***************************************************************** 03/09/01 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 9.62 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS 1 Key GOP senators back off Nevada as site for interim waste 2 Washington Group, Raytheon feud fuels suit 3 Waste compact can sue state 4 Subs indicate nuclear power safe on land 5 USEC, others compete for work on hazardous waste for later use - 6 Activist: Storm-related outage caused near-disaster at Seabrook 7 TVA mulls reviving mothballed Ala. nuclear power plant 8 Senate bill seeks $84M for miners 9 Public Service Board rejects quick Yankee gas plan 10 Legislature sends President Bush a resolution reaffirming its 11 MB - Nuke debate goes beyond Singapore - 12 Taiwan time updated 13 Let reason guide nuclear debate 14 India: Nuclear power to go private 15 Govt paving way for pvt role in nuclear power 16 N-programme due to China: Fernandes 17 Energy bill aims to increase oil, gas production 18 S Korea to Produce R Nuclear Reactor Fuel Rods 19 Norway appeals to Britain over Sellafield emissions 20 Inquiry Launched Into London's Nuclear Trains 21 London nuclear waste routes revealed 22 German Greens to take chance with new leftist leader 23 German activists occupy nuclear waste loading site 24 FOE: NUCLEAR WASTE DERAILMENT 25 Ditching Finn nuclear plans would raise bills - industry 26 New Shutdown for Glitch-Plagued Czech Nuclear Plant 27 Letter: Nuclear energy not quick fix 28 Nuclear use chairman sacked 29 Nuclear sector faces experts crisis 30 Scotland: DU recovery attempts abandoned due to bad weather 31 Plant Keeping the Lid on Radiation Questions - 32 Report: Iran equipping nuclear power plant - 33 Bill promotes nuclear power, funds transmutation research NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS 1 CIA documents shed light on Cold War 2 Debate flares on whether U.S. nuclear subs should be scrapped 3 France to be asked to explain Mururoa Atoll's state 4 D.P.R.K. Threatens to End Missile Moratorium, Nuclear Cooperation 5 LAES Whistle Blower Keeping Up Job Fight 6 Russia accused of stalling nuclear cleanup 7 Determined to find the 'truth' Widow says radiation killed 8 Hanford regulators worry about future cleanup budget 9 Scour Hanford site for other savings ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Key GOP senators back off Nevada as site for interim waste storage March 09, 2001 By Mary Manning LAS VEGAS SUN Republican senators who in the past have pushed an effort for temporary storage of high-level nuclear waste in Nevada before scientific studies of the permanent Yucca Mountain repository are completed now say they will not press for the interim measure. Sens. Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Larry Craig, R-Idaho, are supporting an energy package that attempts to revive nuclear power, but neither Republican has an appetite for moving the wastes 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, they said this week. Nevada's entire congressional delegation has opposed storing the nuclear waste in Nevada. "That's very good news," David Cherry, a press secretary for Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said. There is no current bill seeking interim storage in Nevada before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, chaired by Murkowski, a committee staffer said. However, a proposal could emerge later in the year, he said. The senators said this week that they will wait until the site passes scientific muster before proposing further legislation. Murkowski is busy with a major energy policy bill that encourages more drilling for oil and natural gas in the United States including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, revives nuclear power as a clean energy source and supports clean coal technology. Until the White House takes action on Yucca Mountain, Murkowski and Craig said they would not submit further legislation. Since 1994, the GOP leaders have attempted to pass temporary storage legislation three times, but the efforts failed because the supporters could not muster enough votes to override a veto by the president. Current law prohibits storing high-level nuclear waste in Nevada as long as Yucca Mountain is under study. The Energy Department has been studying Yucca Mountain for more than 15 years as the site to bury 77,000 tons of commercial and defense wastes. If approved, it will take until 2010 at the earliest before any facility is open. In December the Sun reported in a copyrighted story that a two-page memo written with a 60-page report on the progress of DOE's study showed a bias toward approving the project. The memo explained how to sell the site to Congress despite mounting costs that could top $58 billion to build and operate the repository. Federal law requires that the DOE remain objective until the repository site receives final approval. Instead of releasing the report to Congress at the end of the year, the DOE delayed action while investigations into the memo are conducted. The DOE's inspector general and the General Accounting Office are investigating the bias allegations, delaying any site recommendation until at least the end of the year. Republican congressional leaders also are saying they don't plan to overturn any more environmental regulations passed in the waning days of the Clinton administration. But Craig said battles on environmental regulations are unlikely. President Bush imposed a 30-day hold on all last-minute regulations passed by the Clinton administration so his administration could review each action. The senators said they probably cannot review all of the new regulations by a May 15 deadline. A law allows the measures to become effective then. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 2 Washington Group, Raytheon feud fuels suit This story was published 3/9/2001 By Mary Hopkin Herald Oregon bureau HERMISTON -- The contractor responsible for the two of the largest government contracts in the Columbia Basin is suing the business it purchased one of those contracts from. In July, Washington Group International Inc. purchased 200 projects from Lexington, Mass.-based Raytheon Co., including the contract to build and operate the Umatilla Chemical Depot incinerator plant, which will be used destroy the 7.4 million pounds of deadly nerve and mustard agents stored there. In addition, Washington Group partnered with Bechtel National Inc. to bid on the $4 billion Hanford vitrification contract to build and operate a plant to convert Hanford's radioactive tank waste into glass. The Department of Energy awarded the contract to the Bechtel-led team in December. Now Washington Group has its hands full of financial problems and is laying the blame on Raytheon, alleging fraud and breach of contract and looking to rescind the deal. "In a nutshell, we are in a short-term cash-flow crisis caused by a number of projects we acquired from Raytheon," said Chris Early, a spokesman for Washington Demilitarization Co., the Washington Group company building the incinerator plant. "About 20 of those had problems that were not disclosed to us, and of those, about a half dozen had sincere problems that have led to our financial problems," said Brent Brandon of Washington Group. Washington Group is an engineering and construction company that started as a road construction company in Missoula, Mont., in 1964. It has since grown into the Northwest's largest construction and engineering company. Brandon declined to name the Raytheon projects his company inherited through the acquisition, in which Washington Group gave Raytheon $53 million in cash and assumed liabilities estimated at $450 million. Brandon said as part of that deal, Raytheon was supposed to provide Washington Group with final audits and financial documents in January to negotiate a final purchase price. Stephen Hanks, president of Washington Group, said if Raytheon had not misrepresented the state of its business affairs and the profitability of its projects, his company would not have its current financial woes. "A deal is a deal," Hanks said. "If Raytheon had lived up to their commitments, Washington Group would not find itself in the position it is in." Thomas D. Hyde, Raytheon's senior vice-president and general counsel, said Raytheon has acted responsibly and has not submitted the financial statements because Washington Group has not provided all the information needed to complete them. "It may be that WGI bit off more than it could chew, but we certainly aren't responsible for any failure by WGI to manage projects properly after closing," Hyde said. Furthermore, Raytheon does not believe a purchase price adjustment will be needed, said Raytheon spokesman David Polk. But Brandon said if Raytheon would have lived up to its end of the bargain, Washington Group would not have been forced to shut down construction this week on two Raytheon power plant projects in Massachusetts, in an effort to save about $380 million. That will enable Washington Group to fulfill its obligations at the depot and Hanford, as well as all its other projects, Brandon said. "The Department of Army and Department of Energy contracts are very important to us, and we plan to remain there and complete the work," Brandon said. Raytheon is holding an investor teleconference at 5:30 a.m. today to discuss the issue, in response to investor inquiries this week. Raytheon investors also may start asking about an announcement reported by The Associated Press that Moody's Investors Service may downgrade Raytheon's credit ratings on about $13 billion of Raytheon's debt and bank facilities. The AP reported Moody's said it is concerned Raytheon hasn't demonstrated improved cash flow and other performance measures. It also expressed concern over Raytheon's potential liability of up to $450 million to Washington Group. Raytheon declined to comment on the statements and denied any wrongdoing. The teleconference call will be accessible on Raytheon's investor relations Web site at www.raytheon.com/finance/index.htm. Back to top stories Copyright 2000 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 3 Waste compact can sue state BY BUTCH MABIN Lincoln Journal Star KEY DATES IN NUCLEAR WASTE STORY 1980 - U.S. Congress orders states to either construct low-level nuclear waste warehouses or form compacts with other states to store the materials. 1983 - Nebraska joins a compact with Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Kansas. 1987 - the Central Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission, composed of representatives from the five states, selects Nebraska as the host. Boyd County, near the South Dakota border, was later selected as host county. Dec. 21, 1998 - State officials say they will deny the waste facility contractor's license to building the warehouse. They cite as reasons potential groundwater contamination. Later that month the nuclear waste generators say the state did not act in good faith during the licensing process and file suit in U.S. District Court. March 1999 - U.S. District Judge Richard G. Kopf restrains the state from reviewing its decision to deny the license. He said there was evidence to support the waste commission's assertion that the review hearing "is a continuation of the sham licensing process" engaged in by Nebraska. April 2000 - the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, citing "continuing interference by former Gov. Ben Nelson in the licensing process," said there was evidence Nebraska officials were biased against construction of the facility. March 8, 2001 - the appeals court says the state waived its 11th Amendment immunity against lawsuits when it joined the compact. The ruling allows the 1998 lawsuit to go forward. A federal appeals panel said Thursday Nebraska can be sued by a multistate nuclear waste commission that alleges the state sabotaged efforts to build a waste dump in Boyd County. The unanimous, three-judge panel of the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in the same opinion, however, Nebraska had immunity against similar claims brought by a number of utilities and the contractor that tried to get the dump licensed. At stake is close to $100 million the waste commission, utilities and contractor say was spent on the proposed dump, which would have stored low-level nuclear waste. They alleged in a 1998 lawsuit the state dragged its feet on licensing the construction. Low-level nuclear waste includes contaminated tools and clothing from hospitals and nuclear power stations. Alan Peterson, attorney for the Central Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Compact Commission, said he was pleased with the opinion, which affirmed a lower court judge's ruling that Nebraska did not have constitutional immunity from the compact's lawsuit. Meanwhile, Washington, D.C., attorney William Bradford Reynolds, hired by the state to represent it in the dispute, said he was "heartened" that the appeals court said Nebraska had immunity from the utilities and contractor. He said the state would continue to press its immunity arguments against the commission. "I do believe the panel got it wrong insofar as the commission's case is concerned," he said. "The commission never suffered any damages here." The commission, several utilities, including the Omaha Public Power District, and the contractor, U.S. Ecology, are alleging in a federal lawsuit that Nebraska officials acted in bad faith. Specifically, they contend the state announced its intention to deny the license for political reasons, rather than ecological ones. They are seeking to recover some of the $100 million or more spent on the project. The state countered that it had rational reasons for denying the license - specifically citing a potential for groundwater contamination - and also argued the 11th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protected it against the lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf ruled the state waived its constitutional immunity when it joined the compact with Kansas, Louisiana, Arkansas and Oklahoma, so Nebraska appealed to the 8th Circuit. In affirming Kopf's decision that allowed the commission lawsuit, the appeals panel noted the organization's bylaws include a provision allowing it "to initiate 'any proceedings . . . before any court of law,' which includes suits for breach of the Compact." The panel reversed Kopf's decision denying the state's immunity from the utilities and U.S. Ecology under commission bylaws, however. But the panel also directed the judge to determine whether those plaintiffs could sue the state on constitutional grounds. Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States, Entergy Louisiana and Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp., along with OPPD, are the utilities suing the state. Neither Omaha attorney Tom Johnson, who is representing several of the utilities, nor Lincoln attorney Steve Seglin, lawyer for U.S. Ecology, were available to comment Thursday. Nebraska joined the compact with the other four states in 1983, in compliance with a 1980 Congressional mandate that states build their own nuclear waste dumps or align with other states to handle the materials. Trial on the lawsuit has been set for June 2002. *Reach Butch Mabin at 473-7234 or bmabin@journalstar.com* Copyright © 2001, Lincoln Journal Star. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 Subs indicate nuclear power safe on land ContraCostaTimes.com *Published Thursday, March 8, 2001 * LETTERS TO THE CONTRA COSTA TIMES To my knowledge, since the launching of the USS Nautilus in 1957, the Navy has been operating nuclear power plants aboard our naval vessels with a perfect safety record. I have not heard of a single incident where we blew up one of our ships, or irradiated a single sailor, since Admiral Hyman Rickover's nuclear power program began. If we can operate these units safely within the confines of a steel hull, then I'm sure we can do the same on dry land. We need nuclear power to meet the demanding energy needs of California. I believe we can do this safely and in an environmentally responsible manner. I believe we should adopt the French model for nuclear fueled power generation. That is to have a single plant design for the entire country. One that is safe, efficient, economical to construct and doesn't require a unique set of regulatory and environmental approvals prior to construction. Let's get the politics out of our energy business and move forward toward a new era of energy independence. John DeuPree Brentwood ***************************************************************** 5 USEC, others compete for work on hazardous waste for later use - By Joe Walker The Paducah Sun Friday, March 09, 2001 Paducah, Kentucky USEC, others compete for work on hazardous waste for later use *The cylinders are not of any commercial use now, but a use may be found one day. Paducah would be involved in the conversion.* By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com--*270.575.8650* Eleven firms, including USEC Inc., are involved in five bids to convert tons of hazardous uranium waste at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant into safer material that may one day have commercial use. The U.S. Enrichment Corp., a USEC subsidiary, has joined CH2M Hill, a national environmental firm, to form Oak Ridge, Tenn.-based American Conversion Services to seek the work from the Department of Energy, which owns the plant. DOE plans to award a contract by Aug. 1 to build conversion facilities at Paducah and its sister plant at Portsmouth, Ohio. The Ohio plant is scheduled to close in June. In 1998, Congress passed a law earmarking $373 million and requiring DOE to build facilities at each plant to recycle about 50,000 cylinders — roughly 14 billion pounds — of spent uranium hexafluoride, or UF6. Most of the cylinders are at Paducah; others are at Portsmouth and a closed enrichment plant at Oak Ridge, Tenn. Depleted UF6 is hazardous and contains low-level radiation. It has no established commercial use, but the facilities would convert the waste to safer material while commercial applications are developed. The law requires the facilities to be running by 2004. Some past estimates have shown each plant would employ 100 to 200 people, depending on the level of government involvement. To bid for the conversion work, USEC teamed with CH2M Hill, which has extensive cleanup experience. Hill was a chief contractor for DOE a decade ago in efforts to characterize groundwater and other contamination at the Paducah plant. Speaking in Paducah in January, USEC Chief Executive Officer William Timbers said the firm was aggressively looking for work outside its customary field of uranium enrichment. USEC spokeswoman Elizabeth Stuckle repeated that stance Thursday, when asked about the recent USEC bid. "While strengthening our enrichment business is our first priority, we're also seeking new business opportunities, such as bidding on the conversion of depleted uranium," she said. "That would mean a conversion plant in Paducah, and we believe we're best suited for that work." U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Louisville, who sponsored the 1998 legislation, repeatedly accused DOE of foot-dragging on the project until late last year. At his regular news conference Thursday, McConnell said he will meet Tuesday with new Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to discuss Paducah plant environmental funding. He declined to speculate on the significance of the new proposals. Others submitting bids for the conversion work by the March 1 deadline: --Foster Wheeler Environmental Conversion Services of Oak Ridge, formed by BWX Technology Services, British Nuclear Fuels and Foster Wheeler Environmental Corp. BWXT, a leading uranium processor, is a partner with Bechtel National to manage a nuclear weapons plant at Oak Ridge. British Nuclear is a nuclear fuel processor that recycles DOE scrap nickel in Oak Ridge. Foster Wheeler, a New Jersey-based environmental firm, lost a bid with two other firms to be the lead environmental contractor for DOE at Paducah a few years ago. --Jacobs-Cogema of Oak Ridge, formed by Jacobs Engineering Group and Cogema. Jacobs is a partner with Bechtel National in Bechtel Jacobs, which beat Foster Wheeler and others to become the Paducah plant's lead environmental contractor. Cogema, a French firm, is a world leader in nuclear fuel services and already operates conversion facilities. --General Atomics, a nuclear services firm in San Diego. It joined Honeywell for a pilot conversion facility a few years ago at Metropolis, Ill., where Honeywell runs a plant that makes raw product for USEC. A consortium of General Atomics and Texas Pacific Group unsuccessfully bid about $1.5 billion to buy USEC Inc. in 1998 before USEC was privatized. --Uranium Disposition Services of Oak Ridge, formed by Framatome ANP (Advanced Nuclear Power) Richland, Duratek Federal Services, and Burns and Roe Enterprises. Framatome, of France, is a world leader in nuclear reactor production. Duratek, a Maryland firm, has advanced nuclear waste disposal technology. Burns and Roe is a New Jersey-based architectural and engineering firm. David Fuller, president of the Paducah plant's atomic workers' union, said the proposals show progress for work that had seemed too bogged to be realistic. "It's been a pet project of ours for what's turned into a long time now," he said. "We're very, very happy to see at least indications that this is ready to move forward. We're hopeful that a winner will be selected in early August and funding will be available to move right into the construction phase." Fuller called the work a "centerpiece" to help offset some of the hundreds of layoffs at the plant in the past three years as USEC struggles financially. Regardless of the winner, the union will seek the same wages, benefits and seniority rights that it has with USEC, he said. ***************************************************************** 6 Activist: Storm-related outage caused near-disaster at Seabrook plant The Telegraph Online STATE/NEW ENGLAND Friday, March 09, 2001 By The Associated Press CONCORD (AP) – The Seabrook nuclear plant “dodged a bullet” this week when backup generators kicked in after the reactor was shut down due to a power failure, a longtime anti-nuclear opponent said Thursday. “What people don’t understand is that the safety systems rely on the electrical grid. Once you lose the grid, you lose margins of safety at the plant,” said Paul Gunter of the Nuclear Information Resource Center in Washington. Late Monday night, the plant declared a low-level emergency after power in the area was knocked out by the nor’easter that dumped up to two feet of snow in parts of New Hampshire. Three high-voltage lines that carry power to the plant to run systems, including emergency equipment, went down. The safety equipment ran off diesel generators during the outage. The alert, called an “unusual event,” was called off at 10:40 a.m. Wednesday, though the reactor remained shut down Thursday, and it was not known when it would be back up and running. The alert was the lowest of four emergency levels at nuclear plants. Plant spokesman John Giarrusso insisted Thursday there was no danger to the public, that all backup systems worked as expected and there was no concern about safety. “The plant reacted exactly how it was supposed to,” Giarrusso said. “You’ve got to feel confident when that happens. I can’t conjecture to play the ‘what if?’ game. But I know they’re confident in the plan.” Diane Screnci, a spokeswoman for the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said the plant followed proper procedures in an emergency by notifying the agency immediately and updating the situation every few hours. “What we require is that plants have backup power if they lose power,” Screnci said from the agency’s regional office in King of Prussia, Pa. “In this case, it worked as designed.” She said the Seabrook plant has two required backup systems. “The purpose is to keep the fuel cool,” Screnci said. “If you don’t, it can melt.” And that is exactly what anti-nuclear activists are worried about. Gunter said a significant problem with nuclear plants in the United States is that they are powered by offsite electrical supplies. When backup systems kick in, they power emergency systems based on priorities, he said. In the Seabrook case, for example, a steam-driven emergency feedwater pump failed to turn on automatically when the outage occurred, according to a report of the incident filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The pump did start soon afterward. “It is a fairly infrequent event,” David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineering expert with the watchdog group Union of Concerned Scientists, said of plant outages. “The one thing that is on the horizon that could make it happen more is electric deregulation.” Lochbaum said that under deregulation, money from ratepayers to fund backup systems at nuclear power plants is not as guaranteed. New Hampshire has approved a deregulation plan, but opponents are trying to block it. For the time being, Seabrook officials said they will continue to focus on safety and make sure the backup systems work. Screnci, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokeswoman, said the agency has a resident inspector assigned to every plant, including Seabrook. [Telegraph Survey 2-13-01] Portions © 2001, Telegraph Publishing Company, Nashua, New Hampshire ***************************************************************** 7 TVA mulls reviving mothballed Ala. nuclear power plant USA: March 9, 2001 NEW YORK - TVA Nuclear, a subsidiary of Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), is considering reactivating its 1,065-megawatt (MW) Browns Ferry 1 nuclear unit in Alabama to meet growing power demand, a spokesman said yesterday. "It is an option," spokesman Gil Francis told Reuters, adding that TVA has never considered the unit permanently closed since it shut its doors in March 1985. "Nothing has changed from TVA's point of view. We continue to consider it an option," Francis said. The Browns Ferry unit, in Decatur, Ala., which began service in 1974, was shut along with adjacent units 2 and 3, both rated at 1,065 MW, amid ongoing safety concerns. Browns Ferry 2 was returned to service in 1991, while Browns Ferry unit 3 returned to service in the mid-1990s. Both units are generating power today. "We have to do the technical and financial analysis to see if it would be worth bringing Unit 1 back, and then we would have to meet all of the (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) requirements," Francis said. Returning Unit 1 to service would cost over $1 billion, Francis said, which TVA has to weigh against the rising cost of natural gas and coal, the fuels it uses at most of its other generating facilities. "A lot of this is being driven by power demand. We're seeing about a 1,000 MW demand increase per year," the spokesman said. Several Alabama politicians have also recently called for TVA to consider restarting Unit 1, Francis said, with those politicians looking for ways to avoid the kind of power shortage currently creating havoc in California's electricity market. TVA Nuclear is a subsidiary of government-owned Tennessee Valley Authority, headquartered in Knoxville. Tennessee Valley Authority supplies power to nearly eight million people in almost all of Tennessee and parts of Mississippi, Kentucky, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia. The company has about 29,500 MW of generating capacity, of which about half is supplied by coal-fired power plants, with about 20 percent of generation coming from nuclear power sources, about 20 percent from hydroelectric dams, and about 10 percent from natural gas and oil-fired plants. In January, TVA issued a request for proposals for long-term supply of up to 600 MW of base-load power capacity and up to 600 MW of summer peaking power capacity beginning June 1, 2004. The company is also building several large coal and gas-fired power plants in an effort to stay ahead of increasing demand, which Francis said is growing at about 3 percent annually in the southeastern U.S. REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 8 Senate bill seeks $84M for miners *By GARY HARMON The Daily Sentinel* One bill in the U.S. Senate calls for the federal government to pump $84 million immediately into a trust fund for uranium miners sickened by radiation exposure. A second calls for the federal government to make payments automatically when awards are made to uranium workers who suffer from compensable diseases. Sens. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., and Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, introduced the measures, Senate Bill 448 and Senate Bill 449 in response to the loss of funding last year for the program. The U.S. Department of Justice, which administers the Radiation Exposure Compensation program, began sending out 255 IOUs last May to uranium miners who had qualified for $100,000 compassionate payments, but for which the money had run out. Hatch also is pushing for a General Accounting Office investigation into how the trust fund ran dry. The office is the investigatory arm of Congress. The bill to replenish the fund, S.B. 449, earmarks $84 million in emergency appropriations to cover the IOUs and claims likely to be approved through next September. Ed Brickey of Grand Junction, vice president of a coalition of organizations pressing for reforms to the 1990 Radiation Exposure Compensation Act and amendments made last year, said it's "overtime" for Congress to take up the IOUs. "If anything slows this bill down, it would be an injustice," Brickey said. The Colorado Uranium Workers Council will discuss the measures tonight at 7 at Riverside Baptist Church, 1510 N. 17th St. Brickey said the organization will have sample letters available for letters to the senators and the White House. The Justice Department, he said, also needs to be prodded to draft new regulations for applicants. Congress last year added uranium millers and haulers to the list of people whose radiation-related diseases could be compensated by the federal government. In addition, Congress boosted the payments from $100,000 to $150,000 and said the federal government would pick up medical expenses related to the diseases, such as lung cancer, fibrosis, kidney cancers and other illnesses. ***************************************************************** 9 Public Service Board rejects quick Yankee gas plan By Associated Press, 3/8/2001 19:45 MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) State regulators have turned down a request by the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. for speedy approval of its plan to build a $6.6 million hydrogen gas treatment facility at its Vernon reactor. In a letter to Vermont Yankee, the board said that the size and cost of the project made a quick hearing not in the best interests of Vermont ratepayers, according to Susan Hudson, clerk of the board. ''The project cannot be considered to be of limited size and scope because it involves a significant investment (approximately $6.6 million) in the bulk gas storage facility and it will result in substantial onsite construction,'' Hudson wrote Yankee earlier this week on behalf of the board. ''This investment and associated construction have the potential to have significant impacts'' and should be fully reviewed under the state law governing development of new utility facilities, she wrote. Hudson said Wednesday that Yankee would have to resubmit its petition before a hearing schedule could be established. Vermont Yankee needs a certificate of public good from the Public Service Board before it can build the hydrogen gas facility, which would be used to treat the water inside the reactor core cooling system in an effort to slow down corrosion and cracking of cooling system components, a problem that is common at General Electric boiling water reactors. By installing the system, the plant would be keeping its options open about a possible license extension beyond 2012, when its license expires. Vermont Yankee spokesman Robert Williams said Wednesday that Yankee would not challenge the board's determination that an expedited hearing was not warranted. ''We intend to resubmit and we look forward to presenting the case,'' Williams said. Williams said that the hydrogen bulk gas facility, and the water treatment plans, had been installed at other General Electric boiling water reactors. ''This is the right thing to do. Most BRWs have a hydrogen system,'' he said. ***************************************************************** 10 Legislature sends President Bush a resolution reaffirming its opposition to Yucca Mountain CARSON Thursday, March 8, 2001 4:44 AM *By Geoff Dornan* With just two dissenting votes in the Senate, Nevada lawmakers Wednesday reaffirmed their opposition to any attempt to locate a nuclear dump in Nevada. Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, said Senate Joint Resolution 6 also opposes using the electric energy crisis to push for more nuclear plants. "The promotion of new power plants under the guise of responding to the electricity crisis facing California, as proposed in energy legislation being considered in Congress, is irresponsible given that the issue of safe disposal of the waste has not been resolved," according to the resolution. "It's important that they know our opposition is unwavering," said Titus. She was joined by Sen. Jon Porter, R-Henderson, who said a nuclear dump north of Las Vegas would cost the state more than a hundred thousand jobs and millions in tourist dollars. And Porter said he objects to the argument that science should decide whether Yucca Mountain is eventually named the nation's nuclear waste dump. "I don't think science should decide," he said. "I think Nevada should decide." "Sending Congress a resolution is nothing new," said Titus. "What is new about the situation is the current investigation into what appears to be the unapologetic bias in the Department of Energy and the clamoring for new nuclear power even though the waste problem has not been addressed." Her resolution refers to the Department of Energy's handling of the Yucca Mountain investigation process as "biased and blatantly political." "Finally, we are facing an impending decision by the president this summer and we cannot afford to wait," she said. The only speaker in opposition was Sen. Joe Neal, D-North Las Vegas. He said Nevada is wasting its time on another Yucca Mountain resolution when it should be concentrating on other issues such as out-of-control price increases for electricity. Sen. Lawrence Jacobsen, R-Minden, was the other dissenting vote. Tahoe.com ***************************************************************** 11 MB - Nuke debate goes beyond Singapore - At Issue by Hern Zenarosa (03/10/2001) At Issue by Hern Zenarosa Opinion/Editorial Saturday, 10 March 2001 QUESTIONS about possibilities that Singapore might be secretly holding nuclear weapons for the United States fueled heated debates in the citystate's parliament the other day, provoking strong denials from the defense ministry. The issue was raised by opposition leaders who were bothered by the continued secrecy of the content of the military agreement entered into by the two countries more than ten years ago. Opposition leaders wanted to know why, after a decade, the government still cannot reveal what's in the accord, hinting it might include provisions in conflict with the state's nuclear-free policy. Needless to say, the concern transcends the confines of Singapore boundary, considering the range and extent of US security approach in the region as evidenced by past experience and current circumstances. *** In reality no country in Asia can say it is remotely related to American security interest more so if Singapore is involved as suspected by some of its leaders. Not the Philippines or any of its allies in the ASEAN. In trying to allay fears, Singapore Defense Minister David Lim categorically denied the opposition's suspicion. "There are no nuclear weapons stored in Singapore," the Associated Press quoted him, explaining the "classified military pacts with the United States are in accordance with the city-state's nuclear-free policy." It may be worth mentioning that Singapore which was ruled by Lee Kuan Yew for many years, has no known tradition of free debates even in parliament as widely practiced in the Philippines, making demands for information by the opposition an unusual occurrence that invited media attention. Some 96 percent of members of its parliament is controlled by the government, a situation that makes free debate an improbable setting for democratic expression of ideas and principles. But the debate now goes beyond Singapore. Copyright © 2000 Manila Bulletin, All Rights Reserved Back ***************************************************************** 12 Taiwan time updated 2001.03.10¡@2:34am EPA Reaffirms Anti-Nuclear Stance, Early Retirement of Nuclear Plants Taipei, March 9 (CNA) New Environmental Protection Administrator Hao Lung-ping reaffirmed Friday his anti-nuclear stance, saying that he hopes the fourth nuclear power plant can be decommissioned earlier than planned if power supplies prove sufficient. Hao made the remarks when fielding questions on his stance on the controversial nuclear power plant during an interpellation session at the legislature. Also attending the session was Hu Chin-piao, chairman of the Atomic Energy Council. Hao stressed that the EPA is opposed to nuclear power and favors a nuclear free homeland, adding that he hopes the first, second and third nuclear power plants can be decommissioned earlier than planned and that the fourth one, which is presently one-third complete, will go the same way if energy supplies permit. Hu for his part said that his position is neither for nor against nuclear power and that he will monitor the nuclear power safety issue in a professional way. Hao noted that the fourth nuclear power plant, construction of which was halted in October, is now at the stage of restarting construction and added that unless there is a major change in the situation, the EPA will only rigorously monitor the project to make sure it follows the requirements of environmental protection. Hao was responding to legislators Chen Chi-mai and Chen Chao-nan, who pointed out that a white paper released by the opposition New Party -- of which Hao was convenor before being invited to join the Cabinet -- states that the tiny opposition party advocates no further construction of nuclear power units, which runs counter to Hao's stance on the restarting of the fourth plant. Hao also said the most urgent task is to conserve energy and stressed that unless the legislature passes a referendum bill and makes it retrospective, he will not favor a referendum on the controversial issue. Hao noted that before he assumed his new post Wednesday, he told President Chen Shui-bian and Premier Chang Chun-hsiung that he would act according to the law and respect the Constitution. On the recent oil spill off the coast of southern Taiwan, he said that after he visited Kenting National Park for a first-hand inspection, he realized that although the oil spill on the sea has been contained, the clean-up of the oil that reached the coastline will not be completed for another two weeks. In addition, he warned, there are still around 250 tons of oil and iron ore within the stranded freighter Amorgos, which broke in two after grounding, and that there is still the risk that the vessel will disintegrate and further pollute the area. He also noted that the ship's owners are being fined at a rate of NT$1.5 million (US$46,300) per day as long as the vessel remains grounded and the danger remains. China Times Inter@ctive Main Page (in Big-5 Chinese) ***************************************************************** 13 Let reason guide nuclear debate The Taipei Times Online: 2001-03-09 Friday, March 9th, 2001 By Fu Daiwie ³Å¤j¬° The ruling DPP announced, almost without condition, that construction on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant (®Ö¥|) is to resume. This move was as frustrating as it was desperate. Just a few days before the announcement, we had heard that unconditional resumption of construction had been rejected, and then, just a few days later, the government was already moaning and groaning, expressing profound regret that construction would be resumed. The dizzying speed with which the government changed its position leaves one scratching one's head. After tempers have subsided, how is the DPP going to reconsider the direction of Taiwan's energy development from a macro perspective? On the one hand, we see the DPP's Lin I-hsiung (ªL¸q¶¯) resolutely resigning his post as the party's top adviser to protest the decision to resume construction. But we also constantly hear voices in the DPP criticizing the anti-nuclear movement. This kind of critical voice has basically made the anti-nuclear movement -- a cause that has influenced countless people in Taiwan and awakened broad public awareness -- look like a populist movement, lacking reason and professionalism. As the ruling party sings the praises of the "knowledge economy," this so called anti-intellectual, populist tide could well become an obstacle to the government as it attempts to move in a new policy direction. What's more, this kind of criticism implies that Taiwan must continue to depend on cheap labor and cheap electricity for its industrial output, and therefore cannot afford to "de-nuclearize" in the face of competition from manufacturing economies in East Asia and elsewhere. Similarly, it implies we shouldn't put excessive stress on environmental protection, let alone stress the fact that not one industrialized Asian country has become "non-nuclear." I strongly disagree with this kind of argument. First of all, the formulation of an inevitable conflict between populism and reason is actually something with which we've been familiar for quite a while. During the era of KMT rule, wasn't the slogan of "reason and professionalism" often used to suppress environmental and anti-nuclear activism? In fact, in observing the development of grassroots and environmental activism over the past 10 years, the environmental and anti-nuclear movements have proven to be the most "intellectual" of the social activist causes. Over the longterm, they have had an extremely high percentage of science and engineering professors in their ranks. In addition, the nurturing effect of the movements, as well as participants' personal stake in the issues, combined to make those involved in anti-nuclear activities the most civic-minded of their kind -- the group most able to rationally question traditional knowledge and authority. On numerous occasions I have seen televised debates between Kungliao (°^¼d) residents and pro-nuclear professors from National Tsinghua University (²MµØ¤j¾Ç), and been deeply impressed by the residents' powerful arguments and ability to raise substantial, commonsense questions. What is a truly democratic society? If knowledge and power cannot be united with civil rights, the right to information and self-determination, then democracy is just empty talk. Second, with regards to the question of structural restrictions on Taiwan in terms of division of labor in the global economy, we know that the international division of labor is something that is relative and historical, not absolute. In the development of the modern world system, many countries have seen their status move up and down in the global economy. During the 1960s and 1970s, some academics said that Taiwan suffered from structural limitations, and was thus unable to move away from an economy based on light industry and cheap labor. But, with the new opportunities found in the international economy, we were able to achieve a partial economic transformation, though at a considerable social price. Does this mean that even today we still have to use the excuse of structural limitations to suppress the environmental movement? It is precisely the restrictions imposed by this international structure that led to the state of emergency that exists today and that make it necessary for us to overcome this structural limitation -- again. Today, as we consider different paths of energy development, we cannot afford to let economic development and environmental activism conflict with each other. From the substantial development witnessed in Germany's alternative energy industry and looking at the business opportunities reflected in the research and development done on alternative energy, it is evident that a new energy policy that modifies the direction of economic development -- together with a socially responsible environmental policy -- could complement each other. A year ago, a Texas-based professor, Chen Mo-shing (³¯ÂÓ¬P), published an article in Taiwan outlining alternative energy policy considerations and also criticizing the waste and hindrance to economic development associated with nuclear power. Even if construction on the nuclear plant resumes, these are ideas that are worth considering. The problems caused in California by the liberalization of the power industry should not be used as an excuse for Taiwan -- a place very different in terms of the international division of labor -- to embrace nuclear energy. By the same token, when France became a nuclear power it didn't mean that East Asia and Taiwan had to follow its example. Lastly, the formulation and promotion of new energy policies in the 21st century is no easy affair for Taiwan. In the past, although Taiwan's environmental and anti-nuclear movements were highly intellectual, they still had many faults and needed even more intellectuals and experts to join in. Attracting more professionals to join in the research and development of alternative energy sources while engendering more far-reaching concern in civil society -- and then combining these two to prevent the so-called "populism versus reason" bipolar conflict -- will perhaps be the keystone of the next phase of the environmental knowledge movement. As for the participation of more professionals, the research institutes of Taiwan's universities, the National Science Council (°ê¬ì·|) and Academia Sinica (¤¤¬ã°|) all should bear responsibility. *Fu Daiwie is a professor at National Tsinghua University. * Translated by Scudder Smith This story has been viewed 183 times. Copyright © 1999-2001 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 India: Nuclear power to go private Friday, March 9, 2001 ENS Economic Bureau New Delhi, March 8: With the Power Finance Corporation (PFC) winning the mandate to find a partner for the Kaiga Atomic Power Project, the stage is all set for allowing private sector units to produce nuclear power in the country. Before helping the Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL) to find a joint venture partner for the Kaiga plant in Karnataka, Power Finance Corporation will have to suggest suitable modifications to the Atomic Energy Act that will allow private sector participation in this area. PFC, in consortium with Fieldstone Capital Services and RR Financial, won this bid against competitors that include Price Waterhouse Coopers, McKinsey, JM Morgan Stanley and ICICI. The private partner will be allowed to have upto 49 per cent of the joint venture's equity, while the balance will be held by the government-owned NPCIL. Copyright © 2001 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 15 Govt paving way for pvt role in nuclear power 9 March 2001 : The Times of India India NEW DELHI: Stage has been set for opening up the nuclear power sector for private participation with Nulcear Power Corporation (NCPIL) mandating Power Finance Corporation to suggest changes in the Atomic Energy Act of 1962 and hunt a joint venture partner for Rs 3,800 crore Kaiga atomic power project. The Power Finance Corporation (PFC) was awarded the consultancy contract for the prestigious 440 mw Kaiga project from the four shortlisted bidders, which included PriceWaterhouseCoopers, JM Morgan Stanley and ICICI. PFC would locate partners for up to 49 per cent equity in the proposed project of two units of 220 mw, which would take up to four years for completion after the formation of the JV. When contacted, N.D Tyagi, additional general manager (consultancy services) of PFC, said "our contract is two-fold. First we will make suggestions for necessary changes in the act as per which nuclear power is the monopoly of the state." "After this we will hunt for prospective partners both within and outside the country for equity participation up to 49 per cent. The proposed JV will not be under state control, but NPCIL will have the majority 51 per cent stake," he said. The project would have equity component of up to Rs 800 crore, sources said, adding that the rest of the money would be generated from the debt market. They, however, clarified that PFC has not been contacted for arranging finance for the project, which will open up the restricted area of nuclear power generation with its immense potential. PFC succeeded in getting the contract, for which price bids were invited sometime in September-October, due to its almost negligible quote for consultancy, sources said, adding the corporation would get about 1 per cent of the total equity brought in by new partners as 'success fees'. The Kaiga project was originally planned for completion during the Ninth Plan period, but now it is expected that actual work would start only after commencement of the 10th Five Year Plan from April 2002. Sources said that partners would be selected on the basis of their capability to raise funds for equity participation, experience in project management and their relationship with equipment manufacturers. National Thermal Power Corporation and Bharat Heavy Electricals (BHEL) could be eligible for equity participation, sources added. *(PTI) ***************************************************************** 16 N-programme due to China: Fernandes rediff.com: Union Defence Minister George Fernandes Friday said India had launched its nuclear programme almost four decades ago due to threats from China, after New Delhi failed to get nuclear security guarantees from the west and the erstwhile Soviet Union. "What happened to the north of us (1962 Sino-Indian conflict and the Chinese nuclear test in 1964) alerted us... when nuclear security was not available (for India), we chose our step to go nuclear," Fernandes said after releasing the book *The Pakistan Trap *in the South Block. He quoted paragraphs from a chapter in the book by defence analyst K Subrahmanyam on efforts by India to get nuclear cover from the US, the then USSR, Britain and France and all of them refused. It was only then that Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri gave a go-ahead to India's nuclear programme, he said while referring to a strong plea by Subrahmanyam, who was also present on the occasion, that the government should explain to the people why it decided to go nuclear even after having forcefully supported the cause of nuclear disarmament. Fernandes agreed with Subrahmanyam on the issue that the government should make the people aware of the activities of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence. However, the minister said that in making people aware, the government should take care of "the fear in the minds of the Muslim community in India that ISI activities could expose them to great danger". Subrahmanyam, who is convenor of the National Security Advisory Board and had chaired the Kargil Review Committee, sought a white paper by the government on ISI activities in India, saying that "if we do not sensitise the people, it is not easy to succeed in neutralising or countering these (ISI) attacks". Referring to this, Fernandes said while doing so "we should prevent falling into the trap that creates an atmosphere in which the Muslim community in India is pushed into a corner for crimes perpetrated from across the border." D C Pathak, former director of the Intelligence Bureau, said the intelligence agencies had "presented a complete picture to the government fairly early" about ISI plans, which included intelligence encirclement of India and spread of its activities in the northeast, besides balkanisation of the country. He said the Pak-Afghan axis today was "the biggest terrorist axis" operating in this part of the world. The book, edited by journalist Rajeev Sharma, contains articles from top personalities in the field of security and intelligence. Besides Subrahmanyam and Pathak, other contributors who were also present at the function were former Cabinet Secretary T S R Subramaniam, former army chief Gen V N Sharma, former Air Chief N C Suri, former CBI chief S K Dutta, and experts like Rear Admiral Raja Menon, Ved Marwah and K N Daruwala, former chairman of Joint Intelligence Command. (c) Copyright 2001 PTI. All rights reserved. Republication or ***************************************************************** 17 Energy bill aims to increase oil, gas production DOUG ABRAHMS Gannett News Service February 27th, 2001 WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans formally introduced a sweeping energy bill Monday to expand the nation’s supply of oil, natural gas and electricity in an attempt to lower prices and prevent blackouts such as those in California. The bill drops any reference, included in earlier drafts, to Yucca Mountain becoming the nation’s nuclear-waste dump. But the legislation still assumes that a nuclear-waste repository will be built and that nuclear power in the United States will increase. “I’m not willing to talk about nuclear power until there’s something done about nuclear waste,” said Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., who opposes Yucca Mountain. Reid requested the General Accounting Office, the watchdog arm of Congress, to investigate a whistleblower letter that the Yucca Mountain project contains substantial fraud and waste. The letter alleges that the Energy Department is biased in placing the waste dump at Yucca Mountain, he said. Democrats and environmentalists quickly denounced the legislation as focusing too little attention on conservation and advocating oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Sen. Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska and chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, introduced the bill that is expected to spark a major political battle. “We really have an energy crisis in this country. The supply is not keeping up with demand. That’s evident,” Murkowski said. “The time has come for a sound energy plan.” Murkowski’s plan: •Allows oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. •Gives tax breaks and cutting royalties to encourage oil production in the Gulf of Mexico and on public lands. •Pays for research into making coal a cleaner and more efficient fuel. •And makes it easier to build pipelines and electric transmission lines across the nation. His legislation also would add $1 billion to help low-income families pay their heating bills and offer subsidies to buy fuel-efficient cars. The bill, which changed little from a draft floating around Washington in the past month, would reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil to less than 50 percent of the country’s total energy needs. Now about 55 percent of the oil the United States uses is produced overseas. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., said Murkowski’s bill was overly generous with tax breaks to oil companies and focuses too little on reducing oil consumption, mainly from automobiles. Bingaman also opposes oil drilling in the Arctic refuge. “At a time when oil and gas prices are high, we believe it’s valid to say that industry does not need additional tax incentives for them to go forward,” the highest-ranking Democrat on the energy committee said. “We need a fuel-efficiency debate.” Instead, a far-reaching energy bill must look at increasing fuel efficiencies of cars, especially in the age of gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, he said. Also, tax incentives could be better targeted at consumers and businesses to buy more efficient appliances and lighting. “It’s a bill for corporate interests and not a vision for a long-term energy policy,” said Reid, the Senate’s second-highest ranking Democrat. The Murkowski bill provides subsidies of $5 billion to the nuclear industry alone, he said. If SUVs got three more miles to the gallon, that alone would save 1.5 million barrels of oil a day, Reid said, which would save more oil than can be extracted from the Arctic refuge. Reid predicted that the Murkowski bill would not pass the Senate, mainly because of opposition to Arctic drilling. ••• Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn. and Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., plan to introduce legislation later this week that would declare Arctic National Wildlife Refuge a protected wilderness area and off limits to drilling. The Bush administration is scheduled to weigh in with its own energy plan later although most expect it to recommend increasing oil and gas supplies and drilling in the Arctic refuge. No price for taxpayers has been placed the Murkowski bill yet; environmentalists say the cost could reach $20 billion in 10 years. © 2001 Reno Gazette-Journal ***************************************************************** 18 S Korea to Produce R Nuclear Reactor Fuel Rods Friday, March 9 8:57 AM SGT SEOUL, March 8 Asia Pulse - South Korea will manufacture and supply nuclear fuel for use in research and development (R) reactor, starting from 2003. The Atomic Energy Safety Commission approved Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute's (KAERI) plan to process and supply nuclear fuel for use by the nation's Hanaro R reactor in 2003, the Ministry of Science and Technology said Thursday. Accordingly, KAERI will produce annually all the 45 bundles of fuel rods the Hanaro R reactor needs a year, in addition to 420 kilograms of mixed powder used in making fuel rods for exports. KAERI produces fuel rods for use by nuclear power plants but imports R reactor fuel rods in view of the economics of producing in the country these rods which are more uranium-enriched than power generation reactor rods. Moreover, under a contract with Canada, KAERI is committed to long-term imports of Canadian R reactor fuel rods. (Yonhap) *Copyright © 2000 Asia Pulse Pte Ltd. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 19 Norway appeals to Britain over Sellafield emissions The Norway Post - Doorway to Norway 8. Mars 2001 The Norwegian Department of the Environment has appealed to Britain not to extend the permission for radioactive emissions from the Sellafield reprocessing plant. The Department fears that the radioactive emissions from one of the world's largest plants for the reprocessing of nuclear waste will harm the environment along the Norwegian coast. Last January it was reported that the British authorities had withdrawn its earlier demand that the plant must reduce radioactive emissions by 80 per cent. Norway has, together with the other Nordic countries, been in the forefront in the fight to reduce emissions from Sellafield. (NRK/Norway Post) Rolleiv Solholm Share this article with others ***************************************************************** 20 Inquiry Launched Into London's Nuclear Trains Environment News Service: LONDON, United Kingdom, March 8, 2001 (ENS) - Nuclear waste transported by rail through London is to be investigated in an inquiry aimed at discovering the level of radiation coming from trains. The investigation launched by the London Assembly this week will look at the likely effect of a major accident on the capital. [label] Label accompanying a spent fuel flask. (Photos courtesy CORE - Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive Environment) Spent fuel from three nuclear power stations in the southeast is regularly taken to British Nuclear Fuel's Sellafield plant in Cumbria, northwestern England, by rail. The routes pass through London, because of the lack of large storage facilities at the reactor sites. Part loads of nuclear waste are frequently stored at marshalling yards in Willesden, north London, before complete shipments are sent to Sellafield. Trains carrying spent nuclear fuel run through several London boroughs, including West Hampstead, Islington, Hackney and Newham in north London, Hammersmith and Fulham, Wandsworth and Lambeth in west London, and Bromley in southeast London. The cream colored transport cabins conceal spent fuel flasks, which are usually loaded into the cabins at the reactor site. The flask is constructed as a single forged carbon steel container with a separate lid which is bolted on. Heavy fins on the outer surface are for cooling purposes, increasing the effective heat transfer area of the flask. "Nuclear waste has been transported through London for many years," said Darren Johnson, chairman of the Radioactive Waste Trains Investigative Committee. "People in the local areas, through which these trains pass, have expressed their concerns on many occasions and we believe there are a lot of important questions that need to be answered. [train] Standard nuclear transporter with cabin containing one flask. "Londoners have a right to know about the effects of radiation coming from such trains and about the likely effect of a major accident on the capital." The committee will hear evidence from BNFL, the national rail company Railtrack, Direct Rail Services (DRS), representatives from local community groups and other interested parties. A report will be presented to the Assembly for approval in the summer. DRS was established in 1996 to give BNFL a strategic rail transport service following the privatization of the UK rail network. The London Assembly has 25 elected members who form a check and balance against the Mayor. Through its committees, the Assembly can investigates issues significant to London and influence the Mayor's policymaking by its reports. Assessments of radiation doses to railway workers and the public are made periodically by the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB). Radiation from spent fuel flasks comes from two principal sources - the flask contents and the flask itself. The spent fuel contents emit neutron and gamma radiation at varying levels depending on whether the fuel is Magnox or AGR (Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactors). A 1995 NRPB report which covered all flask types in use on the UK rail network concluded that: + AGR flasks emit much higher radiation dose rates than Magnox fuel; + Radiation doses from a static flask to members of the public positioned at the boundary of a marshalling yard were around 5 microSieverts per year, and less from a transient flask; + Doses to railway workers in marshalling yards were less than 100 microSieverts a year. The radiation dose from one chest X-ray is roughly equivalent to 50 microSieverts. Early in 1998, all transport of spent fuel from European power stations to Sellafield and to the French La Hague reprocessing plant were halted when significant radiation levels were found on several flasks in transit, and on the railway wagons carrying the flasks. [train] A pair of Magnox flasks from Japan, with shock absorber collars. The safe limit imposed by the International Atomic Energy Authorority (IAEA) for flask surface contamination is set at 4 Bequerels (Bq) per square centimeter. The IAEA is the world's governing body on the transport of radioactive materials. Governments in four countries started a joint investigation of incidents of surface contamination of rail containers after French authorities reported found "hot spots" on some containers and alerted their German, Swiss and UK counterparts. More incidents quickly came to light and the issue rapidly escalated into a political crisis in July 1998, particularly in Germany and Switzerland. Surface contamination above 4 becquerels per square centimeter (bq/cm2) was detected in several cases, rising to above 400 bq/cm2 in a small number of incidents. Regulatory authorities in each country stressed that the 4 bq/cm2 limit is a goal for "cleanliness" rather than safety and that there are substantial safety margins built into it. Later that year, a four-country report said incidents of surface radioactive contamination on European transports of irradiated nuclear fuel had not risked the health of rail workers or the general public. ***************************************************************** 21 London nuclear waste routes revealed *by Deepa Shah* Millions of Londoners unwittingly live a few yards from the transfer of highly radioactive nuclear waste, an investigation by the Greater London Authority has revealed. Three trains rumble through the capital every week, each carrying up to 40 deadly rods from three power stations to the Sellafield reprocessing plant in Cumbria - and now Londoners can find out for the first time what routes the locomotives take as the GLA's probe into the safety of the 40-year traffic gets underway. Darren Johnson, environment adviser to Mayor Ken Livingstone and head of the inquiry, said: "Londoners have a right to know about the effects of low-level radiation coming from such trains, and about the likely effect of a major accident on the capital. "People in the areas through which these trains pass have expressed concerns on many occasions and we believe there are a lot of important questions that need to be answered." The trains travel north to Sell-afield because of a lack of large storage facilities at the reactor sites. Two, from Sizewell and Bradwell power stations, pass through Romford, Ilford, Stratford, Hackney, Islington, Camden and West Hampstead before reaching sidings in Willesden. Once there, their cargos are sometimes combined with a third transported from Dungeness Power Station. That train trundles through Bromley, Lewisham, Peckham, Brixton, Battersea, West Brompton, West Kensington and Shepherd's Bush. From Willesden, the trains pass northwards through Brent and Harrow. London CND spokesman Lionel Trippett said: "If any terrorist group was stupid and determined enough they could prise open these flasks, even though they are made of steel and lined with lead. "These rods are absolutely lethal because they are intensely radioactive. Anyone who comes into contact with them would suffer radiation burns and risk getting cancers, such as thyroid cancer. "This stuff doesn't have to spend weeks going around our railway system. You could store it on the power station sites where it will lose its radioactivity fairly quickly and could then be conglomerated and transported once a year to Cumbria." He said the nuclear trains, which run during the day, are instantly recognisable. "They consist of a short, usually blue, freight train with a low-loading truck housing huge white containers which accommodate the rods. There's a guard's van at the end to enable someone to keep an eye on things." Direct Rail Services, the BNFL subsidiary which transports the waste, defended its safety record and said the transportation was subject to rigorous tests. A spokeswoman said: "In the UK more than six million miles have been clocked up by BNFL in transporting nuclear material, and all without an accident involving a release of radioactivity." An approved flask must be capable of surviving tests such as a nine-metre drop, a fire reaching temperatures of 800C for 30 minutes, and immersion under 15 metres of water for at least eight hours. The GLA committee undertaking the inquiry will consult with a number of organisations including BNFL, Railtrack and community groups, and hold an evidence-gathering session on 9 May. Its final report will be published in the summer. © Associated Newspapers Ltd., 09 March 2001 ***************************************************************** 22 German Greens to take chance with new leftist leader GERMANY: March 9, 2001 STUTTGART, Germany - Germany's ecologist Greens are set on Friday to elect an outspoken left-winger to their party leadership duo in a move that could make or break their re-election chances in next year's national poll. An opponent of Germany's part in the 1999 Kosovo war, a gay rights campaigner and fierce critic of human rights abuses, Claudia Roth is clearly aligned with the radical wing of the Greens, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's junior partners. But with Schroeder hinting his Social Democrats may have other options aside from renewing the current "Red-Green" coalition, Roth has pledged to work with Greens moderates to broaden its appeal beyond its environmentalist grass roots. "I am here not to represent just one wing but the whole of the party," Roth, 45, said in a recent media interview. Her candidacy at the three-day congress is unopposed. Hastily brought into play as the only viable successor to Renate Kuenast, who was summoned to Schroeder's cabinet to replace a farm minister sacked over the mad cow scare, Roth has won the backing of Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, leader of the Greens' moderate wing. Equally important will be her relationship to Fischer ally Fritz Kuhn, who as co-leader with Kuenast has been credited with helping the party smooth over long-simmering policy rifts brought into the open by its government debut. SUPPORT DANGEROUSLY LOW While Roth and Kuhn know each other from student days in their home region of Baden-Wuerttemberg, political analysts note they have frequently locked horns in the past, such as last year over an accord to phase out nuclear fuel attacked by Roth and other hard-core Greens as far too gradual. "With Roth's election, the independence of the party's leadership from its competing wings will be destroyed," said University of Hamburg's Joachim Raschke, forecasting a new descent into damaging power squabbles. Others disagree. "Holding office brings discipline," forecast one Greens MP, noting that Roth had since fallen behind the nuclear phase-out plan. The Stuttgart congress comes nearly three years to the day after a disastrous party meeting in the eastern town of Magdeburg when the Greens scared away droves of potential voters by agreeing a resolution that would have more than doubled the cost of petrol through taxes. Support halved from around 13 percent to the 6.7 percent they scored in the 1998 general election, when Schroeder picked them as coalition allies to oust Helmut Kohl. Despite the success of individual Greens like the populist Kuenast and dapper Fischer, who regularly rates as Germany's favourite politician despite recent questions over his militant youth, the party's overall support remains mired just above the five percent needed for seats in parliament. That has led to intense speculation, not denied by Schroeder, that the small liberal Free Democrats who share many of his centrist leanings could emerge as his favoured partner after a general election around 18 months away. Schroeder has in recent days warned the Greens against renewing calls to extend a modest yet unpopular set of "eco-taxes" on polluting calls past 2002. He says darkly that such a debate could lead to "alienation" within the coalition. However the eco-tax issue will be on the agenda of the Stuttgart congress. Story by Mark John REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 23 German activists occupy nuclear waste loading site GERMANY: March 9, 2001 DANNENBERG, Germany - About 30 environmentalist activists occupied a loading station for nuclear waste containers yesterday in protest at the planned resumption of waste shipments in Germany later this month. A police spokeswoman said the demonstrators, members of the environmentalist group Greenpeace, ended the protest peacefully after about four hours, although three were still on a temporary police communications mast they had climbed. "With this symbolic action we want to show our opposition to nuclear waste transport and make a call for peaceful resistance," Greenpeace spokesman Stefan Schurig said. Police detained some 25 demonstrators and said they were considering increasing security measures at the station at the northern town of Dannenberg where nuclear waste containers were due to be moved from railway transporters onto trucks. In another development, police said explosives experts were investigating two barrels probably filled with a petrol mixture found by children on a railway between Dannenberg and the town of Lueneburg that they said could have been primed to explode. Unknown saboteurs damaged a rail line last month in what police said was probably a protest against the shipments. Radioactive waste is due to be shipped later this month for the first time in four years from France's La Hague reprocessing plant to the Gorleben permanent storage site. Germany banned nuclear waste shipments in 1998 amid mass protests and concern over radiation leaks from containers containing waste. Anti-nuclear activists also blocked the railway track near Dannenberg at the weekend. Police said they were expecting some 10,000 demonstrators to try to block the transports and they would have 15,000 officials on hand to break up any blockades. REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 24 FOE: NUCLEAR WASTE DERAILMENT Aberdeen Friends of the Earth Ref: 270201 IIGACE PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE USE: Friday 2 March 2001 Call to review all nuclear waste shipments Friends of the Earth today (Friday 2 March) called for an urgent investigation into all nuclear transportations following the derailment of a nuclear freight train near the Torness nuclear power station in Scotland. Commenting, FoE's Head of Research Dr Richard Dixon said: "This was a low speed incident involving empty waste flasks, but it does raise the whole issue of the transport of nuclear waste on our railways. The public may be surprised to learn that dangerous radioactive waste regularly travels through our urban areas - these particularly flasks probably came through Edinburgh's Morningside on their way to Torness. We need urgently to look at why so much waste is being transported and to look again at the options for storing waste at the nuclear stations themselves. "We also need to look again at the safety of these flasks. The nuclear industry claim they are safe because they have crached a train into one at 100mph. This is not good enough, the worst case accident is more like what happened this week at Selby with two speed trains hitting head on. " ENDS NOTES TO EDITORS: [1] A freight train carrying empty nuclear fuel flasks has derailed near the Torness nuclear power station in Scotland. According to British Nuclear Fuels the train was involved in a "low speed minor derailment" at 9:45am this morning. For more info: Richard Dixon on 0131 554 9977 or (pager) 01426 130752 ***************************************************************** 25 Ditching Finn nuclear plans would raise bills - industry FINLAND: March 9, 2001 HELSINKI - The chairman of the Confederation of Finnish Industry and Employers (TT) said yesterday Finnish households would pay a heavy price should plans to build a fifth nuclear power reactor be shelved. "It would mean a bill between 10 to 20 billion Finnish markka ($1.6-3.1 billion) to households through... financing another means for increasing electricity production," Jyrki Juusela told a news conference at a TT energy seminar. "In addition, it would inevitably also mean slowing down of (Finnish) economic growth," Juusela said. In November, Finnish power group Teollisuuden Voima (TVO) applied for a permit to build a new nuclear reactor to help satisfy increasing demand and ensure the country fulfils its greenhouse gas emission obligations under the Kyoto protocol. Industry studies estimate Finland's electricity consumption will increase by 25 percent to around 100 terawatt hours annually by 2015, boosted by steady economic growth. Finnish industry consumes more than half of the current annual electricity consumption of nearly 80 TWh. The decision to apply to build the reactor, which goes against the grain in a Europe moving away from nuclear power, has sparked furious debate in Finland and opened fissures within the ruling five-party coalition. Opponents to nuclear power in Finland - which satisfies 28 percent of the country's electricity consumption - want alternative energy sources, such as natural gas, to be considered instead, with overall consumption to be cut as well. The reactor proposal is expected to be sent to parliament for a vote later in the year. Juusela said raising the share of natural gas in total energy consumption - now around 15 percent - would not be a viable option in satisfying demand as it would further increase dependency on Russian gas and electricty imports. "Our electricity supply would then be 40 percent dependent on Russian gas and electricity imports," Juusela said. REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 26 New Shutdown for Glitch-Plagued Czech Nuclear Plant Central Europe Online - PRAGUE, Mar 8, 2001 -- (Agence France Presse) A glitch-plagued Czech nuclear plant which is fiercely disputed by neighboring Austria was shut down again Thursday for work to reduce vibrations, a spokesman said. The Temelin plant, 60 kilometers (35 miles) from the Austrian border, will be powered down for about a week for the latest work to modify valves in its secondary circuit, said spokesman Milan Nebesar. Czech firm Skoda Energo, the main supplier of equipment for the originally Soviet-built plant, will modify three valves to try to reduce persistent vibrations, he said. The Temelin plant has suffered repeated problems and shutdowns since it was first powered up last October despite protests by the Austrian government and a border blockade mounted by Austrian ecologists. Its most recent and longest closure was from January 17 to 25, when engineers made modifications to one valve and succeeded in reducing vibrations by 80 percent, said the spokesman. But the vibrations appear to be causing serious problems. Eliminating them is "a long-term task," the head of the national nuclear energy safety agency, Dana Drabova, said recently. "Experts have been asked to find a solution." Construction of the Temelin plant was begun in the 1980s, but was only finished in the 1990s after extensive modifications and additions following the 1989 collapse of communism. Austria at one stage threatened to block Prague's EU membership negotiations over the Temelin plant, but signed an accord last December agreeing to allow it to start up, but not before safety and environmental studies have been carried out. *((c) 2001 Agence France Presse)* ***************************************************************** 27 Letter: Nuclear energy not quick fix [Tahoe Online Reservations] VIEWS Thursday, March 8, 2001 4:44 AM In the Feb. 23 Appeal there was this article "Officials cite favorable outlook for nuclear energy," the officials being the Nuclear Energy Commission. I predicted in this very paper last August that there would be renewed interest in nuclear energy when the oil and natural gas supplies start to run low. However, this would not be a quick fix. One of the detriments to nuclear energy development has been the lack of a long-term radioactive material storage site. The Nevada Test Site, wherein resides Yucca Mountain, is controlled by the federal government. Our governor may delay the use of that site by lawsuits; however, he can't prevent the federal government from storing nuclear waste there if they want to. One thing that is great about our country is that the states share their resources with other states and help each other when there is the need. Nevada has a resource, so to speak, in dry, remote and useless land. Why some of our politicians are too selfish to share this resource is hard to understand. After all, Sierra Power may buy electricity from a nuclear generation plant and we all enjoy the use of products made by the use of nuclear energy. Transportation of nuclear waste on our highways seems to be the big bugaboo. What a majority of people don't know or have forgotten is that the interstate highway system was built primarily for the rapid deployment of men and war material in case our country was attacked by a foreign power. Since the federal government funded the building of those highways, they have the inherent right to use them if it is in the best interest of our nation. Instead of being part of the problem, solely on political reasons, some of our political leaders should get with the program. DONALD W. CUNNINGHAM Carson City ***************************************************************** 28 Nuclear use chairman sacked Bulgaria's English-language newspaper The Sofia Echo - Issue 10 - March 9 to 15, 2001 By Velina Nacheva THE chairman of a key atomic energy body was sacked by the government last Thursday. As he left the Committee on the Use of Atomic Energy for Peaceful Purposes, Georgi Kaschiev, 50, fired a parting shot: “The Government is holding back two urgent reports on the safety of the Kozlodui nuclear plant,” he said. He told The Echo: “The first report was prepared by the Western European Regulatory Association and criticises delays in modernising the plant’s small reactors. The second one was prepared by a European consortium at the request of the European Commission. “Both reports point out that the general problem of the Kozlodui plant is the high degree of average yearly radiation exposure the staff are subjected to,” Mr Kaschiev said. Urban and Regional Development Minister Evgeni Chachev said Mr Kaschiev was sacked for actions which ‘impeded the normal functioning’ of the Kozlodui nuclear plant. The minister’s report also said that Mr Kaschiev interfered in the work of the committee’s Inspection on Safety Use of Atomic Energy (CUAEPP). Mr Kaschiev said: “The ministers are not well acquainted with the CUAEPP’s functions as a regulatory body, which has to carry on the state policy on safety in accordance with the law. “How can a person who doesn’t have any experience in nuclear energy judge my work? I was doing my duty, co-ordinating with my inferiors. How can that be considered interfering with the committee’s safety inspection?” This means that the committee has to set the relevant conditions for the safe use of atomic energy and to control their observations, even if that means closing down the whole plant, he said. He claimed that in 2006, when the four small reactors at Kozlodui are due to be decommissioned, 2,000 tonnes of spent nuclear fuel will become a major problem for Bulgaria – because it does not have the storage capacity. An agreement was in force until 1990 to return the spent fuel to the then Soviet Union. It was never renewed and for each shipment an individual agreement has to be reached. Experts from the Inspection on Safety Use of Atomic Energy at the CUAEPP launched a check on the preparedness of the Kozlodui nuclear plant for the introduction of a storage facility for spent nuclear fuel, it was announced on Tuesday. The check was ordered by the newly appointed chairman of the committee, Robert Popits. The expert commission will then decide whether the facility is ready to be launched into operation. Georgi Kaschiev became the head of the Nuclear Committee in 1997. He was invited to take up the post by the Prime Minister at the time, Evgenii Bakurdzhiev. He was involved in the launch of five of the six Kozlodui reactors. He also worked in the United States on a new nuclear unit project during the 1990s. ©2001 Sofia Echo Media Ltd. ***************************************************************** 29 Nuclear sector faces experts crisis E4 : Engineering Reuters Newsfeed » Channels The Engineer, 08 March 2001, in Business &Finance Britain's nuclear industry could lack the expertise to maintain its current operations within the next 10 years, the Health and Safety Executive has warned. The HSE, whose Nuclear Installations Inspectorate regulates the industry, expressed this concern at a recent meeting of the British Nuclear Industry Forum, which was attended by DTI officers. It said the sector faced a skills crisis unless more relevant engineering and sciences courses are introduced in universities soon. 'The HSE feels there should be more nuclear expertise coming out of the universities,' said John Haddon, BNIF director for trade and industry. He said the industry's concern, by contrast, was that there should be enough 'good engineering and science graduates to provide it with the people it needs in future'. Haddon said companies felt they could train graduates in the specifics of the industry. The industry's problem is that its key staff are getting older — partly a legacy of the public perception that it has no real future — and many are coming up to retirement. A senior executive with the leading nuclear contractor NNC, who is in his late 50s, said: 'I'd like to retire but I can't — there's no one to replace me.' Now that further nuclear development is being considered once again — to reduce dependence on gas and to help meet commitments on greenhouse gas emissions — the problem threatens to become more acute. This is because the industry's staffing requirements for existing operations, including decommissioning work, are unlikely to reduce over the next 10 years. While British Energy denied a report over the weekend that it had plans for a new generation of reactors to replace its advanced gas-cooled plants, any such new-build programme would require thousands of additional engineers and other specialists. Copyright Centaur Communications Ltd.All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 30 Scotland: DU recovery attempts abandoned due to bad weather STRONG tides and poor visibility have forced the Ministry of Defence to abandon attempts to recover 42lbs of depleted uranium lost last month in the Solway Firth from an environmental test rig. A team of naval divers from the Clyde submarine base at Faslane spent two days this week carrying out a fingertip search of the seabed beneath the experimental structure in visibility limited to between five and six inches. They failed to find any of the DU discs suspended in the rig to discover the corrosive effects of seawater on the radioactive metal and will not now renew the search until May. A spokeswoman for the MoD-sponsored Defence Evaluation and Research Agency said yesterday: "The divers faced tides which had stirred the silt on the seabed into an impenetrable soup. Their vision range was down to a handsbreadth. "The search will be renewed in May, when the spring tides have subsided. There is no radiological danger in the meantime to either the local environment or to people living in the vicinity of the Solway." The experiment was carried out because of fears of radioactive contamination from more than 6000 rounds of DU anti-tank ammunition fired into the water from the MoD's nearby Dundrennan range over the last 20 years. DU, made from the waste products of nuclear power generation, can be moulded into a penetrator rod capable of slicing through all known tank armour. It also burns up after impact, setting fire to fuel and ammunition inside the target vehicle. It then disperses in a cloud of particles carried on the smoke from the resultant conflagration. Because it is slightly radioactive, it has long term health implications if inhaled. Dozens of soldiers from Nato armies who have served in Bosnia or Kosovo, where DU ammunition was used widely by tank-busting US aircraft, are now complaining of Balkans Syndrome effects from the DU to which they claim they were exposed. Seven Italian soldiers have died of cancer. About 100 areas where Serb armoured vehicles were strafed with DU shells remain roped off in Kosovo and the United Nations has issued a warning to anyone entering them. The MoD renewed its testing of DU rounds at Dundrennan last month despite local protests. It claims that the rounds fired on the Kikcudbright range pass through "soft screen " targets and do not break up into potentially harmful dust or disperse by burning. A spokesman said: "The rounds are completely intact when they hit the sea. We monitor the waters off the range regularly and have not detected anything beyond natural background radiation in two decades. "Most of the 6000-plus rounds fired over that period have probably dissolved. The recent experiment was intended simply to give us data on the rate of corrosion in seawater and to reassure those concerned that there is no risk to health." The test rig lost its DU discs when its anchor buoy chain smashed into the structure during a storm early last month. A spokeswoman for the Dundrennan community council said last night: "We've waited 20 years for answers, so another couple of months probably won't make much difference. "What astonishes people here is why DERA and the MoD went ahead with the test rig when they did. Any local fisherman could have told them the rip tides and winter storms in the Solway would pull their apparatus to bits. " We feel sorry for the divers who had to go down into the pea soup silt swirling on the seabed to root around for the DU. It was fairly obvious they would not find it." *-March 9th* ***************************************************************** 31 Plant Keeping the Lid on Radiation Questions - The St. Petersburg Times. #651, Friday, March 9, 2001 By Charles Digges STAFF WRITER Administrators of a controversial factory to clean radioactive waste metals for commercial use stressed the safety of the project on Tuesday, but only to media members who observers say were chosen for their ignorance of the dangers posed by the plant. The plant, EKOMET-S, is situated on the grounds of the Leningrad Atomic Energy Station, or LAES, in Sosnovy Bor - a militarily closed town 60 kilometers west of St. Petersburg. The factory, which opens in May, plans to produce 5,000 tons of cleaned metal per year initially, with an expanded output of 150,000 tons a year if it gets the go-ahead to build more plants, according to Interfax. But EKOMET-S's proposal has met strong opposition from environmental groups and members of the Sosnovy Bor administration, who say the firm's raw material - taken from LAES' overflowing waste dumps - will expose users of products from kitchen utensils to cars to dangerously high levels of radiation. They also say the firm has submitted incomplete documentation to Gosatomnadzor, the regulatory body, responsible for licensing nuclear facilities. According to reporters and observers who attended Tuesday's press conference, these safety issues were not raised. "They obviously chose a group of 'friendly' publications who would not put the tough questions to them," said Oleg Bodrov of Greenworld Sosnovy Bor, a non-governmental environmental organization, in a telephone interview Wednesday. Anna Sharogradskaya, director of the Northwest Center for Press Development, agreed. "Sosnovy Bor is a closed town and it would have been much easier for [EKOMET-S] representatives to travel to St. Petersburg than for the press to travel to them," she said in a telephone interview Wednesday. "If they had been interested in discussing safety issues, they would have done that. Instead, they held the conference there, invited who they wanted and avoided tough questions." A report by Interfax - which was invited - quoted Valery Buntushkin, an EKOMET-S spokesperson, as saying metals produced by the plant would emit some 30 microrems of radiation per hour. Though there is some dispute among scientists as to what a safe level is, 16 microrems per hour is the widelyaccepted norm. Metals produced by the firm, therefore, will be nearly twice as radioactive. A reporter present at the conference - who requested anonymity - said reporters missed that element of the report. "Actually, I don't think anyone knew what he was talking about," said the source. When contacted on Wednesday, Buntushkin said through his secretary that the Interfax report was his "only comment" on the matter. Aside from Interfax, however, the press conference made barely a ripple in the local media. The St. Petersburg Times - which has written critical reports on LAES in the past - was refused accreditation on the basis that its request was received too late, despite assurances from Buntushkin last week that there was "still plenty of time" to get on the list. No other local papers carried the report. According to Interfax, EKOMET-S was built with $10 million in loans from Russian banks, which the report did not name, using the yet-to-be produced metals as collateral. [Copyright] copyright The St. Petersburg Times 2001 ***************************************************************** 32 Report: Iran equipping nuclear power plant - CNN.com - March 8, 2001 TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Moving closer to completing its first nuclear power plant, the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization said Thursday it will install equipment at the Bushehr plant this year with the help of Russia, state-run radio reported. The radio quoted an Iranian official, identified only by his surname Sabouri, as saying the "atomic equipment at Iran's Bushehr power plant will be installed next year through the cooperation of Iranian and Russian experts." Iran's New Year begins on March 21. The official also said Iran would be able to recycle nuclear waste at the plant through the development of a new technology. He did not elaborate on the technology or its source. The official gave no other details, and it was not possible to reach Iranian authorities for comment. The country is marking the Muslim feast of sacrifice or Eid al-Adha this week and government offices are closed. It was not clear from the report when the Bushehr plant will be operational and what kind of equipment will be installed. The plant stands on the Gulf coast about 100 kilometers (60 miles) south of Tehran. On Monday, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami is scheduled to go to Moscow where he is expected to sign several trade and defense contracts. Russia has been helping Iran to complete the Bushehr plant, which was started by the German company Siemens in the 1970s. In 1985, Russia and Iran signed an initial $850 million agreement to complete the plant's 1,000 MW reactor by 2003, but the work did not begin until February 1998. In November 1998, Russia and Iran announced they were studying the possibility of building three more nuclear reactors at Bushehr. Under strong U.S. pressure, Ukraine agreed not to provide the turbines for the reactors. In January, Russia shrugged off U.S. objections and said work had started to build a second reactor. The United States has warned that civilian nuclear projects could help Iran develop the ability to produce nuclear weapons. Moscow has repeatedly dismissed such warnings and insisted the Bushehr project allows the Russian nuclear industry to earn much-needed hard currency. The International Atomic Energy Agency has said it has not detected any suspicious nuclear activities in Iran. It has given Iran $1.6 million from its technical assistance fund to complete the Bushehr plant. Copyright 2001 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 33 Bill promotes nuclear power, funds transmutation research Friday, March 09, 2001 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By STEVE TETREAULT DONREY WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- A leading Senate advocate of nuclear energy introduced a bill this week to promote development of new nuclear power plants while continuing to back research into possible alternatives to radioactive waste burial. "The United States has basically abandoned its leadership in the field of nuclear energy," Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said. "We've erected so many regulatory hurdles that there hasn't been a single new nuclear power plant built in more than 20 years." Domenici's bill, introduced Wednesday, would authorize $406 million to encourage new plant construction, revamp Nuclear Regulatory Commission rules, develop new solutions to waste disposal, and increase the visibility of nuclear energy development within the Energy Department. It would authorize $120 million for research into "transmutation" of spent reactor fuel into compressed and less toxic material, a process embraced by some as a way to render nuclear waste less harmful while generating heat energy at the same time. Now the government allocates $131 million for those activities, Domenici said. Another $40 million would be earmarked to develop an advanced accelerator that would be utilized to rework the nuclear waste through the transmutation process. Joe Colvin, president of the Nuclear Energy Institute, applauded Domenici for boosting the nation's "leading emission-free source of electricity." The Domenici bill contains no provisions directly affecting the Energy Department's ongoing studies of Yucca Mountain in Nevada as a nuclear waste repository, according to aides to Nevada lawmakers who examined the legislation. Still, more nuclear power plants means more nuclear waste, an environmental advocate pointed out. "This bill attempts to extend the life of nuclear power plants and funds research into the siting of future power plants," said Anna Aurilio, legislative director of U.S. Public Interest Research Group. "The amount of nuclear waste headed to Nevada could increase. This is going in the wrong direction." Domenici said he will try to attach his bill to a national energy strategy being developed by the Bush administration and by other Senate leaders. A number of its provisions are similar to a bill introduced last week by the chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska. For instance, both would establish an Office of Spent Nuclear Fuel Research to oversee waste disposal studies. This story is located at: http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/Mar-09-Fri-2001/news/15604770.html ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 CIA documents shed light on Cold War [deseretnews.com] Friday, March 09, 2001 'Treasure trove' covers pope, 'Star Wars' plan Reuters News Service PRINCETON, N.J. — The CIA released 859 secret documents of Cold War analysis Friday on issues ranging from the impact of a Polish pope on the Soviet Union to the response to former President Ronald Reagan's "Star Wars" plan. The release of the previously classified Central Intelligence Agency documents, written between 1947 and 1991, was timed to coincide with a two-day conference at Princeton University on the CIA's analysis of the Soviet Union. "This is a treasure trove of great material," Lloyd Salvetti, director of the CIA's Center for the Study of Intelligence, said. The documents will be available on the CIA's Web site: . A 1987 analysis of the Soviets' response options to Reagan's 1983 Strategic Defense Initiative known as "Star Wars" concluded that the Soviets were likely to pursue arms control measures to gain U.S. concessions on the proposal. Some of the arguments then ring familiar in the current debate over a proposed U.S. national missile defense system that Russia vehemently opposes and some have called "son of Star Wars." A 1981 intelligence report said there was "conclusive evidence" that the Soviet Union supported revolutionary groups that used "terrorism," specifically mentioning El Salvador. That involvement was a "basic tenet" of Soviet policy aimed at weakening unfriendly societies, destabilizing hostile regimes and advancing Soviet interests, it added. "Whether terrorist tactics are used in the course of revolutionary violence is largely a matter of indifference to the Soviets, who have no scruples against them," the intelligence report said. It said revolutionary groups using "terrorist" tactics were one of the many instruments of Soviet foreign policy. And a 1963 paper showed U.S. intelligence analysts at odds with each other over how close the United States and Soviet Union came to the brink of nuclear war during the October 1962 Cuban missile crisis. A 1978 CIA memo said the selection of a Polish pope, John Paul II, would be "extremely worrisome to Moscow" because it would make it more difficult to integrate Poles more closely into a communist Soviet-dominated system of alliances. Other CIA documents throughout the period addressed the outlook for Soviet commodities such as oil, grain, and gold, and analyzed Soviet relations with countries such as China, India, North Vietnam, Nicaragua, Iraq and Cuba. Some material echoed themes relevant today such as a 1978 analysis on the flare-up of nationalist sentiment in the Soviet Transcaucasus and a 1988 analysis of unrest in the Caucasus. Russia has recently engaged in fighting separatists in the southern rebel province of Chechnya. Since the newly released CIA documents were products of the analysis division they did not cover clandestine operations. Still, the reports were "carefully scrubbed" to exclude intelligence sources or sensitive information that could impact current U.S. relations with other countries, Ed Cohen, director of CIA's Office of Information Management, said. In addition to the CIA documents, 12 National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) from the National Intelligence Council were released. NIEs can include input from all U.S. intelligence agencies and focus on issues such as Soviet weapons. Gerald Haines, the CIA's chief historian, said analysis of the NIEs showed they continued to overestimate the Soviet missile build-up in the 1980s. A September 1991 CIA analysis of the defense implications of a break up of the Soviet Union concluded that a Russia without Ukraine and other republics would "retain the potential of a major military power." In 1986 the CIA analyzed Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev's anti-alcohol campaign and concluded that success in curtailing alcohol abuse, when consumption had doubled over the prior 30 years, would strengthen his political position. Several analyses of Gorbachev's policies were released, and Salvetti said the documents showed U.S. analysts "trying to keep pace with a rapidly moving train." He added: "It was often the case where analysts were just trying to determine what it is that Gorbachev's intentions were when it was really hard for Gorbachev himself to understand where he was going." A 1986 CIA report said a controversial Soviet radar under construction in Krasnoyarsk was mainly for ballistic missile detection and tracking rather than for satellite detection as the Soviets argued. CIA's analysis was the basis for U.S. administration policy which declared the radar a violation of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and that it be dismantled, CIA historians said. Haines said the newly-released documents overall showed how CIA analysis became based more on facts rather than speculation after technical means of gathering information were employed. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, the CIA was operating with "no eyes and ears," he said. But then the U-2 spy plane and Corona spy satellite began operating and "gave the United States tremendous advantage," Haines said. © 2001 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 2 Debate flares on whether U.S. nuclear subs should be scrapped Friday, March 9, 2001 The Detroit News. Critics say fast-attack subs no longer have real-world applications By Guy Gugliotta / Washington Post TONGUE OF THE OCEAN, Bahamas -- Conceived in the onrush of Cold War creativity, nuclear fast-attack submarines were the ultimate conventional weapon, designed to stalk and kill Soviet counterparts with technology and expertise unmatched in the history of undersea warfare. But the Cold War and the Soviet Union are gone, and chances of deadly face-offs in the abyss had faded even before the ignominious sinking of the Russian nuclear submarine Kursk last summer underscored the deteriorating fortunes of a once-formidable enemy. Now attack boats are once again in the news, this time because of the collision last month off the Hawaii coast of the surfacing Los Angeles-class attack submarine USS Greeneville with the Japanese trawler Ehime Maru. The Greeneville affair has refocused attention on a type of warship that for the past 10 years has served as a lightning rod in the debate over the future of naval technology: Are attack boats the modern Navy's indispensable jacks-of-all-trades, as adept at mapping the Arctic seafloor as they are at putting a Tomahawk cruise missile in downtown Belgrade? Or are they multibillion-dollar Cold War luxuries the nation no longer needs to afford? Here, in a deep-water sound off the coast of the Bahamas' Andros Island, the USS Connecticut is undergoing tests to prepare for its first full-scale deployment next year. It is a Seawolf submarine -- faster, quieter and more versatile than the Los Angeles subs -- and the newest attack boat in the U.S. Navy. The basic science of nuclear submarines is well-known. A self-contained nuclear reactor provides heat for a turbine that drives the ship and for all the accompanying systems. The boat makes and maintains its own atmosphere and cruises beneath the sea at speeds inconceivable during the diesel days of World War II. The only constraint on how long the sub can remain submerged is the amount of food the boat can carry. Rated on these criteria, the Connecticut is probably the finest submarine ever built: 353 feet long and weighing 9,000 tons, it can travel in excess of 25 knots at depths greater than 800 feet, and can remain submerged for at least four months. It cost $2.4 billion. But like the Los Angeles subs before it, the Connecticut was designed as an undersea duelist, a job description that has virtually disappeared. As a result, the Navy emphasizes that in the post-Cold War world, attack boats are unique machines capable of multiple tasks -- mapping, carrying and firing cruise missiles, inserting special warfare troops into hot spots, tailing high-speed drug traffickers, spying electronically in a variety of ways. "The perception was that the only thing subs were good for was ASW (anti-submarine warfare)," said Vice Adm. John J. Grossenbacher, the Atlantic Fleet's submarine commander. "Nuclear subs finally have the chance to reach their full potential." But this argument has challengers. Like space technology, much of what attack submarines have does not translate into real-world applications. There is little demand for a cutting-edge hydraulic system that can load torpedoes while sea pressures are squeezing a ship's hull to throw clearances out of kilter. There is also a suspicion that many tasks that attack submarines perform can be done by other means, and much more cheaply. "We still have to go up to the Arctic to watch the Russians, and we still have to move subs at high speed for long distances in an emergency," said naval analyst and author Norman Polmar. "Do we need high-tech subs? Yes. Do we need an entire force of them? No." Indeed, there is little argument that the Connecticut is a spectacular weapon. Most of the 135 men aboard have served on other submarines -- earlier attack boats or the larger but less versatile ballistic missile subs -- and they remain awestruck by the new ship's capabilities. "The sensitivity is far greater than" previous submarines, said Chief Petty Officer Don Parker, the Connecticut's leading sonarman, as he listened to a combination of sounds that included a ship's propeller, a whistling dolphin and the click-click from a school of "snapping shrimp." "We're detecting contacts further than 50,000 to 60,000 yards (25 to 30 miles)," farther than ever before. But is it cost-effective? "So much of the intelligence stuff is classified," Rand Corp. analyst David Mosher said, "you can't get to enough" information to figure out whether it's worth the price." Ironically, the one mission area in which nuclear submarines are unquestionably the best and the only alternative has nothing to do with warfare: "Nothing compares, when you want to explore the ocean," said Dennis Conlon, leader of the Office of Naval Research's High Latitude Dynamics Program. ***************************************************************** 3 France to be asked to explain Mururoa Atoll's state Radio Australia News - 9/03/01: The Pacific Islands Forum is to ask France to explain reports that its former nuclear test site at Mururoa Atoll in French Polynesia is deteriorating. Last week a French newspaper, France Soir, quoted a senior official for nuclear safety at the French Atomic Energy Commission as saying nuclear tests contributed to a weakening of the atoll rock, with some sections threatened with collapse. The Pacific Islands Forum says the organisation will be seeking an explanation over the reports, in line with the Forum's longstanding concerns with nuclear issues in the Pacific. The Forum's acting secretary general Iosefa Maiava, says the group wants to know what steps France is taking to monitor the long-term effects of nuclear testing in the Pacific, and its plans to respond to any adverse impact of the tests. France exploded nearly 200 nuclear devices at Moruroa and nearby Fangataufa Atoll between 1966 and 1996. Agence France-Presse (AFP) and Reuters ***************************************************************** 4 D.P.R.K. Threatens to End Missile Moratorium, Nuclear Cooperation *Arms Control Today *March 2001 Alex Wagner Pyongyang threatened on February 22 to abandon its missile testing moratorium and its participation in the Agreed Framework if the Bush administration followed a “different” North Korea policy from that of the Clinton administration. North Korea also criticized the Bush team for what it termed an “aggressive and brigandish” approach to future relations that would obstruct movement in the “direction of reconciliation, cooperation and improved ties.” The remarks were made in a Foreign Ministry statement carried by the Korean Central News Agency, the official government press organ. The statement claimed that the Bush administration “is not posed to seriously study” progress made by the Clinton administration toward ending Pyongyang’s indigenous missile program and missile exports. The statement reaffirmed that, while North Korea would not test long-range missiles during negotiations, a pledge originally made in September 1999, if dialogue were discontinued, the moratorium could not be maintained “indefinitely.” Pyongyang also accused Washington of “not sincerely” implementing the Agreed Framework and emphasized that, should Washington continue to delay implementation, there would be “no need” to be “bound to it any longer.” The framework, signed in 1994, froze North Korea’s nuclear program in exchange for two light-water commercial nuclear power reactors and for heavy fuel oil shipments during the reactors’ construction. Since the framework’s signing, the reactors’ construction has suffered from setbacks, prompting North Korean protests. The statement also denounced past U.S. characterizations of North Korea as a “rogue state” and U.S. national missile defense efforts. At a February 22 press conference, White House national security adviser Condoleezza Rice characterized Pyongyang’s threat to resume missile tests as “counterproductive.” Rice told reporters, “It’s not helpful for the North Koreans to threaten to have missile tests in order to get [the United States] to do something to give up missile defense.” Rice also said that the new administration is still reviewing its North Korea policy, which it is closely coordinating with South Korea and Japan. However, earlier that same day, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher expressed the administration’s willingness to continue the progress made to date on security issues, saying, “We will continue to use that as we form an overall policy.” Boucher added that the United States expects Pyongyang to respect its pledge on ballistic missile testing and that the Bush administration would honor its commitments under the Agreed Framework “as long as North Korea does the same.” North Korea appears to have issued its statement in response to what it perceives as a more “hardline stance” by the new Bush administration. At his January 17 confirmation hearing, Secretary of State Colin Powell indicated that he plans to move carefully when engaging North Korea on missile issues. Powell told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “The Bush administration will come in and work with North Korea and with our allies in the region…in a very, very cautious way.” While Powell stated that the United States should “encourage” the opening up of North Korea, he stressed that North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il should be viewed with “clear-eyed realism.” Powell emphasized that, even if Pyongyang agreed to end its indigenous missile program and missile exports, “we’d still be left with a situation of a dictatorial regime that has a very large army poised on the border between North and South Korea.” Powell also said that the new administration would only continue to engage North Korea through reciprocity and that it would measure progress by Pyongyang meeting tangible benchmarks. Any North Korea policy would have to be implemented “in a very, very realistic way” that does not “give them anything unless we get something in return, something that is really valuable to us, something that moves them in an entirely different direction.” Richard Armitage, a key foreign policy adviser to the Bush campaign who has advocated taking a tougher negotiating posture with Pyongyang, has been nominated to become Powell’s deputy. In a 1999 paper for the National Defense University, Armitage called for regaining the “diplomatic initiative” with North Korea and moving toward “full normalization of relations” if Pyongyang satisfies U.S. concerns. However, should diplomacy fail, Armitage suggested that the United States would be faced with either living with and deterring a “nuclear North Korea armed with delivery systems” or “preemption, with the attendant uncertainties.” ACA ***************************************************************** 5 LAES Whistle Blower Keeping Up Job Fight - The St. Petersburg Times. #651, Friday, March 9, 2001 By Galina Stolyarova STAFF WRITER It has been nine months since environmentalist Sergei Kharitonov lost his job as the operator of the spent nuclear fuel storage at Leningrad Nuclear Power Station, or LAES, in what he says was the plant's attempt to shut him up. But nine months later he is still fighting to get that job back. LAES is located in the town of Sosnovy Bor, 60 kilometers west of St. Petersburg. The plant's four Chernobyl-type reactors are the oldest of their kind in Russia, and LAES has been plagued by accidents, financial problems, hunger strikes and conflicting reports about its safety. Kharitonov, who also worked as a volunteer at the Chernobyl clean-up in 1986, worked at LAES for 25 years. In 1995 he began documenting the plant's environmental hazards. The same year, Kharitonov and Green World Sosnovy Bor, his environmental organization, protested the plant's attempt to squeeze twice as much nuclear waste into storage facilities than they were designed to hold. And in 1996, Kharitonov distributed photographs of the waste facility's cracked foundation, which showed ground water seeping through the floor. Environmentalists have estimated that the LAES storage facility has a potential contamination level 50 times that of Chernobyl. Kharitonov's most recent dismissal is not the first time the plant has tried to fire him. In November 1997, he was dismissed after publishing an article calling for LAES's operating license to be revoked. He took the plant to court. As a 25-year-veteran and legal status as a "Chernobyl liquidator," he successfully claimed he could not be fired without two month's notice. The court agreed, citing Russia's labor code which stipulated that Chernobyl liquidators should be the last people to be sacked. But when he returned to the plant the next month, he found his "working facilities" had been moved to the men's locker room. "Starting December 1997 until the moment of my [most recent] dismissal, the plant's administration wouldn't let me to do my job, thought I was regularly getting paid, he said in a telephone interview this week. "I was forced to spend all my work days in the men's lockers - they wouldn't let me go further." On June 9, 2000, he was fired again, and so far he has not been as lucky with Sosnovy Bor courts, who he and his attorney, Alexei Pavlov, a lawyer with the Alexander Nikitin Environmental Center, accuse of bending to LAES pressures - not unlikely in a town where the budget depends heavily on the plant. According to LAES's legal advisor Yelena Tuchkova, Kharitonov was fired because he wasn't fulfilling his duties, and for failing to pass the annual technical check-ups on his competence. In additional, Tuchkova said Kharitonov "had created an unhealthy atmosphere at the storage facility." Kharitonov, with the backing of Duma deputy Yuly Rybakov, appealed his dismissal to the Sosnovy Bor special prosecutor's office overseeing high security installations. But the prosecutor's aid Vladimir Nesvit threw the case out last week. "He lost his job because he wasn't doing his job - he systematically failed to fulfill his professional duties, and he repeatedly refused to pass the obligatory annual examination," Nesvit said in a telephone interview Wednesday. "Kharitonov did all he possibly could to be fired." Pavlov has appealed the case to the Leningrad oblast court, and Pavlov expects the hearings to take place in less than a month. "If I didn't see clear ways to restore the justice, I wouldn't have taken this case," said Pavlov. "All in all, Sergei's dismissal is not a result of his poor work but an angry reaction from LAES which wants to get rid of a troublemaker." [Copyright] copyright The St. Petersburg Times 2001 ***************************************************************** 6 Russia accused of stalling nuclear cleanup Guardian Unlimited | Frustrated negotiators close to dropping aid offer to clear Barents sea graveyard of rusting submarines Special report: Russia Ian Traynor in Moscow Friday March 9, 2001 A western plan to spend billions of pounds cleaning up the Russian far north is in danger of collapsing in acrimony after more than two years of difficult negotiations between Russia, the European Union, the US, Norway, and Japan. Governments in the west - especially those in Scandinavia - are frightened by the risks posed by what some have called "the world's biggest nuclear graveyard': the dozens of abandoned submarines with their nuclear reactors littering the Barents sea in the Russian arctic. Russian and Scandinavian foreign ministers are to meet in the arctic port of Murmansk next week to try to reach an agreement to put billions of pounds in western aid money into what a 10-year project. But the host of objections raised by the Russians has so exasperated the western negotiators that they are warning that the whole project could be ditched. The Russian side is worried about preserving military secrecy, has insisted that western companies involved in the work must pay Russian taxes, and has declared that western governments or companies will be liable for any accidents during thework. "What is the point of getting lots of experts together if they're not going to get anywhere? the EU external affairs commissioner, Chris Patten, commented. "In some ways the negotiations have slipped backwards. Is it wise to go on with endless meetings that don't go anywhere?" The Kursk submarine disaster off the coast of Murmansk last summer highlighted the potential for nuclear pollution in the Barents sea. There are estimated to be about 100 Russian submarines rusting abandoned in the fjords of the Kola peninsula, with 300 nuclear reactors and 8,000 nuclear fuel elements. The Swedes and the Norwegians are trying to inject urgency into the negotiations. Although the western is offering aid money, and much of it would go to western engineering companies contracted to do the work, the Russians have been insisting that those companies would then be liable to Russian taxation and their imported equipment subject to Russian customs duties. "This is Norwegian taxpayers' money, given as aid. Norwegian politicians won't accept paying [tax] on what is seen as aid to Russia," said Thomas Nielsen, who is monitoring the talks for Bellona, a Norwegian environmental organisation which specialises in arctic nuclear pollution. A meeting of experts in Moscow last week brought some movement on the taxation wrangle between Moscow and the EU, although sources said the Americans were still refusing to accept the Russian conditions. Russian officials declined to comment on the negotiations. On the bigger problem of liability and indemnity, western officials are pessimistic about any agreement being reached before a Russia-EU summit in May. "We want the western companies to enjoy a kind of diplomatic status so they are not terrorised by the Russian tax police and customs," a senior western diplomat in Moscow said. "You're playing with atoms and people get scared. If something goes wrong, it's expensive. Who is going to pay for the damage? The Russians insist we're liable for any damage we cause. We're telling them they've got a problem with nuclear waste. But we're more concerned about it than they are." A senior official in Brussels estimated the funds at stake at anywhere between $100m and several billion dollars. The overall cost of the clean-up is reckoned to be $10bn (about £7bn). Some of the biggest names in western nuclear engineering and waste management, such as British Nuclear Fuels, stand to gain from the contracts if the project gets the green light. The negotiations on the so-called MNEPR (multilateral nuclear environmental programme for Russia) began two years ago. But while the Russians appear happy to string them out, key western donors are fed up, Mr Nielsen said. "The Russians are not going to sign the agreement, because they fear losing control of the project," he predicted. "And there is a time limit on the west's willingness to lend its technological help." European commission officials said that the urgent task was to get the abandoned submarines into shallow water, to reduce the risk of radioactive materials being dispersed into the ocean. The nuclear fuel and the reactors could then be detached from the vessels and put into storage. But Russian Baltic and Northern fleet officers were balking at allowing western engineers into areas they regard as top-secret, they said. "We now have a situation where both sides are aware that if there is no progress, there is a risk of a major collapse," one said. "There has to be a breakthrough not later than the EU-Russia summit in May," the western diplomat in Moscow said. "Otherwise one has to question whether it is worthwhile to continue." Mr Nielsen said that rather than a multilateral agreement, Moscow's negotiators would prefer to deal with one western participant at a time. Failure to reach a deal could also dash Russia's hope of the EU contributing tens of millions of dollars towards raising the Kursk and its two nuclear reactors from the bed of the Barents sea this summer. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited ***************************************************************** 7 Determined to find the 'truth' Widow says radiation killed husband Borderland Friday, March 9, 2001 *Daniel Perez El Paso Times* Linda Stelter / El Paso Times Over the past 30 years, Lady Louise Byron has accumulated boxes of documents in her effort to get the government to acknowledge that her husband died of cancer in 1971 because he was exposed to radiation while in the Army in Nevada in 1953. + Compensation claims: Department of Veterans Affairs, (800) 827-1000. + Details on veterans participation in nuclear tests: (800) 462-3683. + Participants: Service personnel part of the Operation Upshot-Knothole nuclear test experiment in Nevada can call Lady Louise Byron at 584-2938. An El Paso spouse of an "atomic veteran" who died 30 years ago is locked in a five-year battle with the government over whether she deserves compensation or not. Westsider Lady Louise Byron said her husband, former Fort Bliss soldier Dennis D. Acheson, died in 1971 from being exposed to radiation during a 1953 nuclear test in Nevada. The Department of Veterans Affairs has denied the claim twice, at the regional level in Albuquerque in 1996 and the board level in Washington in 1998. The VA's Court of Appeals in Washington remanded the case back to Albuquerque two years ago. Byron, 69, said her reasons for pursuing the case go beyond the $911 a month she would collect from the VA. "I want my daughters to know the truth," she said referring to her two now-adult daughters. "I want veterans to be encouraged by my persistence." The VA is pursuing information on the case from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, said Sandy Epps, director of the VA regional office in Albuquerque. The case is among 6,000 in Albuquerque and 350,000 nationwide that the VA is trying to resolve. New cases take about 178 days to complete. Contested cases take 763 days to resolve, Epps said. Among the top reasons for the delays is having to work with other agencies on older cases, she said. None of the VA reasons sit well with Erwin "Butch" Koehler, a retired Army sergeant major who has spent years as a veterans advocate. He was the first person Byron called when she reopened her case five years ago. He said one of the main problems is that some VA staffers have a bad attitude. "They just turn off the lights, but at 5 o'clock the veterans don't turn off their pain," Koehler said. Acheson was drafted by the Army while a student at the University of Michigan in 1952. He was assigned to a radar unit at Fort Bliss, where he helped train officers on nuclear physics. He was honorably discharged in 1954. According to Army records, he was in a unit that went to Nevada in December 1953 after Operation Upshot-Knothole, which involved atmospheric nuclear tests. He was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in March 1968. Doctors said it probably started in 1966. He died five years later in El Paso. He had no family history of cancer, Byron said. Acheson's initial claim in 1971 was denied because of a lack of evidence. He wrote a letter to veterans officials in which he stated his belief that the cancer came from his participation in "highly classified" tests while in the service. Records showed that his Fort Bliss unit was among the participating units, but no documents showed that Acheson was there for the tests conducted from March 17 through June 20, 1953. However, Byron's case includes five affidavits from people, including a retired Army colonel, who heard Acheson say he was there. Several members of an Army Air Defense Board at Fort Bliss signed affidavits that Acheson mentioned his involvement in the test during a job interview in 1954. The board tested air-defense material, she said. "He spoke about (his work in Nevada) to the extent he could. He didn't go into detail because of security reasons," said Frances Hills, a retired board mathematician and supervisor. Epps said all the information will be considered, but it is not enough on its own. Byron's lawyer, Keith D. Snyder of Maryland, said the information should be enough. Acheson's on-site participation six months later as a member of the unit falls within the VA approved time for radiation-risk activity, Snyder said. It's not unusual for military lists to lack the day-to-day locations of all its soldiers, especially those involved in secret projects, he said. Not so, Epps said. She said the military was good at keeping track of its service personnel regardless of the operation's confidentiality. Leaving names off unit lists has more to do with carelessness than security, said Oscar Rosen, editor and publisher of Atomic Veterans Radiation News, a newsletter produced in Salem, Mass. Rosen, a World War II Navy veteran, started his publication in 1990 to provide information about the approximately 230 nuclear tests conducted from 1945 through 1962 using up to 250,000 service personnel as "guinea pigs." Another 195,000 U.S. service members who were part of the Japanese occupation forces may have been exposed to radiation, according to VA records. Rosen said Byron's case is not unusual. He said the VA process is cumbersome. He only knows of about 500 widows out of about 20,000 atomic veterans who he's heard have sought compensation. *Daniel Perez may be reached at For more information: * ***************************************************************** 8 Hanford regulators worry about future cleanup budget This story was published Thu, Mar 8, 2001 By John Stang Herald staff writer Hanford's next two annual cleanup budgets might stray a bit from the Tri-Party Agreement. And that bothers Hanford's regulators and Hanford Advisory Board members. That concern surfaced in the past two days in Richland at Tuesday's Hanford budget workshop and Wednesday's Hanford Advisory Board financial committee meeting. These worries are prompted by: -- The Department of Energy's Washington, D.C., headquarters not releasing any clue on what Hanford's cleanup budget might be in 2002 and 2003. Traditionally by each March, Hanford has detailed budget figures for the next two years. Consequently, no one at Hanford has any idea if the site will get enough money to meet its legal obligations, or where any appropriations will actually go. -- DOE recently signing long-term contracts with Fluor Hanford and Bechtel-Washington. Fluor's contract directs some efforts to project not covered by the Tri-Party Agreement, the legal pact governing Hanford's cleanup. The Bechtel-Washington contract ignores two legal cleanup deadlines. The bottom line is that the Hanford 2002 budget likely could fall short of its legal obligations by an unknown amount, and several Hanford constituencies are unhappy that not all available cleanup money won't used to cover that compliance gap. The main example is Fluor's contract calling for it to tackle some transuranic and mixed waste removal beyond what the Tri-Party Agreement requires, plus the decontamination and removal of old railcars, which is not a legal obligation. DOE officials said Fluor volunteered to do the extra work for no additional costs. "If they could do extra work, why didn't they volunteer to do extra work in the compliance gap (in meeting Tri-Party Agreement obligations)?" asked Keith Smith, a HAB member representing Hanford's union workers. Meanwhile, Bechtel-Washington's contract to build a waste glassification plant calls for the first glass from high-level radioactive waste to be produced in 2009, instead of the Tri-Party Agreement deadline of 2007. And the contract calls for glassification to be at full speed by January 2011, while the Tri-Party Agreement deadline is December 2009. The Environmental Protection Agency and state Department of Ecology officials said this puts them at a disadvantage when renegotiating the Tri-Party Agreement to match the new contracts. "Contracts should reflect how the (Tri-Party Agreement) exists and not how DOE wants to change them," said Gerald Pollet, director of Heart of America Northwest and chairman of the HAB's financial affairs committee. DOE officials said the contracts had to be nailed down -- without waiting for new Tri-Party negotiations -- to keep momentum going on Hanford's cleanup. Another wrinkle is whether DOE in Washington, D.C., will allocate enough money to meet DOE's recently signed contract obligations with Fluor, Bechtel-Washington and tank farms manager CH2M Hill Hanford Group. If Washington, D.C., does not provide enough money, those contracts will have to be renegotiated, DOE officials said. HAB members voiced another concern Wednesday, noting Fluor is bringing in extra upper-ranks people to troubleshoot problems, while planning to lay off up to 300 rank-and-file workers. The HAB members are worried about cleanup money going to more managers, possibly taking money away that could hire rank-and-file employees doing the actual field work. A public meeting on Hanford's request of $1.9 billion in 2003, which has gone to DOE's Washington, D.C., headquarters, is scheduled at 7 p.m. today at the Richland Red Lion hotel. Copyright 2001 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. ***************************************************************** 9 Scour Hanford site for other savings The Herald editorial board is: + Cheryl Dell,publisher + Ken Robertson, executive editor + Kate Riley, editorial page editor + Kim Bradford, editorial writer + Jack Briggs, retired publisher Published March 8, 2001 The good news is that Hanford will save about $1.7 million by returning 559 cars and trucks to the federal Government Services Administration - as recommended by a federal report. The confounding news is that it took a Department of Energy's Inspector General investigation to uncover something that should have been a no-brainer: Fewer people in a smaller operation need fewer cars. Since 1994, the Hanford work force has dropped from about 17,000 to about 10,000. Ironically, the same year the layoffs started, a 1994 Inspector General's report concluded several DOE sites, including Hanford, were not managing their vehicles efficiently. But apparently, that message was lost on Hanford managers. It is particularly irksome when such revelations only confirm criticisms that Hanford operations aren't as efficient as they could be - just as the Energy Department's Richland office is trying to step up its river corridor cleanup efforts, a plan that requires more money. And, although $1.7 million is small compared with Hanford's current $1.5 billion budget, it is $1.7 million of taxpayer money wasted. If some of those cars had been returned earlier, perhaps some people might not have lost their jobs or more work could have been done. Hanford officials say the changes will begin soon. But they shouldn't stop there. Scouring Hanford operations for efficiencies of every kind should be an every day endeavor - not something that happens only after the inspector general publishes a report. What's your opinon? Copyright 2001 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************