision would lead to the creation of about 400
jobs and should secure hundreds of others.
John Kane, a GMB union official at the Sellafield site, said he
was glad the uncertainty was over. "It's a massive boost for the
area," he declared. "In West Cumbria, one in three families have
someone directly employed by BNFL.
Environmental concerns
"If the plant had not been given the go-ahead, it would have been
devastating for the economy.
"We thought if we lost it, it would be the beginning of the end
for Sellafield and the local economy."
Sellafield has been the target of protesters
Less happy with the decision, announced by Environment Secretary
Margaret Beckett, are the pressure groups campaigning against the
use of nuclear power.
Nigel Chamberlain, from CND, said: "The Campaign for Nuclear
Disarmament has employed rational argument for the last three
years to explain why they feel putting plutonium into commercial
trade and transporting it around the world would increase
opportunities for nuclear proliferation.
"Despite detailed submissions to three public consultations,
those concerns have not been addressed by either the government
or BNFL.
"The Sellafield Mox Plant should never have been built in the
first place. "Now, West Cumbria has been saddled with another
white elephant which will result in yet more highly radioactive
spent fuel being shipped back to Cumbria."
'Terrorist target'
Safety concerns triggered by the US terror attacks are also an
issue for one Cumbrian pressure group.
To start producing plutonium fuel in larger quantities is a
dangerous decision
Martin Forwood, Core
Martin Forwood, from Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive
Environment (Core), said: "After the US events, it is not only a
disgraceful decision but a dangerous one.
"By opening the plant, BNFL's plutonium will be shipped across to
Japan and Europe and I think it is highly possible that the
shipments from Sellafield will be a target for terrorists.
"To start producing plutonium fuel in larger quantities is a
dangerous decision.
But in the village of Gosforth, just three miles (five
kilometres) down the road from the plant, concern is more about
jobs than terrorist attacks. 'Good for the area'
David Grey, a parish councillor and district councillor for
Gosforth, said "I'm delighted. It's a long-awaited decision.
Economically, it will be very good for the area. Any news like
this is good for BNFL and good for local people.
"I've never heard any dissent from anyone I've spoken to in the
area about the plant. It means a lot for jobs locally."
The leader of Copeland Borough Council. Robin Simpson, echoed
those views. "The announcement is warmly welcomed and good news
for Copeland," he said.
"After a rigorous assessment several years ago, government gave
approval that the Mox plant be constructed.
"Our community built the plant, workers have been trained to
operate it, setbacks have been experienced but overcome by
management and workers, and the Mox plant is now ready in all
respects to go.
"As regards the future, the Secretary of State is right to
realise that on a national basis the plant helps reduce the
plutonium stockpile and makes a contribution to energy needs."
*****************************************************************
13 Sellafield wins fight to open spent fuel plant
The Times
THURSDAY OCTOBER 04 2001
BY MARK HENDERSON, SCIENCE CORRESPONDENT
A NUCLEAR fuel plant at Sellafield was cleared by the
Government yesterday to begin operating, securing 1,800 jobs but
angering environmental groups.
The joint announcement by Margaret Beckett, the Environment
Secretary, and Alan Milburn, the Health Secretary, means that
manufacture of mixed oxide (mox) fuel will be able to begin at
the reprocessing plant in Cumbria for the first time since it
became operational five years ago.
Although it has been ready since 1996, the plant has stood idle
during five public consultations and a review of its financial
viability. Its future was in further doubt last year when BNFL,
the operating company, was found to have falsified information
about a fuel shipment to Japan.
The plant is designed to convert spent uranium and plutonium fuel
rods from nuclear reactors into a new kind of fuel — a mixture of
the oxides of both metals. The nuclear industry believes that
such recycling will reduce the world’s growing stockpile of
radioactive and toxic plutonium, with benefits for public safety
and the environment.
Anti-nuclear campaigners oppose the mox plant, arguing that it
presents environmental and security risks and that it is not
economically viable. Yesterday Mrs Beckett said that the
Government had been persuaded there was a sufficient market for
the fuel to justify approval of the plant and that it should
begin operations. The manufacture of mox fuel was also justified
under European law, she said.
Of the 9,000 or so responses received in the five consultations,
about 7,000 were in favour of the plant and about 2,000 were
against.
Norman Askew, BNFL’s chief executive, said: “Our customers have
been extremely patient with us and we can now get on with the
business of manufacturing fuel for them.”
Sir Ken Jackson, general secretary of the Amalgamated Engineering
and Electrical Union, said that it would guarantee jobs in the
region.
Green activists were dismayed. Charles Secrett, Friends of the
Earth’s director, said: “It beggars belief that the Government
can give the go-ahead to a process involving the use and
transportation of plutonium that could be used to make weapons.
Producing mox at Sellafield will make the world a less safe
place.”
The Irish Government last night pledged to pursue its legal
challenge against Britain over the new plant. Joe Jacob, the
Irish minister with responsibility for nuclear safety, said the
decision “defied logic in the current climate of international
terrorist threats”.
Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided
*****************************************************************
14 Nuclear plant gets go-ahead
BBC News | SCI/TECH |
Wednesday, 3 October, 2001, 15:31
[Mox AFP]
Critics doubt there is a market for Mox
Sellafield's new mixed oxide (Mox) plant has been given the
commercial go-ahead despite environmentalists' protests.
They say the decision is unlawful and fear that the UK plant will
become a target for terrorists.
Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett's decision on the £460m
fuel fabrication facility in Cumbria will secure its immediate
future.
I'm delighted for the people at BNFL who've put in a lot of work
of the years to get us to this point
Norman Askew, BNFL chief executive
The plant processes Mox, a blend of plutonium and uranium that
has been extracted from the spent fuel rods already "burnt" in
reactors.
The nuclear industry believes that recycling the used fuel and
turning it into Mox can help reduce the world's growing stockpile
of plutonium, one of the most toxic substances known to
humankind.
The plant was completed in 1996, but permission for commercial
operation was withheld because of concerns over finances and data
falsification.
But critics fear in the wake of the US atrocities, terrorists may
attempt to intercept or blow up shipments of Mox.
BNFL delight
They believe it would be safer to leave the plutonium in spent
fuel and keep it in storage tanks, rather than transport it
around the world with the potential for an accident.
But Norman Askew, chief executive of British Nuclear Fuels
Limited (BNFL), the site's operators, expressed delight at the
news that will be crucial to the future of his company.
The approval was announced on the Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) website, and confirmed by the
Environment Secretary, Margaret Beckett, who was in Brighton for
the Labour Party conference.
Mox has been made at Sellafield since 1993
Mrs Beckett said she and the Health Secretary Alan Milburn
thought the manufacture of Mox fuel "is justified" in line with
European Community law.
Mr Askew said: "I'm delighted for the people at BNFL who've put
in a lot of work over the years to get us to this point, and I'm
delighted for our customers," he told the BBC.
"It's very good news for them because they've supported us
through this period and are ready to do business with us."
'Management failures'
BNFL was at the centre of a major international row last year
when then chief executive John Taylor was forced to resign
following a damning report from the Nuclear Installations
Inspectorate.
The agency accused the company of "systematic management
failures", which allowed data on the quality of Mox fuel destined
for Japan to be falsified. The row was a severe blow to the
commercial standing of BNFL and, as a result, several countries
stopped sending spent fuel to Sellafield for reprocessing.
Commentators at the time doubted whether the new plant would have
a viable commercial future - even if government approval was
obtained.
Terror concern
But consultants say the plant's operation will be worth £150m to
the UK over its lifetime. The company also points to the feedback
that came from five consultations on the plant's future. Of the
9,000 responses received, 7,000 supported the facility's
approval, BNFL said.
The green lobby argues that nuclear power has no future - it
accuses Sellafield of polluting the Irish Sea - and that Mox
creates new environmental and security risks.
Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace slammed Wednesday's decision,
claiming it was "unlawful".
Greenpeace said it was dangerously irresponsible to launch an
expansion of the international plutonium trade when the threat
from terrorists was still unknown and out of control.
Charles Secrett, director of Friends of the Earth, said the
decision beggared belief.
"Yesterday, Tony Blair talked of the need for international
action to build a safer global community. Today, his government
does the reverse. This isn't joined-up government. It's unhinged
government."
Green Party MEP Nuala Ahern, from Leinster, Ireland, denounced
the decision as "inviting terrorists to go nuclear".
"The centre of this insanity is Sellafield, from where hundreds
of shipments of the deadly nuclear explosive plutonium are about
to be sent thousands of miles across the high seas," she said.
"We are now all in grave danger from radiological sabotage, or an
attack on shipments from Sellafield. Producing Mox at Sellafield
will make the world a less safe place."
BNFL's Norman Askew "The decision is good news for our customers"
Mark Johnston, Greenpeace "The government will have to defend
this decision in the High Court"
The BBC's Fergus Walsh "It will safeguard 300 jobs at the planet"
*****************************************************************
15 House panel OKs bill on security for nuclear plants, waste
[Las Vegas Review-Journal]
Thursday, October 04, 2001
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
Measure calls for armed escorts to guard shipments of spent fuel
By STEVE TETREAULT
DONREY WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- A House committee Wednesday approved a bill that
directs the government to pull its security blanket tighter over
commercial nuclear plants and spent-fuel storage, including a
proposed repository at Yucca Mountain.
The legislation urges the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to devise
new rules requiring armed escorts for all spent-fuel shipments
and requiring inspections that would take place at a repository
and other facilities at least once every two years.
Also, the measure would expand the law on sabotage involving
nuclear materials to cover acts committed at a spent-fuel
repository, nuclear waste treatment plants and fuel enrichment
facilities.
The penalty for conviction of nuclear sabotage would be increased
to $1 million or life in prison without parole.
A committee spokesman said the bill would cover acts committed
during the transportation of nuclear waste.
The actions by the House Energy and Commerce Committee came as
panels on Capitol Hill are developing anti-terrorist legislation
that will be incorporated into a single bill and brought before
Congress.
The NRC had requested legislation giving nuclear plants more
authority to arm guards and control weapons brought onto the
premises, but committee member Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., offered
what he said were more substantial safeguards.
One amendment would direct the NRC to upgrade its sabotage
scenario, which licensees are required to defend against.
Markey said current rules envision small groups of attackers who
would not be willing to kill themselves in the course of
committing sabotage, characteristics that run counter to what was
demonstrated in the Sept. 11 attacks on New York City and
Washington.
"More realistic rules should be in the books," Markey said.
Under his amendment, nuclear plants would be required to have
protections against at least 20 intruders wielding explosive
devices and not afraid to die using them.
For nuclear waste shipments, "regulations shall require armed
escorts, capable of repelling attacks by a large number of
attackers working as several coordinated teams and using
sophisticated techniques and equipment," according to the
amendment.
Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, objected to requiring armed escorts for
nuclear waste. He said it would be packed in canisters strong
enough "to withstand a locomotive crash or sustained fire."
"You're going to have to have an armed battalion with every spent
fuel shipment that goes anywhere in this country," he said. "Do
we really want to do that? I don't think so."
Energy Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin, R-La., argued against the
Markey amendment and said it was premature because the NRC was
conducting its own threat study.
When it appeared that committee members were about to approve the
legislation over his objections, an angry Tauzin said he would
rewrite the bill before it reached the House floor to ensure it
would not hamper the NRC's efforts.
Another Markey amendment, requiring federal background checks of
anyone seeking a driver's license to transport nuclear waste, was
set aside to be redrafted.
Markey withdrew another amendment that would have allowed the
president to declare "no fly zones" over nuclear plants and to
station National Guard troops at utilities in emergencies.
Barton argued the president already has that authority and it may
complicate state emergency planning.
Rep. Christopher Cox, R-Calif., said Congress should take a
broader look at nuclear power security.
It may turn out, he said, that the government may need to take
over some management of nuclear power and the nation's
electricity grid in the same way it is moving to assert more
control over airport security.
This story is located at:
http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/Oct-04-Thu-2001/news/17144902.html
*****************************************************************
16 Security measures close lakes near nuclear power plant, energy center
"The Star"
The Associated Press
Date: 10/01/01 10:44
BURLINGTON, Kan. -- Security concerns that have swept the
country since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks have even touched
fishing and hunting spots in Kansas.
Coffey County Lake is closed until further notice because it is
located next to the Wolf Creek Nuclear Power Plant, which some
consider a potential terrorist target. The popular hunting and
fishing grounds around the Jeffrey Energy Center near St. Marys
also are closed, even though the plant is not nuclear-powered.
"I totally understand why it was done, and I'm supportive of what
took place," said Clyde Holscher, a guide from Topeka who often
fishes at Coffey County Lake.
"It's just that I never imagined that fishermen in Kansas would
ever be affected by something like terrorism," he said.
Officials emphasize that the outdoors areas are safe and unlikely
to ever be hit by terrorists.
"We know we are coming into prime fishing time at Coffey County
Lake and that closing the lake hurts," said Coffey County Sheriff
Randy Rogers, who oversees the lake's recreation program. "But we
felt we had to do this as a precautionary move to give people
peace of mind."
Normally, fishermen can get close to the nuclear power plant in
their boats. Rogers said that presented several potential
problems.
"People are so jittery right now that there was always the
possibility of some false alarms," Rogers said. "They might see a
boat up there, think someone is up to something and call in or
get into confrontations."
Rogers is confident the nuclear reactor was constructed to guard
against terrorist strikes. He said the bigger threat is someone
trying to disrupt power service.
That's one of the reasons public access will probably remain
restricted for at least several weeks.
"My guess would be four to six weeks," Rogers said, "but it might
be longer than that."
Officials at the Jeffrey Energy Center also restricted recreation
in part because of concerns about power being disrupted, although
no threats have been received.
"Many people enjoy fishing and hunting on plant grounds, and we
are working with the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks to
determine how and when we can safely reopen the area," said Dave
Neufield, executive director at the energy center.
He said no target date has been set for reopening the grounds.
All content © 2001 The Kansas City Star
*****************************************************************
17 State kicks DOE out of hearing site
Las Vegas SUN
Today: October 04, 2001 at 9:55:19 PDT
SUN CAPITAL BUREAU
CARSON CITY -- A state official who opposes the Yucca Mountain
project barred the Department of Energy from hosting a public
hearing at the Capitol regarding the proposed nuclear waste
repository.
Scott Sisco, acting director of the state Cultural Affairs
Department, which has authority over the historic and tiny
Supreme Court chambers, said in a letter to the DOE on Tuesday
that he was canceling authorization to use the room, which is on
the second floor of the Capitol.
"We do not feel the space would be an appropriate venue for
these hearings in light of the potential size of the audience,
the workload for Capitol Police and the proximity of the offices
of our constitutional officers," Sisco said.
Sisco said he was concerned about crowd control and safety
issues.
"We were disinvited," said Steve Brocoum, assistant manager of
the office of license and regulatory compliance for the Energy
Department.
The action to bar the DOE was taken on the advice and with the
consent of the office of Gov. Kenny Guinn. Michael Hillerby,
assistant chief of staff for Guinn, said Sisco called the
governor's office for assistance. Hillerby said the governor's
office recommended against holding the hearing in the small room
and agreed with Sisco.
The hearing was moved to a second floor meeting room in Carson
City's Nugget casino, and only a handful of people showed up
during the first hour of the hearing.
Jim Roberts, a retired University of Nevada, Reno, professor,
testified in favor of opening Yucca Mountain, saying that 77,000
tons of nuclear waste is now stored at about 70 sites around the
country.
These locations, he said, "are poorly protected against
terrorism. A central storage of spent fuel rods would provide far
fewer terrorist targets, and the central storage could be more
easily protected.
"Decentralization of nuclear waste increases our vulnerability
to accidents and sabotage," he said.
Herman Mende of Carson City said the dump would become a major
target for terrorists, adding that an explosion would mean the
release of radiation, which would be active 300 to 400 years.
Referring to nuclear waste, Mende, said, "It's the dirty little
dog you can't clean up. You can't clean up after it."
Ed Silsby of Carson City suggested that the nuclear waste be
dumped on Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. He said, "Forty nine
other states want to dump on Nevada." And he said he would lie
across the road to stop shipments of nuclear waste.
Six teams of Energy Department officials and consultants will
conduct public hearings concerning the repository during the next
couple of weeks.
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
18 Daily Events Report
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Operations Center
Event Reports For
10/03/2001 10/04/2001
** EVENT NUMBERS **
38342 38343 38344 38345
Other Nuclear Material Event Number: 38342
REP ORG: STERIGENICS NOTIFICATION DATE: 10/03/2001
LICENSEE: STERIGENICS NOTIFICATION TIME: 13:10[EDT]
CITY: ROCKAWAY REGION: 1 EVENT DATE: 10/02/2001
COUNTY: MORRIS STATE: NJ EVENT TIME: 23:59[EDT]
LICENSE#: 29 30308 01 AGREEMENT: N LAST UPDATE DATE: 10/03/2001
DOCKET:
PERSON ORGANIZATION
RICHARD CONTE R1
FRED BROWN NMSS
JOSEPH HOLONICH IRO
NRC NOTIFIED BY: STANLEY YAP
HQ OPS OFFICER: LEIGH TROCINE
EMERGENCY CLASS: NON EMERGENCY
10 CFR SECTION:
MAAA 36.83(a)(1) UNSHIELD STUCK SOURCE
EVENT TEXT
COMMERCIAL IRRADIATOR FACILITY REPORT REGARDING A SOURCE HANG UP
Sterigenics is a panoramic, wet source storage, commercial,
irradiator facility. At approximately midnight on 10/02/01, a
2.6 megacurie cobalt 60 source got stuck in the unshielded
position for approximately 1 hour. Because the source got stuck
on the way down, the licensee lifted the source rack, freed it,
and successfully returned it to the shielded position. The
licensee is still investigating the cause of this event but
stated that there were no obvious reasons at this time. There
were no personnel radiation exposures or injuries as a result of
this event, and there was no source leakage.
(Call the NRC operations officer for a site contact telephone number.)
General Information or Other Event Number: 38343
REP ORG: SORRENTO ELECTRONICS NOTIFICATION DATE: 10/03/2001
LICENSEE: SORRENTO ELECTRONICS NOTIFICATION TIME: 16:12[EDT]
CITY: SAN DIEGO REGION: 4 EVENT DATE: 10/03/2001
COUNTY: STATE: CA EVENT TIME: [PDT]
LICENSE#: AGREEMENT: Y LAST UPDATE DATE: 10/03/2001
DOCKET:
PERSON ORGANIZATION
CLAUDE JOHNSON R4
RICHARD CONTE R1
KEVIN RAMSEY, MOB NMSS
NRC NOTIFIED BY: DIRK KOOPMAN
HQ OPS OFFICER: LEIGH TROCINE
EMERGENCY CLASS: NON EMERGENCY
10 CFR SECTION:
CCCC 21.21 UNSPECIFIED PARAGRAPH
EVENT TEXT
10 CFR PART 21 NOTIFICATION REGARDING MICROPROCESSOR BASED
RADIATION MONITOR RM 2000
The following text is portion of a facsimile received from
Sorrento Electronics:
"The information following is in accordance with the reporting
requirements of 10 CFR 21.21(d)(4):"
"ii) Identification of the basic component which contains the
defect: The basic component which contains the defect is
software version 16.0 and higher of the microprocessor based
radiation monitor, RM 2000, with the 'SAVE MASTER DATABASE'
function, where the master database has been restored at least
once."
"iii) Identification of the firm supplying the basic component:
Sorrento Electronics, Inc. [...]"
"iv) Nature of the defect and the safety hazard which is
created by the defect: The defect was noted at Sorrento
Electronics following a power up on a RM 2000 skid, where the
detectors had been detached while the monitor was powered down.
When the monitor was powered up, the channels associated with the
detectors continued to indicate a green operate status rather
than indicating a NO PULSES operate failure condition. Further
interrogation of the database revealed the monitor was not
responding to taking the channel in and out of service or to
changing the alarm status. The monitor showed a constant
radiation on the channel display. The affected channels would
not return to a normal operating condition until the detector was
reconnected."
"This failure will cause the RM 2000 to not process the
following tasks associated with the affected channel:
1. Temperature correction
2. Tracking algorithm
3. No pulses
4. Display checksource value
5. Over range
6. Background subtract
7. Pressure correction
8. Limit to minimum value
9. Display current count rate
10. Limit to maximum value
11. Perform checksource
12. Channel in service
13. Check alarms
14. Reset alarms after power failure"
"v) Date on which the information was obtained: The
information was noted on software discrepancy notice, (SDN 545),
on August 14, 2001, for review of possible 10 CFR [Part] 21
implications. Evaluation by [Sorrento Electronics'] engineering
of the problem for 10 CFR [Part] 21 applicability was immediately
begun. The evaluation was completed and declared reportable on
October 1, 2001."
"vi) The number and location of the components subject to the
regulations per 10 CFR [Part] 21: The following safety related
equipment is affected:
PLANT RADIATION MONITOR ASSEMBLY NUMBER RM 2000
VERSION
Salem (PG & E) 04231701 001, S/N: 001 (Gas Monitor)
16.6
Salem (PG & E) 04233101 001, S/N: 001 (Duct Monitor)
16.6
Salem (PG & E) 04231201 001, S/N: 001 (Particulate Iodine Gas Monitor)
16.6
"vii) Name of the implementing organization and time frame for
implementing the corrective action: The responsibility for the
implementing the corrective action has been delegated to [...]
RMS Engineering. Sorrento Electronics will make the individual
purchasers aware of this possible problem. Further, the RM 2000
operating code will be revised to correct the deficiency. The
new corrected version of the RM 2000 code will be available to
customers after November 1, 2001."
"viii) Advise related to the defect that will be given to the
purchasers: While this defect is not likely to occur during
normal operation at a nuclear power plant, it is possible.
Therefore, Sorrento Electronics will advise the affected
purchasers via a Quality Bulletin of the following interim test
procedure to verify operability of the affected RM 2000:"
"There are two methods to verify that a RM 2000 has not failed
after a power fail sequence. First, if the radiation value being
displayed is changing, the monitor is operating correctly.
Second, if the radiation value is not changing, then the user
should remove the monitor from operation by taking a channel out
of service by database manipulation. If the channel goes into a
operate fail condition, the RM 2000 is working correctly and the
channel can be returned to service. If the monitor does not go
into an operate fail condition, the monitor has failed and is not
receiving any pulses from the associated detector."
(Call the NRC operations officer for reporting organization
contact information.)
Power Reactor Event Number: 38344
FACILITY: GRAND GULF REGION: 4 NOTIFICATION DATE: 10/03/2001
UNIT: [1] [] [] STATE: MS NOTIFICATION TIME: 16:28[EDT]
RXTYPE: [1] GE 6 EVENT DATE: 10/03/2001
EVENT TIME: 13:00[CDT]
NRC NOTIFIED BY: BOB CARROLL LAST UPDATE DATE: 10/03/2001
HQ OPS OFFICER: LEIGH TROCINE
PERSON ORGANIZATION
EMERGENCY CLASS: NON EMERGENCY CLAUDE JOHNSON R4
10 CFR SECTION:
NONR OTHER UNSPEC REQMNT
UNIT SCRAM CODERX CRITINIT PWR INIT RX MODE CURR PWR CURR RX MODE
1 N Y 100 Power Operation 100 Power Operation
EVENT TEXT
24 HOUR REPORT REGARDING AN OPERATING LICENSE CONDITION
VIOLATION (POTENTIAL MAXIMUM POWER LEVEL VIOLATION)
The following text is a portion of a facsimile received from the
licensee:
"This report is made as required by Grand Gulf Nuclear Station
License Condition 2F. Grand Gulf is reporting a potential
violation of the maximum power level of 3833 MWT as stated in
Licensee Condition 2.C.1."
"This event is similar to event number 38337 and 38340 called in
by two other BWR plants. Based on the General Electric (GE)
report titled, 'Impact of Steam Generator Carryover Fraction on
Process Computer Heat Balance Calculations, September 2001.' It
is possible that Grand Gulf [may] have exceeded the maximum power
level on some occasions in the past by about 3 MWT. The plant
has reduced the 100% power limit by 3 MWT until the Heat Balance
Equation can be corrected."
The licensee notified the NRC resident inspector.
(Refer to event #38330 for a similar event at Fermi, event
#38337 for a similar event at Perry, event #38340 for a similar
event at Hope Creek, and #38445 for a similar event at Columbia
Generating Station.)
Power Reactor Event Number: 38345
FACILITY: COLUMBIA GENERATING STATIREGION: 4 NOTIFICATION DATE: 10/03/2001
UNIT: [2] [] [] STATE: WA NOTIFICATION TIME: 18:50[EDT]
RXTYPE: [2] GE 5 EVENT DATE: 10/02/2001
EVENT TIME: 16:37[PDT]
NRC NOTIFIED BY: DAVE BROWN LAST UPDATE DATE: 10/03/2001
HQ OPS OFFICER: LEIGH TROCINE
PERSON ORGANIZATION
EMERGENCY CLASS: NON EMERGENCY CLAUDE JOHNSON R4
10 CFR SECTION:
NONR OTHER UNSPEC REQMNT
UNIT SCRAM CODERX CRITINIT PWR INIT RX MODE CURR PWR CURR RX MODE
2 N Y 100 Power Operation 100 Power Operation
EVENT TEXT
24 HOUR REPORT REGARDING AN OPERATING LICENSE CONDITION
VIOLATION (POTENTIAL MAXIMUM POWER LEVEL VIOLATION)
The following text is a portion of a facsimile received from the
licensee:
"General Electric (GE) report titled, 'Impact of Steam Carryover
Fraction on Process Computer Heat Balance Calculation, September
2001,' documents a non conservative constant for moisture
carryover fraction in the equation used to calculate plant heat
balance. The report states that a number of later model GE BWR
plants report carryover fractions of less than 0.003%. Currently,
Columbia Generating Station uses 0.1% for the carryover term in
the calculation as directed by the GE design specifications. Use
of the 0.1% term in the heat balance calculation may have
resulted in Columbia Generating Station exceeding the maximum
core thermal power value of 3486 MWt specified in license
condition 2.C(1) by approximately 2.83 MWt or 0.08% Rated Thermal
Power. As a compensatory measure until this issue is resolved,
Columbia Generating Station will adopt a conservative value of
0.0% for the moisture carryover term in the plant heat balance
calculation. Consequently, the Plant Process Computer eight hour
average core thermal power is currently being administratively
controlled at less than or equal to 3482 MWt."
"The Columbia Generating Station Operating License (NPF 21)
contains a requirement to report a violation of this license
condition to the NRC Regional Administrator or the Administrators
designee. The NRC Region IV Regional Administrator's designee,
Mr. William Jones, has been informed of this condition."
The licensee notified the NRC resident inspector.
(Refer to event #38330 for a similar event at Fermi, event
#38337 for a similar event at Perry, event #38340 for a similar
event at Hope Creek, and #38444 for a similar event at Grand
Gulf.)
*****************************************************************
19 Forest fires threaten Russian nuclear waste site
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Oct 3, 2001
Forest fires are threatening a radioactive waste burial site in
the Khabarovsk region in Russia's Siberia, Russian NTV reported
on Wednesday.
There are now 35 forest fires in the area and the Rodon
enterprise, where radioactive waste is stored, is situated in the
danger zone, the television said.
Emergencies Ministry official told the channel that over 100
troops and cadets were helping to fight the fires.
Source: NTV, Moscow, in Russian 1500 gmt 3 Oct 01 /BBC
Monitoring/ © BBC.
World Reporter All Material Subject to Copyright
*****************************************************************
20 Sellafield move may cause legal battle
ireland.com - The Irish Times - IRELAND
Thursday, October 4, 2001
By Rachel Donnelly, in London
Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are considering legal action
to overturn a decision by the British government to approve
operations at a mixed oxide fuel plant at Sellafield, in Cumbria.
The Environment Secretary, Mrs Margaret Beckett, and the Health
Secretary, Mr Alan Milburn, announced yesterday that British
Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) could go ahead with the manufacture of
mixed oxide fuel (MOX), which is burnt by nuclear reactors, at
the £473 million sterling plant.
The decision was immediately condemned as "outrageous" by
environmental campaigners Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth who
said shipping the fuel ( a mixture of uranium and plutonium)
around the world increased the risk of a terrorist attack. Both
groups indicated they would consider an application for legal
review of the decision, possibly within the next few days.
Mrs Beckett said the public consultation process over the past
four years was "exhaustive". In addition to evaluating the
economic case for MOX fuel, she said the government had
considered the wider risks and benefits involved and had
concluded that manufacturing the fuel was "justified" and met
European environmental and safety standards.
Unions welcomed the decision, saying it would secure the jobs of
300 employees at the plant, and BNFL's chief executive, Mr Norman
Askew, said he was "highly delighted".
It would enable the Mox plant to begin manufacturing the fuel and
"repay the commitment" shown by BNFL's customers, he said.
Production is expected to commence in about ten weeks' time,
following consent from the Health and Safety Executive.
The company is awaiting a decision by Japan as to whether it will
go ahead with its order for MOX fuel.
A BNFL spokesman told The Irish Times that the potential of a
terrorist attack was taken into consideration as part of its
safety contingency plans.
"No stone is left unturned," the spokesman said, adding that all
fuel shipments had to comply with safety regulations set down by
the maritime authorities and the nuclear industry watchdog, the
Nuclear Installations Inspectorate.
However, opponents of the MOX plant, which was completed in 1996
but mothballed while five public consultations took place,
insisted that fuel shipments could become the target of terrorist
attack, particularly in the wake of the atrocities in the US.
The executive director of Greenpeace in Britain, Mr Stephen
Tindale, said expanding the global trade in plutonium was
"dangerously irresponsible", particularly when Mr Blair had
spoken after the US attacks about the potential for terrorists to
strike using chemical or nuclear weapons.
"Other countries like Germany, Japan and the US are now halting
nuclear transports and stepping up security at nuclear sites," he
said.
"Yet the government here seems as ever hell-bent on supporting
BNFL at any cost, even if that means plutonium shipments bobbing
about like sitting ducks on the high seas.
"The on-board weaponry of these ships is no match for a
determined terrorist."
*****************************************************************
21 MOX plant set up in 1996
ireland.com - The Irish Times - IRELAND
Thursday, October 4, 2001
By Dick Ahlstrom, Science Editor
BNFL's MOX plant was built in 1996 but has only run on a pilot
basis so far. It is one of a number of production and
reprocessing plants operated by the company at its Sellafield
site in Cumbria. The new facility is a fuel processing plant that
produces mixed oxide (MOX) pellets for nuclear reactors by
combining highly toxic plutonium with uranium.
Much of the raw materials for this come from the nearby THORP
plant, also at Sellafield, where spent reactor fuel rods are
melted down in nitric acid. This separates the materials so some
of the plutonium and uranium can be recovered. This in turn is
processed back into uranium fuel rods and MOX pellets as fresh
reactor fuel.
THORP has been in production for some time and discharges
radioactive waste into the Irish Sea. The MOX plant in full
production would also produce both solid and liquid wastes, some
of which would be discharged into the sea.
*****************************************************************
22 Campaigners to wage long fight against BNFL
ireland.com - The Irish Times - IRELAND
Thursday, October 4, 2001
Anti-nuclear campaigners are adding the prospect of terrorist
attacks to their environmental concerns, writes Rachel Donnelly,
in London
Over the next few days, lawyers acting for the environmental
campaigners, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, will closely
examine the detail of the British government's decision to give
the green light to mixed oxide fuel production at Sellafield.
The MOX plant was completed in 1996, but it has never carried
out the purpose for which it was designed - mixing plutonium and
uranium to produce fuel for nuclear reactors.
The British government held five public consultations before
yesterday's decision to allow British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) to
bring the plant into service. But as the executive director of
Greenpeace, Mr Stephen Tindale, hinted at the possibility of a
legal challenge, he said the British government's decision was
not the end of the MOX controversy, "in reality it is just the
beginning".
His words may be pre-emptive, for some observers believe the
British government has been very careful in the wording of its
decision, with the aim being to see off any legal challenge by
the environmentalists.
The Irish Government is also considering its legal options - it
has already launched a challenge to the Mox plant, which is in
arbitration under the OSPAR convention - an agreement between 14
North Atlantic states relating to pollution and discharges into
the marine environment. The Government is now considering other
legal options under EU or UN law - with a challenge before the
European Court seen as the most likely option.
As the lawyers on both sides of the Irish Sea consider their
next move, BNFL will be hoping that any legal challenge comes to
nothing and that it can finally begin fuel production securing
lucrative oversees contracts, principally from Japan and Europe.
It would also raise the company's profile - it reported pre-tax
losses of more £210 million sterling in its 2001 annual report -
and help it overcome the damaging publicity generated by its
admission in 1999 that workers fabricated safety data for a
demonstration batch of mixed oxide fuel destined for Japan.
Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth believe the case for opening
the mixed oxide fuel plant at Sellafield is far from conclusive.
Apart from environmental concerns, which are shared in Ireland,
it believes that in the light of the terrorist attacks in the US,
shipping large consignments of plutonium-based fuel around the
world is highly dangerous.
Greenpeace insists it is not just the fact of the terrorist
attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon that have
helped its case - plutonium is already used around the world -
but the increased potential for environmental accidents and
terrorist incidents presented by mixed oxide fuel shipments.
Irish concern will focus on the movement of these shipments
through the Irish Sea and the risk that they could face terrorist
attack. Irish politicians and environmentalists also warned of
the risk of accident or attack on the plant itself and pointed to
the likelihood of increased discharges into the Irish Sea.
Environmentalists also point out that at a conference of the
watchdog on atomic energy (the International Atomic Energy
Agency) in Vienna last month, industry analysts warned that
Sellafield and the nuclear reprocessing plant at Cap de la Hague,
in France, could be terrorist targets.
"What are very big risks are the huge tanks of very, very
radioactive liquid stored in reprocessing plants," said Dr Frank
Barnaby, a nuclear physicist working for the Oxford Research
Group.
"They contain a huge amount of radioactivity and are less well
protected than reactors." For its part, BNFL says its reactors
and reprocessing plants are "extremely robust" and can withstand
accidents, including plane crashes. It also says that any mixed
oxide fuel shipments must comply with maritime and Nuclear
Installations Inspectorate rules before they can leave the
Cumbrian plant.
Among the many arguments for and against the Sellafield plant,
about 300 jobs at the plant will be safeguarded. But in reality
the jobs are not guaranteed until legal action, or possibly a
European review of the decision, has been played out.
*****************************************************************
23 SRS again meets goal on radioactive waste
Columbia, S.C.
Thursday, October 4, 2001
AIKEN (AP) -- The Savannah River Site has met its goal for the
fifth year in a row to turn high-level liquid radioactive waste
into glass, officials said Wednesday.
The facility, which formerly made material for nuclear bombs,
poured 227 canisters of liquid radioactive waste in the fiscal
year that ended Sept. 30. Officials had wanted to produce at
least 220 canisters of glassified waste this fiscal year.
About 4.5 million pounds of waste have been glassified since the
program began in 1996. It will take 20 to 25 years to finish
turning the site's high-level inventory into glass, said Dean
Campbell, an SRS spokesman.
The canisters are slated to be shipped and stored underground at
federal repositories.
? Copyright 2001 The State-Record Company
*****************************************************************
24 Pickering nukes a 'real risk'
Thursday, October 4, 2001
By STEPHANIE RUBEC, OTTAWA BUREAU
OTTAWA -- Nuclear opponents urged federal regulators yesterday to
protect Toronto-area residents from a nuclear meltdown by turning
down a request to re-open Pickering's A reactors.
Irene Kock, researcher for the Sierra Club of Canada, said that
at 30 years old, the reactors can no longer be safely operated.
"Severe nuclear accidents at Pickering are a real risk to the
entire Great Lakes basin," Kock warned. "Many things could lead
to a catastrophic accident, including terrorism, aging equipment,
human error and earthquakes."
But Ontario Power Generation noted residents would benefit if the
power plant is re-opened by reduced smog levels and new jobs.
The reactors are also getting a $1-billion facelift that will put
the plant on the same level as more modern ones, OPG said.
The Nuclear Safety Commission is expected to deliberate for
several weeks before deciding on the Pickering reactors' fate.
Previous story: Banks cut off Alliance Next story: Israeli tanks
reply to raid
Copyright © 2001, CANOE Limited Partnership. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
25 Russia to resume building Ural nuclear plant in 2004 after two
decades on hold
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Oct 3, 2001
Text of report in English by Russian news agency Interfax
Chelyabinsk, 3 October: The construction of the South Urals
nuclear power plant, which was phased out in 1987-1989, will be
resumed in 2004 rather than in 2005, as was originally planned,
General Director of the plant Vladimir Morozov has told Interfax.
The construction will be financed completely from the federal
budget, and its resumption was pushed forward after the Russian
Atomic Ministry amended the programme of the development of the
atomic industry sphere for the period up to 2015, the general
director said.
At the same time, Morozov noted, the exact amount of funds to
finance the construction of the nuclear plant has not been
defined yet. According to the Atomic Ministry's programme, the
federal budget-2004 will earmark R1.5bn for construction
operations at six nuclear power plants in Russia, including the
South Urals plant.
The South Urals nuclear plant is to be put into operation before
2015, Morozov said. The midterm programme up to 2005 envisions
the commissioning of the Kursk and Kalinin nuclear power plants.
The South Urals nuclear plant is to consist of three 800-mWt
power units. The projected cost of the construction of the first
unit is R2.828bn in 1991 prices, and an estimated cost of
building each of the following two units is R1bn.
Source: Interfax news agency, Moscow, in English 1343 gmt 3 Oct
01 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to
*****************************************************************
26 Fury over Sellafield plutonium decision
Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian |
Paul Brown, environment correspondent
Thursday October 4, 2001
The Guardian
After four years of dithering, the government gave the go-ahead
to the £472m plutonium fuel plant at Sellafield, Cumbria,
yesterday, a decision immediately condemned by environmental
groups but welcomed by the owner, British Nuclear Fuels.
The decision safeguards 1,600 jobs at Sellafield and begins a
worldwide trade in the plutonium based fuel MOX.
Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace were both consulting lawyers
last night and are expected to take on the government in the high
court to get the decision overturned on the grounds that the
plant can never be economically viable - which it must be under
European law to justify the radioactive discharges from the
plant.
But the strongest condemnation of the decision came from people
who fear that the worldwide trade in plutonium which will get
under way when the plant is operational represents an
unacceptable terrorist threat.
The MOX plant, as it is known, takes plutonium and uranium from
spent nuclear fuel and mixes it into pellets to make new fuel for
reactors. It is built on the end of the troubled £1.6bn Thorp
reprocessing plant at Sellafield, which dissolves used fuel from
British, Japanese, German and Swiss reactors and is itself
running behind schedule.
British Energy has refused to use MOX because it is too
expensive, but the Germans and Swiss have placed orders. The
Japanese are key to the financial success of the plant but have
placed no orders following a row with BNFL two years ago when
specifications for early versions of the fuel were found to
falsified. It was this argument about the financial viability of
the plant that caused the government to have no fewer than five
consultations over licensing in five years.
BNFL was accused of "voodoo economics" because it wrote off the
multimillion pound construction cost of the plant and claimed
that it would make a profit as a result.
Margaret Beckett, the environment secretary, said that with the
capital cost written off, the plant would make £150m profit.
But since the attack on New York, ministers have been constantly
reminded of the potential dangers of the plutonium trade posed by
MOX. The government decided not to take these representations
into consideration when making the decision, even though the need
to have an armed escort for each shipment could dramatically
increase costs.
Dan Plesch, senior research fellow at the Royal United Services
Institute, said: "In the present international situation this is
a reckless decision - it beggars belief. It hardly fits into Mr
Blair's vision of taking new opportunities to build a new world."
BNFL is confident that it can overcome both the economic and
security difficulties.
Norman Askew, BNFL chief executive, said: "I am delighted with
the decision. Our customers have been extremely patient with us
and we can now get on with the business of manufacturing fuel."
He said the plant needed contracts or reserved business for only
40% of plant capacity to break even.
Martin Forwood, of Cumbrians Opposed to Nuclear Environment,
said: "This is a crazy decision economically. They just do not
have the orders to justify it.
The Japanese said again this week they are not talking to BNFL
and have no plans to buy MOX. Even with the terrorist threat it
is a disgraceful decision based on voodoo economics."
Charles Secrett, of Friends of the Earth, said: "It is outrageous
that the government thinks it can get away with using Alice in
Wonderland economics to justify giving this MOX plant the
go-ahead. This is a political decision which doesn't make
economic or environmental sense."
Stephen Tindale, executive director of Greenpeace in the UK,
said: "Expanding the global trade in plutonium is dangerously
irresponsible, especially at a time of huge global insecurity.
Some may think this is the end of the MOX controversy. In
reality, it is just the beginning."
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001
*****************************************************************
27 Ireland says Sellafield decision "defies logic"
Planet Ark Environmental News:
REPUBLIC OF IRELAND: October 4, 2001
DUBLIN - Ireland yesterday said a British decision to give the
go-ahead for the start-up of a nuclear fuel manufacturing plant
in northwest England "defied logic" in the wake of last month's
attacks on the United States.
In a strongly-worded statement Joe Jacob, Ireland's minister
responsible for nuclear safety, condemned a decision to allow
British Nuclear Fuels to begin operations at the mixed oxide
(MOX) plant just across the Irish Sea at Sellafield.
"In the light of the events of September 11 in America I find it
difficult to comprehend today's decision," said Jacob.
"I would have considered that the whole rationale for this energy
source would have been undergoing a serious reappraisal.
"It is a minimum expectation that countries with nuclear
installations will now consider the full implications of the
recent tragedies and the real and present danger in terms of
safety and security."
Ireland has long been haunted by fears of an accident at the the
plant and since September 11, when hijacked planes slammed into
the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, the threat of a similar
attack on Sellafield has been raised.
The existence of the plant, in Cumbria on England's northwest
coast, has provoked a string of sharp exchanges between the two
countries over the years, and in June Ireland said it was
mounting a legal challenge to the MOX plant.
The action is currently subject to arbitration under the OSPAR
Convention for the protection of the marine environment in the
northeast Atlantic.
Jacob said Ireland was now looking at other legal options,
including a challenge under European Union or United Nations law.
Britain first established nuclear facilities at Sellafield,
formerly called Windscale, in the 1940s, and the world's first
commercial nuclear power station opened there in 1956.
The MOX plant was completed five years ago, but its approval has
been delayed by fears there were not enough customers for the
fuel.
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
*****************************************************************
28 Sellafield: THE LONG ROAD TO A LICENCE
The Independent - United Kingdom; Oct 4, 2001
BY STEVE CONNOR
1991: Decision made to build the Sellafield Mox Plant (SMP).
1994: BNFL given planning permission for SMP.
1996: Construction completed at a cost of pounds 300m.
Maintenance and upgrading bring total cost to pounds 473m.
20 Aug 1999: BNFL becomes aware of fabrication of quality-control
data in the smaller Mox demonstration facility making fuel
pellets.
10 Sept 1999: The Independent informs BNFL of impending article
on data falsification. BNFL tells Nuclear Installations
Inspectorate (NII).
14 Sept 1999: The Independent publishes article. BNFL tells
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kansai Electric that
falsification does not affect shipment on its way to Japan.
16 Sept 1999: BNFL admits falsification is more extensive than
thought, but still only affects Mox pellets still at Sellafield.
8 Nov 1999: NII writes to Japanese Embassy in London saying
falsification has affected two lots of pellets in Japan shipment.
15 Dec 1999: BNFL discovers a third affected lot in Japan.
16 Dec 1999: Japanese told of wider falsification, leading to
demands for suspension of shipments.
18 Feb 2000: NII sets 15 recommendations before it will allow the
restart of Mox production at Sellafield. BNFL subsequently
decides to close down the demonstration facility and rely on
operating the SMP.
3 October 2001: Government gives the go-ahead for SMP operation.
All Material Subject to Copyright
*****************************************************************
29 Nuclear fuel go-ahead
The Scotsman Online -
THE Government yesterday gave the go-ahead to start operations at
a controversial nuclear fuel plant.
It said the long-awaited decision for the manufacture of mixed
oxide (MOX) fuel at Sellafield in Cumbria was "justified" in
accordance with the requirements of European Community law.
The move sparked immediate criticism from environmental,
anti-nuclear and local residents' groups, who warned it
would make the world a more dangerous place and increase the
terrorist threat.
The MOX plant was completed in 1996 but has lain idle since then.
It was intended to turn spent plutonium and uranium into usable
fuel but, following financial concerns and in the wake of a data
falsification incident, the commercial go-ahead for the plant was
withheld.
*****************************************************************
30 Government to challenge Sellafield expansion
ireland.com - The Irish Times - FRONT PAGE
By Mark Hennessy, Political Reporter
The Government has warned that it will challenge the British
government before the European Court and, if necessary, the
United Nations, following a decision to expand nuclear
reprocessing at Sellafield.
The British Environment Secretary, Ms Margaret Beckett, after
months of examination, yesterday formally approved the opening of
a £460 million mixed oxide (MOX) plant at the British
Nuclear Fuels Limited complex in Cumbria.
The Minister of State for Public Enterprise, Mr Joe Jacob, said
the decision was unacceptable, particularly in light of the
September 11th terrorist attacks in the United States. "I find it
difficult to comprehend. I would have considered that the whole
rationale for this energy source would have been undergoing a
serious reappraisal," Mr Jacob said.
A legal challenge already under way before the OSPAR Convention,
an international environmental body comprising 14 North Atlantic
nations, is "now largely irrelevant", he conceded.
Ireland had intended to argue before OSPAR that Britain had
broken international law by having no justification for the MOX
plant and by its refusal to hand over sensitive documentation.
"We specifically asked that no decision to proceed on the MOX
decision is completely contrary to that request. We feel quite
affronted," he complained.
Besides Ireland, five other OSPAR-member countries, Denmark,
Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, support Sellafield's
shutdown and its French counterpart at Cap la Hague.
Now, however, the Government intends to take the same case before
the high-profile European Court. "I discussed it with the
Taoiseach. He is of the same view as I am," said Mr Jacob.
Several months of grace remain before the MOX plant would go into
daily use. "I will be actively using that time to oversee the
completion and processing of all legal options." The United
Nations offered another avenue, he said.
This possibility will be discussed between the Attorney General,
Mr Michael McDowell, and senior Public Enterprise officials. "I
won't say more about it for now," he said.
Sellafield has been a constant sore between Dublin and London.
Following years of complaint,, Britain agreed to cut Sellafield's
Irish Sea discharges to almost nothing by 2020. The MOX plant was
built in 1996, but it failed to secure a licence after the
British government became concerned about the falsification of
records by BNFL staff covering exports to Japan.
Mixed oxide fuel is a blend of plutonium and uranium which has
been extracted from nuclear fuel rods already burnt in reactors
in Britain, Japan and Europe. l BNFL argues that the MOX plant
will cut the world's plutonium stockpile.
The decision to licence it was regarded as inevitable after
consultants said last month that it would be cheaper to open than
to mothball.
The director of the Stockholm International Peace Research
Institute, Dr Frank Barnaby, last month warned that it was
inevitable that terrorists would eventually acquire plutonium.
Fine Gael TD Ms Deirdre Clune said Ireland's agriculture and
tourist industries, which are dependent on a clean environmental
image, could be "seriously undermined" by yesterday's decision.
"It is time for Bertie Ahern to stop bluffing and start acting to
halt this monstrous development. Four and a half years of
posturing by Bertie Ahern and Joe Jacobs have come to nothing,"
she said. Green Party TD Mr Trevor Sargent said he was appalled.
"It is not just grossly irresponsible, it is an act of madness.
Sellafield should be decommissioning not expanding."
The British Prime Minister, Mr Blair, was prepared to open the
MOX plant despite his fears that international terrorists could
get their hands on nuclear weapons. A large grouping of
environmental organisations, including Friends of the Earth and
Greenpeace, condemned the British move as unlawful and threatened
to go to the British courts.
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES
*****************************************************************
1 'Bin Laden bought nuclear weapons'
by Jeremy Campbell
Intelligence officers in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kazakstan have warned
the US that Osama bin Laden has been buying nuclear weapons from the
Russian mafia, it was reported today.
The Russian foreign ministry has rebutted a story in the Washington Times
that the Russian criminal underground is supplying Bin Laden with the
means to build weapons of mass destruction.
Richard Butler, former United Nations weapons inspector, said in a TV
interview yesterday: "A nuclear terrorist threat from Bin Laden, by way of
the Russian criminal underground, is a reality."
© Associated Newspapers Ltd., 04 October 2001
*****************************************************************
2 PML(N) rejects US assistance for N. security
The Frontier Post From Peshawar Pakistan
Raja Assad Hameed
Updated on 10/4/2001 10:45:04 AM
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) has expressed deep
concern over reports that the military regime has been discussing
with the United States possible American assistance for security
of Pakistan's nuclear installations.
PML (N) spokesman Wednesday said that the move amounted to
compromising Pakistan's most vital security interest.
He said the PML stayed its comments for two days hoping that the
reports emanating from Washington would be contradicted, or at
least a plausible clarification would be issued from Islamabad.
"However, continued silence of the official spokesmen has
strengthened the suspicion that the military rulers have
completely surrendered national interests before the global
hegemonic interests of the United States," he added.
He said the reports, carried by the national press, clearly
stated that the top level US military team visiting Islamabad
last week "discussed possible US help to Pakistan to provide
equipment and other assistance for improving security and
installing new safeguards on Pakistan's nuclear weapons and at
its nuclear power plants." The PML spokesman said it was an open
secret that the United States had all along been deadly against
development of nuclear deterrent capability by Pakistan, who had
to suffer harsh economic sanctions for eleven years due to its
nuclear program.
"How could then the Americans be entrusted with providing
protection to our nuclear installations," he asked.
He said that for the last two years the military regime had been
bragging about putting the commitment to cause of Kashmir and the
nuclear capability on top of its priorities.
However, it undermined the Kashmir cause when it failed to rebut
US Secretary of State Colin Powel's assertion that the Kashmiri
mujaheedin were included in the targets of so-called war against
world terrorism; in fact the regime hastened to outlaw one of the
mujahedeen group following dictation from Washington.
"Now, by discussing the security arrangements of Pakistan's
nuclear installation with American officials, the regime has
jeopardized national security," he said.
The spokesman said that the military rulers, in their zeal to
undo whatever the Nawaz Sharif government had achieved to
safeguard national interests, appeared to have adopted policies
whose consequences could threaten the very existence of the
country.
He said Nawaz Sharif had refused to sign the Comprehensive Test
Ban Treaty (CTBT) because he rightly believed that it would open
Pakistan's nuclear installation to intrusion by hostile elements.
"The United States, as it appears, has now come up with the
seemingly innocent notion of providing security equipment, and
thus gaining access to our nuclear facilities," he added.
The PML spokesman urged the present government to desist from
providing even the remotest access to the Americans to our
nuclear installations.
"The military rulers should realize that seeking protection of
the installations from a power which has vowed to annihilate
nuclear capability of Pakistan, would be the height of madness to
say the least," the spokesman concluded.
Taliban - Ascent to Power
A Comprehensive book on the movement of Taliban and its impact on
the world which Author Dr. M. J. Gohari Calls, " The Taliban - UN
Dilemma". Gohari concludes the book with a chapter specially on
Osama Bin Laden, which serves the demystify the elusive
radicalism of Taliban - Price - 12.95
32 Stadium Road Peshawar Cantt P.O. Box No. 1161 Pakistan Phones:
+92-91 287074-5-6 Fax: +92-91 278901
© Copyright 2001 The Frontier Post
*****************************************************************
3 Nuclear material missing from Kazakh cosmodrome, Kazakh
Commercial TV reports
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Oct 4, 2001
[Presenter] We have just received a report from our
correspondents at Baykonur [space launching site in southern
Kazakh Kyzyl-Orda Region]. An emergency has taken place in the
Russian zone of responsibility at the space launching site. A
container of the radioactive substance caesium-137 has
disappeared at the compound, which is guarded by armed forces.
Our crew has returned from the scene of the incident with some
details:
[Correspondent, over video of workers, servicemen, aircraft,
nuclear containers, people at space launching facilities] The
report that a container of the nuclear substance was missing at
the Baykonur cosmodrome came to the police on 25 September.
The Kyzyl-Orda Region police department has said that the missing
caesium was at a burial site in the secret area No 94A, which is
not indicated on maps.
According to unofficial reports, the missing nuclear substance
had already been sent off to Russia the following day. The
Russian special services say this is the first time they have
heard about the missing container. Only the head of Baykonur's
Russian administration, Gennadiy Dmitriyenko, said in an
interview that nuclear substances have disappeared from the
cosmodrome several times.
However, later, on the grounds that the facilities were secret,
officials demanded that Kazakh Commercial TV journalists hand
over their video camera to the town administration for the night.
The next morning, the cassette did not contain the recording of
the interview with the mayor.
[Yevgeniy Sergienko, Kazakh Commercial TV cameraman, interviewed]
The Baykonur town administration has plainly told us that we
should not poke our nose into this.
[Correspondent] [Passage omitted: all officials were told to give
no information to journalists] It emerged that unprecedented
security control has been introduced here only for independent
journalists. Several hours later, it became known that everyone
who wished could go through a control and checking post guarded
by Russian servicemen.
[Unidentified taxi driver showed from the back] There are taxi
drivers who can take you through it. You pay them, they pay the
servicemen and then you can go in and back freely. There is no
difficulties there now. In general, money solves everything now.
[Correspondent] So the fact that a container of caesium has
disappeared from the compound guarded by the Russian side is not
an emergency. Dangerous radioactive substances are known to have
disappeared at the cosmodrome before. However, none of these
criminal incidents have been solved.
Source: Kazakh Commercial Television, Almaty, in Russian 1300 gmt
3 Oct 01 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material
*****************************************************************
4 Health officials begin testing for clues in Fallon cancer cluster
By Frank X. Mullen Jr.
Reno Gazette-Journal
Thursday October 4th, 2001
FALLON — Men in white jumpsuits Wednesday dusted a TV screen,
vacuumed square-meter swaths of carpet, took well samples and
scraped up dirt in a backyard to demonstrate how state
investigators will look for a cause of this town’s childhood
leukemia cluster.
In the air, dust, water and soil, the investigators will look for
clues to the cause of outbreak. Since 1997, 14 Fallon-area
children have been diagnosed with leukemia and two have died.
Investigators said the high leukemia rate in the town of 7,500
people in a county of 24,000 people probably isn’t a coincidence
and they suspect an environmental cause for the outbreak.
Federal and state health officials over the next few weeks are
scheduled to collect environmental samples in Fallon at the homes
and former homes of patient families and control group families.
The scientists will then test the samples for solvents, fuels,
many elements, and other chemicals and compounds, including
radiation and radioactive isotopes.
“It’s a cross-section exposure study where we will compare the
results between the case families and control families,” said Jim
Najima, project officer for the Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection. “We’re looking for things that may be present in case
families’ homes that aren’t found in the control families’
homes.”
On Wednesday, the investigators performed environmental sampling
on a Fallon home in preparation for weeks of sampling at the
targeted homes. The state agency is scheduled to begin real
testing next week in cooperation with the state Division of
Health, the federal centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
and other state and federal agencies.
“They told us not to clean the house for five days,” said Carinsa
Rivers of Fallon, whose daughter, Sareynah, 4, is in remission
from leukemia. “They’ll be here Monday to take samples.”
The Rivers family and other patients’ families have already given
blood, urine and cheek swab samples to CDC investigators. The
health officials will compare the environmental and human test
results to look for common links.
The environmental samples must be carefully collected to avoid
contamination, investigators said.
“If you go to a gas station that day and step in a puddle of
gasoline and then visit the home we’re testing, that would mess
up our results,” said Randall Todd, state epidemiologist. “We
have to be very careful about introducing contaminants into our
field of study.”
In the environmental testing phase of the study, NDEP
investigators will:
o Wipe a cloth over a TV screen or other appliance to collect a
dust sample.
o Swipe a vacuum cleaner nozzle over two one-meter squares of
carpet to collect more dust samples from the home.
o Use a small metal keg to suck up air samples from within the
house.
o Scrape up soil samples from backyards.
o Place a radon detector inside the house.
o Work with the U.S. Geological Survey to collect tap water
samples from the houses.
Once all the samples are collected, investigators said, they will
be analyzed at labs and the results will be compared.
All but a handful of hundreds of cancer cluster investigations
done in the U.S. and the world have resulted in no clues to the
outbreak. But investigators said the Fallon cluster grew so fast
and was detected so early, there may be a chance of linking the
disease outbreak to an environmental cause.
“We wouldn’t be responding at this level if we didn’t think it
were possible to find something,” said Carol H. Rubin, chief of
the studies branch at the CDC’s National Center for Environmental
Health.
“We are going to give it our best shot.”
HOW TO HELP:
Fallon Families First is a support/community fund for Fallon
families affected by leukemia. Donations may be made to: The
Mayor’s Youth Fund, 55 Williams Ave., Fallon, NV 89406,
Attention: Fallon Families First/City Clerk. Details:
775-423-5104.
© Reno Gazette-Journal
*****************************************************************
5 Los Alamos Lab to Settle for $9.5M
Las Vegas SUN
October 03, 2001
SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) - More than 400 families who sued Los Alamos
National Laboratory for conducting secret experiments on their
relatives' cadavers would share $9.5 million under a proposed
settlement, a lawyer for one of the plaintiffs said Wednesday.
The University of California, which runs the laboratory, has
agreed to pay $8 million and Banner Health System, which owns Los
Alamos Medical Center, have offered to pay $1.5 million, said
lawyer John Bienvenu.
The settlement must be approved by a judge. A hearing is
scheduled for Jan. 11, 2002.
Lawyers for the lab and the plaintiffs agree that between 1959
and 1980 doctors at the Los Alamos hospital provided lab
scientists with tissue samples from locally autopsied bodies for
study. Scientists were to determine how much radiation lab
workers and area residents had absorbed, and how their bodies
processed it.
Families who signed autopsy release forms were not told of the
study, nor were they told snippets of their relatives would end
up in the hands of government scientists, the plaintiffs allege.
The class-action lawsuit was filed in 1996 by Katie Kelley Mareau
whose father, Cecil Kelley, died in 1959 after being exposed to a
plutonium mixture at the laboratory. His organs were the first
tissues removed for the study. The lawsuit alleged that neither
Mareau nor her mother knew when her father's body was buried it
was missing eight pounds of organs, tissues and bones. "I am very
glad that our efforts have been successful and justice has been
achieved," Mareau said in a statement.
The laboratory issued a statement Wednesday saying "express
consent to use the autopsy tissue may not have been obtained from
next of kin."
"While the program was conducted with the best of intentions, and
within the legal and ethical standards of the time, if initiated
today it would be conducted under current informed consent
practices that are more formal and highly detailed," the
laboratory said.
Bienvenu said no settlement had been reached with the remaining
defendant, a pathologist who performed about 300 of the autopsies
between 1965 and 1978. A second pathologist who had been a
defendant in the case has died.
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
6 Preliminary Fallon well tests show radiation, no pollutants
Las Vegas SUN
October 03, 2001
RENO, Nev. (AP) - Preliminary test results of 100 private wells
in the Fallon area show many contain some levels of naturally
occurring radioactivity but no fuels, pesticides or other
man-made pollutants.
The tests by the U.S Geological Survey are part of an
investigation into a childhood leukemia cluster. Fourteen
children have been diagnosed since 1997. Two have died.
Experts suspect an environmental cause and are looking for clues.
Though radiation can be a source for leukemia, state health
officials have said patients' families got their drinking water
from different sources, including bottled water and municipal
supplies and rural wells.
Because of that, they say the rural wells are not a common link
to the 14 cases.
The USGS tests appear to suggest that chemicals in drinking water
are not a source of the illnesses, officials said.
"In the vast majority of results, we're not seeing solvents,
fuels or any volatiles in the water," said Terry Rees, Nevada
district chief at the USGS office in Carson City.
"We are seeing some heavy metals, but aside from the arsenic, the
magnesium and molybdenum are still below federal drinking water
standards."
Rees said the high radiation levels have been found in some of
the privately owned wells tapping the shallow and intermediate
aquifers.
The municipal water supply comes from four city-owned wells sunk
into the deeper basalt aquifer and that underground supply
doesn't have high uranium levels, he said.
Federal and state health officials are scheduled this week to
collect air, soil and water samples in Fallon. The scientists
will test for many elements, chemicals and compounds, including
radiation and uranium isotopes, according to the federal Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Information from: Reno
Gazette-Journal
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
7 Reid announces lineup for Henderson anti-terrorism summit
Las Vegas SUN
October 03, 2001
HENDERSON, Nev. (AP) - U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced
Wednesday he'll host a hearing next week for law enforcers,
medical and federal officials to tell how they're countering
terrorism in Southern Nevada.
Reid said the counterterrorism summit will be held at 9 a.m.
Monday at the Henderson fire training center.
He said he wants to brief Las Vegas-area residents on steps that
emergency and law enforcement officials are taking to detect,
prevent and respond to terrorist threats.
Henderson Fire Chief Jim Cavelieri, Clark County Sheriff Jerry
Keller and Dr. Dale Carrison, emergency medicine director at
University Medical Center in Las Vegas are scheduled to testify.
Federal officials will include Nellis Air Force Base Major
General L.D. Johnston, Las Vegas FBI chief Grant Ashley and Steve
Hansen of the Clark County Federal Emergency Management Agency
office.
Administrators from the National Nuclear Security Administration,
the Nuclear Emergency Search and Emergency Response team and
Bechtel Nevada will talk about Nevada Test Site security, Reid
said.
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
8 Lawmakers to consider improvements to sick workers program
Las Vegas SUN
October 03, 2001
WASHINGTON (AP) - The defense authorization bill passed by the
Senate this week calls for some key improvements to a new
compensation program for sick Cold War-era nuclear weapons
workers and their families, but whether House lawmakers back the
changes is an open question.
The House passed its version of the defense bill last month, but
it did not address the compensation program. A House-Senate
conference committee will soon be tasked with ironing out the
differences between the two bills.
Reps. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., and Ted Strickland, D-Ohio, are
circulating a letter urging House members to support the Senate
provisions.
"We're hopeful that the conferees will adopt the Senate
language," said Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., who signed the letter and
described the changes as "technical corrections."
Worker advocates said the most critical change would eliminate a
requirement that surviving children of deceased workers had to be
under 18, or dependents, when their parent died to collect
benefits.
Whitfield said many adult children of workers at the Paducah,
Ky., uranium plant cared for dying parents and deserve the
compensation.
"There's been a lot of concern about that and people don't think
that it's fair," Whitfield said.
David Gleason, of Portsmouth, Ohio, says the change would be
helpful to his 10 siblings. All were over 18 when their father, a
sick maintenance worker at the uranium plant in Piketon, Ohio,
died in 1981.
"It was not inclusive of all the people that it needed to really
include," Gleason said of the original legislation passed by
Congress last year. "...
Money cannot replace loved ones, but it can help alleviate some
of the problems associated with that loss."
Congress approved the worker compensation program last year. It
provides medical care and $150,000 to sick workers or their
families, if the workers were exposed to cancer-causing radiation
or silica or beryllium, which are linked to lung diseases.
The changes are estimated to cost about $108 million over 10
years. Whitfield said he was optimistic House conferees would
accept that expense, though he acknowledged it was hard to
predict how the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks would affect
congressional spending.
The Senate defense bill also calls for a more relaxed criteria
for determining who suffers from silicosis, a scarring of the
lungs. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the change will
allow an additional 550 people to receive benefits.
"It's an important change," said Dr. Steven Markowitz, who
screens former and current Energy Department workers for
illnesses that might be related to their jobs. Markowitz said the
more relaxed definition corresponds with accepted medical
standards.
Rep. James Gibbons, R-Nev., says some of his constituents
developed silicosis while building tunnels at the Nevada Test
Site. He said those workers deserve compensation, because the
disease is so painful.
"It gets into the fibers of your lungs and suffocates you. It's a
death-debilitating illness," Gibbons said.
The Senate bill also states that attorneys who assist workers
with contested claims can receive up to 10 percent, rather than 2
percent, of compensation paid.
Richard Miller, who followed the legislation last year for the
Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers Union, said
some attorneys are unwilling to take appeals cases at the lower
rate.
"That was a real concern, and so this I really think is of huge
assistance to claimants," Miller said.
The Labor Department is administering the program, which
officially began in July. Shelby Hallmark, the director of the
agency's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, says about
10,000 people have sought benefits so far. He said the agency has
approved benefits for about 180 people and has taken steps toward
approving benefits for about 280 more.
"We are working as hard as we can," Hallmark said. "I am pleased
with implementation to date, but we are pushing hard to get more
through the system."
On the Net: Labor Department: http://www.dol.gov/ House:
http://www.house.gov/ Senate: http://www.senate.gov/
All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
9 Preliminary tests show no pollutants in 100 Fallon wells
[Las Vegas Review-Journal]
Thursday, October 04, 2001
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
Levels of naturally occurring radiation don't alarm officials
investigating leukemia cluster
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
RENO -- Preliminary test results of 100 private wells in the
Fallon area show many contain some levels of naturally occurring
radioactivity but no fuels, pesticides or other man-made
pollutants.
The tests by the U.S. Geological Survey are part of an
investigation into a childhood leukemia cluster. Fourteen
children have been diagnosed with the type of cancer since 1997.
Two have died.
Experts suspect an environmental cause and are investigating.
Though radiation can be a source for leukemia, state health
officials have said patients' families got their drinking water
from different sources, including bottled water and municipal
supplies and rural wells.
Because of that, they say the rural wells are not a common link
to the 14 cases.
The tests by the USGS appear to suggest that chemicals in
drinking water are not a source of the illnesses, officials said.
"In the vast majority of results, we're not seeing solvents,
fuels or any volatiles in the water," said Terry Rees, Nevada
district chief at the USGS office in Carson City.
"We are seeing some heavy metals, but aside from the arsenic, the
magnesium and molybdenum are still below federal drinking water
standards."
Rees said the high radiation levels have been found in some of
the privately owned wells tapping the shallow and intermediate
aquifers.
The municipal water supply comes from four city-owned wells sunk
into the deeper basalt aquifer, and that underground supply
doesn't have high uranium levels, he said.
Federal and state health officials are scheduled this week to
collect air, soil and water samples in Fallon. The scientists
will test for many elements, chemicals and compounds, including
radiation and uranium isotopes, according to the federal Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.
This story is located at:
http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/Oct-04-Thu-2001/news/17142171.html
*****************************************************************
10 Debris, Weeds Shadow China's Nuclear Weapon Site
Thursday, October 04, 2001, updated at 11:02(GMT+8)
Crumbling factory walls sprawl amid the sand, weeds and grazing
sheep at this desolate spot on the Tibet-Qinghai plateau, giving
China's first nuclear weapons research center the odd look of an
ancient ruin.
The code-named No. 221 Plant of the China Nuclear Industry
Corporation is 101 kilometers from Xining, capital of the
northwest province of Qinghai, and 3,200 meters above sea level.
When it opened in 1958 it was regarded as a mysterious and
forbidden zone, covering an area of 1,170 square kilometers. To
the outside world, it was known as the Qinghai Mine.
Now the local government has erected billboards near the site to
attract tourists.
Dotting one wall of a geometrically shaped building surrounded by
reinforced cement structure are the holes researchers peered
through to observe the nuclear testing explosions. The
dilapidated site at present was the former No. 6 Factory of the
base, called the "shooting range."
Some hundreds yards away is the famous "No. 1 Pit in Asia," where
nuclear waste is buried.
Insiders say that the Chinese government has organized experts to
thoroughly clean the testing area with special chemicals over the
following two years. The team has already buried waste materials
over an area of 5,400 square meters.
The government has spent some three billion yuan (370 million U.
S. dollars) ensuring the waste removal to meet strictest
international standards, they say.
The ruined factories are now open to sightseers, who know little
about how such places operate. The No. 4 Factory is totally
covered by weeds. Nearby, sheep nose about for food. Another site
looks like a telecommunications and command center. Only farmers
collecting grass to feed their pigs can be seen.
Through this bleak scene winds a rusted railway, on which a
special train once carried China's first atom bomb to its test
field in a remote desert.
The No. 18 A Zone was the assembling plant of China's nuclear
weapons. Now it is a hog farm, where hogs and dogs howl at the
sight of strangers intruding on their domain.
In the center of the zone is a red-brick, six-storey building,
the "generals' tower," where the "fathers" of China's nuclear
movement, Wang Ganchang, Zhu Guangya, Deng Jiaxian and Zhou
Guangzhao, put their imaginations to reality.
Not far from there stands a tall granite monument, on top of
which is a model atom bomb made of steel. The inscription on the
monument reads: "This is the place where China's first nuclear
bomb was born and China's first hydrogen bomb was successfully
researched. On October 16, 1964, China exploded its first atom
bomb, declaring to the world that the Chinese nation finally had
its atom bomb, making a great contribution to breaking the
nuclear monopoly and safeguarding world peace."
It says that over the past 30 years China has successfully
launched 16 nuclear tests there, and developed a number of types
of strategic nuclear weapons.
All of China's nuclear tests were carried out with strict safety
protection, causing no radioactive harm to anyone.
In 1996, China announced a temporary suspension of nuclear
testing in a move toward nuclear disarmament.
Since 1996, the nuclear test center has received 300,000
tourists. The local government is discussing ways to repair the
ruined factories and build power, chemical and aluminum plants to
develop the local economy.
Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved |
*****************************************************************
11 A closer look: Pakistan's nuclear arsenal
Orange County Register -
October 4, 2001
Many diplomats warn that Pakistan - which in 1998 successfully
tested at least two nuclear bombs - could be destabilized by a
U.S.-led attack on neighboring Afghanistan. The Register's Chris
Reed talked about Pakistan's arsenal Wednesday with Cliff Singer,
a nuclear engineer at the University of Illinois who is an expert
on Asian nuclear proliferation. The text has been edited for
length.
Q. How many nuclear weapons does Pakistan have?
A. There have been estimates recently that they have enough
fissionable material for about 25 atomic bombs. As for the number
Pakistan has assembled, I have no idea.
Q. How powerful are their bombs?
A. Their yield is no larger than the atomic bombs the U.S. used
(against Japan in 1945), and quite possibly smaller. They don't
have hydrogen bombs.
Q. How can Pakistan use its nuclear weapons against an enemy?
A. They have missiles, but they're not intercontinental. They
have potentially nuclear-capable aircraft.
Q. Is their nuclear arsenal considered well-guarded?
A. Compared to the situation in Russia, it's a minor problem.
There's no reason to believe they're not under firm control.
Q. What about during the three changes of government in the 10
years since the U.S. first began to think that Pakistan may have
nuclear weapons?
A. There's never been any question that they were under control
of the atomic-energy establishment, which answers to the
government.
Q. Is there any reason for Americans to be nervous that
Pakistan's nuclear-weapons might somehow be used during this
crisis?
A. There's essentially no chance of that as long as the
political situation in Pakistan remains stable. And even if it
doesn't, there's strong reasons why they wouldn't be. But it's
not impossible.
Q. If Pakistan fell into chaos, would the United States try to
grab its nuclear weapons to keep them from falling into the wrong
hands?
A. It's sort of obvious that the government would be thinking
about that, but I have no specific information about programs or
plans.
The Orange County Register ocregister@link.freedom.com-->
*****************************************************************
12 Improvements to sick-workers program being considered
Oak Ridger Online -->
Story last updated at 2:01 p.m. on Thursday, October 4, 2001
by Nancy Zuckerbrod
Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- The defense authorization bill passed by the Senate
this week calls for some key improvements to a new compensation
program for sick Cold War-era nuclear weapons workers and their
families, but whether House lawmakers back the changes is an open
question.
The House passed its version of the defense bill last month, but
it did not address the compensation program. A House-Senate
conference committee will soon be tasked with ironing out the
differences between the two bills.
Reps. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., and Ted Strickland, D-Ohio, are
circulating a letter urging House members to support the Senate
provisions.
"We're hopeful that the conferees will adopt the Senate
language," said Tennessee's Zach Wamp, R-3rd District, who signed
the letter and described the changes as "technical corrections."
Worker advocates said the most critical change would eliminate a
requirement that surviving children of deceased workers had to be
under 18, or dependents, when their parent died to collect
benefits.
Whitfield said many adult children of workers at the Paducah,
Ky., uranium plant cared for dying parents and deserve the
compensation.
"There's been a lot of concern about that and people don't think
that it's fair," Whitfield said.
David Gleason, of Portsmouth, Ohio, says the change would be
helpful to his 10 siblings. All were over 18 when their father, a
sick maintenance worker at the uranium plant in Piketon, Ohio,
died in 1981.
"It was not inclusive of all the people that it needed to really
include," Gleason said of the original legislation passed by
Congress last year. "... Money cannot replace loved ones, but it
can help alleviate some of the problems associated with that
loss."
Congress approved the worker compensation program last year. It
provides medical care and $150,000 to sick workers or their
families, if the workers were exposed to cancer-causing radiation
or silica or beryllium, which are linked to lung diseases.
The changes are estimated to cost about $108 million over 10
years. Whitfield said he was optimistic House conferees would
accept that expense, though he acknowledged it was hard to
predict how the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks would affect
congressional spending.
The Senate defense bill also calls for a more relaxed criteria
for determining who suffers from silicosis, a scarring of the
lungs. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the change will
allow an additional 550 people to receive benefits.
"It's an important change," said Dr. Steven Markowitz, who
screens former and current Energy Department workers for
illnesses that might be related to their jobs. Markowitz said the
more relaxed definition corresponds with accepted medical
standards.
Rep. James Gibbons, R-Nev., says some of his constituents
developed silicosis while building tunnels at the Nevada Test
Site. He said those workers deserve compensation, because the
disease is so painful.
"It gets into the fibers of your lungs and suffocates you. It's
a death-debilitating illness," Gibbons said.
The Senate bill also states that attorneys who assist workers
with contested claims can receive up to 10 percent, rather than 2
percent, of compensation paid.
Richard Miller, who followed the legislation last year for the
Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers Union, said
some attorneys are unwilling to take appeals cases at the lower
rate.
"That was a real concern, and so this I really think is of huge
assistance to claimants," Miller said.
The Labor Department is administering the program, which
officially began in July. Shelby Hallmark, the director of the
agency's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, says about
10,000 people have sought benefits so far.
He said the agency has approved benefits for about 180 people
and has taken steps toward approving benefits for about 280 more.
"We are working as hard as we can," Hallmark said. "I am pleased
with implementation to date, but we are pushing hard to get more
through the system."
All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger
*****************************************************************
13 U.S. debates how to assure safety of nuclear weapons
[charlotte.com]
Published Thursday, October 4, 2001
A politically fragile area
U.S. debates how to assure safety of nuclear weapons There is
concern Pakistan's stores could fall into wrong hands
By WARREN P. STROBEL Observer Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- With political instability threatening Pakistan,
the United States has begun debating how it can help President
Pervez Musharraf's government secure its nuclear weapon stockpile
and nuclear-related facilities, according to Bush administration
officials.
Driving the preparations is the prospect, however remote, that
Islamic militants angered by an expected U.S. military assault on
neighboring Afghanistan could seize power in Pakistan or gain
control of its nuclear weapons.
But while the threat is clear, the solution is not, according to
current and former U.S. government officials who have dealt with
Pakistan's nuclear program.
They say international treaties and U.S. laws designed to
control the spread of nuclear weapons severely limit how much aid
the United States can give to Pakistan's nuclear weapons program,
even with the best of intentions.
The Bush administration, contrary to some reports, has not held
any detailed discussions with Pakistan on the issue, said a
senior administration official, who spoke on condition of
anonymity.
It was not until this week that top government experts began
discussing how to assist Pakistan in light of the restrictions,
the senior official said.
Proposals for helping Pakistan ensure its nuclear weapons do not
fall into the wrong hands vary widely. They range from sending
U.S. troops to guard nuclear facilities - which Pakistan has not
asked for and probably would not accept - to technical assistance
with transporting nuclear materials and guarding against their
unauthorized use.
Any one of those would involve overturning long-standing U.S.
policy, which has been to oppose nuclear programs such as
Pakistan's that are outside international controls.
Lee Feinstein, who as a State Department official helped
formulate the U.S. response to India and Pakistan's May 1998
tit-for-tat nuclear tests, said that while nonproliferation is
still important, "we have treaty obligations that didn't exactly
foresee the circumstances we're in now."
Those obligations include the 1968 Nonproliferation Treaty, which
bars encouragement and assistance to any country except the
original five declared nuclear powers: the United States, Russia,
China, Britain and France.
U.S. officials are concerned enough about political instability
in Pakistan that they are trying to minimize the U.S. military's
use of the country for expected strikes on Afghanistan in
retaliation for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
"Pakistan is a fragile political society, and we don't want to
burden Pakistan with more than we absolutely need," Deputy
Secretary of State Richard Armitage said Wednesday on ABC News'
"Good Morning America" program.
U.S. experts say Pakistan's nuclear weapons, controlled by the
army, appear to be secure for now.
Musharraf
*****************************************************************
14 Pakistan presents a nuclear dilemma
Philly.com
Thursday, October 4, 2001
U.S. officials wonder what, if anything, to do to protect the
arms amid the threat of instability. By Warren P. Strobel
INQUIRER WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON - With political
instability threatening Pakistan, the United States has begun
debating how to help the country secure its nuclear weapons
stockpile and nuclear-related facilities.
Driving the preparations is the frightening prospect, however
remote, that Islamic militants angered by a U.S. military assault
on neighboring Afghanistan could seize power in Pakistan or gain
control of some of its nuclear weapons. But while the threat is
clear, the solution is not, according to current and former U.S.
government officials who have dealt with Pakistan's nuclear
program. The problem, they say, is that international treaties
and U.S. laws designed to control the spread of nuclear weapons
severely limit how much aid the United States can give to
Pakistan's nuclear weapons program, even with the best of
intentions.
The Bush administration, contrary to some reports, has not yet
held any detailed discussions with Pakistan on the issue, said a
senior administration official, who spoke on condition of
anonymity. And it was not until this week that top government
experts began discussing how to assist Pakistan in light of the
restrictions, the senior official said.
Proposals vary widely for helping Pakistan ensure its nuclear
weapons do not fall into the wrong hands. They range from sending
in U.S. troops to guard nuclear facilities - which Pakistan has
not asked for and almost certainly would not accept - to
technical assistance in transporting nuclear materials and
guarding against their unauthorized use. Any one of those would
involve overturning long-standing U.S. policy, which has been to
oppose nuclear programs, such as Pakistan's, that are outside
international controls.
The dilemma is similar to the one over whether to give drug
addicts clean needles to stem the spread of disease, said Lee
Feinstein, who as a State Department official in the Clinton
administration helped formulate the U.S. response to India and
Pakistan's May 1998 tit-for-tat nuclear tests. While
nonproliferation is still important, "we have treaty obligations
that didn't exactly foresee the circumstances we're in now," said
Feinstein, now at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
a Washington research firm. Those obligations include the 1968
Nonproliferation Treaty, which bars encouragement and assistance
to any country except the original five declared nuclear powers:
the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France. Pakistan,
where a vocal minority supports Islamic radicals, has between 23
and 29 nuclear weapons, according to the Washington-based Center
for Defense Information, a research outfit led by retired
military personnel. It has a plant to enrich uranium for nuclear
weapons at Kahuta, outside Islamabad, and a newer facility for
producing plutonium at Chasma, southwest of the capital. U.S.
officials are concerned enough about political instability in
Pakistan that they are trying to minimize the U.S. military's use
of the country for expected strikes on Afghanistan in retaliation
for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
"Pakistan is a fragile political society, and we don't want to
burden Pakistan with more than we absolutely need," Deputy
Secretary of State Richard Armitage said yesterday on ABC News'
Good Morning America. U.S. experts inside and outside government
say that Pakistan's nuclear weapons, controlled by the army,
appear to be under secure control for now.
"I'm not in a position to say there's not a real source of
concern, because we've seen the unthinkable," said George
Perkovich, author of India's Nuclear Bomb, referring to the
attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. But, he said,
images of "a bunch of guys with long beards running through a
fence somewhere" in Pakistan and taking over a nuclear weapons
complex are unrealistic.
Warren P. Strobel's e-mail address is wstrobel@krwashington.com.
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************