***************************************************************** 05/09/01 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 9.113 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS 1 New German Waste Shipment Arrives 2 Cheney urged to heed waste options 3 Explore nuclear power 4 Nuclear power plant owners pursuing waste storage facility 5 Whither nuclear waste? Energy Dept. continues long-term trucking 6 Officials keep close eye on hazardous cargoes 7 Radioactive waste begins trek to new facility in N.M. 8 Radioactive waste to pass through Texas 9 Jeffco wells tested for refined uranium 10 Duke Energy defends mixed-oxide nuclear fuel plan 11 First SRS shipment heads out 12 Cheney: Nuclear waste dump can be safe 13 Nuclear-fuel producer favored in trade ruling 14 Urenco Reaction on Commerce's Preliminary Decision 15 Dingell Questions DOE On No-Bid Contract For USEC At Portsmouth 16 Letter to Energy Department regarding USEC 17 Batavia joins multi-state suit against EPA 18 A phantom energy crisis 19 Cheney says nuclear waste dump can be built safely 20 Critics Rip W on Energy Plan 21 Fitch Encouraged By Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Recent Actions 22 Niagara Mohawk Files Proposed Settlement on Sale of Nine Mile 23 Nuclear still a mistake second time around 24 Yucca water runoff raises new concerns about nuclear waste 25 German Police Escort Nuclear Waste Shipment 26 Chernobyl raised mutations 600% 27 New Scientist: Chernobyl's children 28 NUCLEAR WASTE: Cheney: Repository is needed 29 Nuclear still a mistake second time around 30 Nuclear dump design undecided 31 Yucca project a boon to some, bust to others 32 The Toxic Mountain NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS 1 Nuke protesters hit fund-raising trail 2 Advisory group discusses cleanup, preservation 3 REID PRAISES ADMINISTRATION DECISION TO SWIFTLY COMPENSATE 4 Not surprised to learn data missing 5 State balks at cleanup delay 6 Last Cold War nuclear weapons leave Fairchild 7 Report: no more nukes at Fairchild 8 Plutonium use raises concerns 9 New Scientist: Nuclear boom 10 Bush says terrorism threat is `very real' 11 FEMA, Cheney will head anti-terrorism efforts 12 Statement by Dr. ElBaradei on Non-Proliferation And Nuclear 13 Pakistan joins DU producer nations - Jane's Asia/Pacific News 14 IAF fine-tuning nuclear interception techniques 15 India using Nuclear-weapons carrying aircraft 16 N. Korea nuclear pact is verifiable 17 Radioactive monsters 18 DU Cancer Risks 'Infinitesimal', Minister Tells Committee - 19 Russia faces new nuclear disaster as experts quit 20 Defective torpedo blamed for Kursk tragedy 21 Iraq Mulled Building Radiation Bomb **************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 New German Waste Shipment Arrives BERLIN (AP) - A train carrying spent nuclear fuel from a closed power plant in eastern Germany arrived at a storage site in the north of the country Wednesday after a six-hour journey marked by small protests. The shipment of 246 spent fuel rods in four containers was the latest in a series that have set off massive protests by anti-nuclear activists trying to stop the transport of waste. About 40 protesters tried to block the tracks near the defunct Rheinsberg power station, where the train started its journey, police said. Another demonstration managed to bring the train to a brief halt about 12 miles short of its destination in Lubmin, near the Baltic coast and the Polish border. Both blockades were quickly broken up and the protesters detained. Some 6,500 police officers were deployed to protect the shipment. The waste will be kept at Lubmin until Germany designates a permanent storage site. Nuclear waste shipments in Germany resumed in March after a three-year break imposed by the previous government after radiation leaks were found in some containers. The government last year struck a deal to scrap the country's 19 nuclear plants, though the shutdown could still take over 20 years to complete. The resumed transports have brought protest action by opponents who who want Germany's plants closed faster and say shipments are unsafe. They aim to make the transports so costly that the government and power companies will be forced to stop them. Yahoo ***************************************************************** 2 Cheney urged to heed waste options May 09, 2001 By Benjamin Grove LAS VEGAS SUN WASHINGTON -- Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said he and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., urged Vice President Dick Cheney during a Tuesday meeting to consider "myriad options" to burying the nation's nuclear waste in Nevada. But the senators would not detail the content of the meeting in Cheney's Capitol office. Reid, Ensign and Cheney agreed not to rehash their 15-minute meeting with the media, Ensign said. They plan further talks. "The vice president views those conversations with the senators as private and would not be one to divulge" details, a Cheney spokeswoman said. Nevada's senators requested the meeting to again voice their opposition to a plan to bury high-level nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, they said. Ensign and Reid support alternatives, such as leaving the waste stored on-site at the 103 nuclear power reactors, at least until new technologies are developed for dealing with the waste. They support an expensive, undeveloped technology called transmutation, which breaks waste down into a less harmful form. But the Energy Department did not include money for transmutation research in its budget proposal for next year. Cheney will release a report next week outlining a national energy strategy that includes increasing nuclear power output. Nevada lawmakers say the country needs a safe solution to waste disposal before building new nuclear Cheney urged to heed waste options power plants. Reid and Ensign's aides said after the meeting that the senators were encouraged that Cheney and President Bush had not pursued an interim nuclear waste storage site -- a temporary facility at the Nevada Test Site to store waste until Yucca is completed in 2010, at the earliest. The interim site has been proposed in past congressional sessions and bitterly opposed by Nevada lawmakers. Reid and Ensign also said they were thankful that Cheney and Bush have stood behind a pledge Cheney made during the campaign that the Environmental Protection Agency -- not the Nuclear Regulatory Commission -- should set radiation safety standards, their press secretaries said. While details about the meeting were scarce, Cheney talked at some length earlier Tuesday about nuclear waste in a CNN interview on energy issues. "Eventually, there ought to be a permanent repository," he said. The vice president touted nuclear energy as a "safe" technology that was good for the environment. "One of the great ways to deal with greenhouse gases is nuclear power plants," Cheney said. He never specifically mentioned Yucca Mountain in his remarks, saying the waste issue was a "tough problem." "But just making the decision that we think nuclear power deserves another look, that it may offer us significant potential for the future, that does, in fact, then entail us going back and addressing the waste question. "And there have been steps taken. There have been (waste disposal) sites studied. There's a lot of work that's been done here. There's more that needs to be done if we're actually going to resolve it." Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., criticized Cheney's position on increasing nuclear power. On Tuesday Berkley said the Yucca project was a waste of money and unsafe. She reiterated the findings of a DOE inspector general's report that found some public confidence in the project has eroded. "The further we investigate Yucca Mountain, the more money we spend, the more obvious it becomes that Yucca Mountain is not the answer," Berkley said in written comments to the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, which was meeting in Arlington, Va., Tuesday. Congress created the board in 1987 to review and evaluate the DOE's efforts to dispose of nuclear waste. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 3 Explore nuclear power [deseretnews.com] May 09, 2001 In regard to your editorial in the Deseret News on May 4, "Build more nuclear plants," I was greatly impressed that you have finally taken a positive position regarding nuclear power, and by your statement, "It is clear that Americans need more energy, and that will come only through the sensible use of more natural resources, and through nuclear generation." Your concern about what we are going to do with the nuclear waste has very little merit, because the research will never be funded until we have a consensus that this is the route the nation should be taking. Is not this generally the norm regarding new discoveries? I suggest we have some scientific follow-up articles regarding the serious threats of nuclear waste instead of all these negative factions that are producing fear alone. In addition, after our lights go out, we all may be assured there will be sufficient support for nuclear energy. Ray Ward West Jordan © 2001 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 4 Nuclear power plant owners pursuing waste storage facility By Associated Press, 5/9/2001 03:00 HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) The owners of the now-defunct Connecticut Yankee nuclear power plant are pursuing in court their plans to construct a nuclear waste storage facility on the Haddam neck site. In May 4 filing, The Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co. asked the U.S. District Court to reconsider whether federal law supersedes local zoning authority when it comes to nuclear waste, which is federally regulated. In April, U.S. District Judge Alan Nevas ruled there was not sufficient controversy to force a ruling on the issue. Connecticut Yankee has filed an application for a building permit to construct a concrete pad for the storage of spent nuclear fuel and other high-level waste in 43 outdoor casks at Connecticut Yankee. In their court filing, the owner's argue that Nevas' ruling was based on the premise that the building permit might be granted. But local authorities have consistently opposed the plan. In December, the Haddam Planning and Zoning Commission rejected Connecticut Yankee's proposal request to change the zoning of 15 acres near the plant to allow the storage of spent nuclear fuel. The land is zoned for residential use. The plant is being decommissioned, and engineers want to move the fuel from a circulating water pool at the plant to 43 concrete casks on the disputed parcel. Commission members said they were concerned that approval would open the door for other states to send their nuclear waste to the site. Connecticut Yankee officials said this would not happen. Haddam Selectman Fred Edelstein said he believes the town will win in court. ''I am convinced that there is no applicable federal pre-emption that would allow CY to build on the land they have chosen. This is a land-use issue and Haddam will prevail.'' Boston Globe Online: Print it! ***************************************************************** 5 Whither nuclear waste? Energy Dept. continues long-term trucking to New Mexico The Seattle Times: Nation &World: By The Associated Press CYRUS MCCRIMMON / AP Colorado State Patrol trooper Pat Conder runs a radiation meter over waste-shipment containers en route to New Mexico. Large stainless-steel storage casks are hauled by trucks that are tracked by satellites and driven by specially trained drivers. ARLINGTON, Texas - Federal energy officials yesterday started a new phase in a 35-year program to ship nuclear waste by truck to New Mexico. The latest shipments are from Savannah River Site near Aiken, S.C., and include items such as gloves, shoe covers, rags and tools that were exposed to plutonium and discarded during the production of nuclear weapons. The material is destined for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, N.M., where it will be stored nearly a half-mile underground in rooms surrounded by massive salt deposits. Similar shipments from Washington state's Hanford nuclear reservation began last year. Other shipments have come from various nuclear-weapons sites around the nation. "This is all part of taking care of the legacy of the Cold War," said Tom Welch, a spokesman for the U.S. Energy Department in Washington. The leader of a Waste Isolation Pilot Plant watchdog group warned there is some risk in transportation. "The reason we're spending billions of dollars burying stuff 2,150 feet underground isn't because we need to find a place to put booties and gloves," said Don Hancock, executive director of the Southwest Research and Information Center of Albuquerque, N.M. "It's because this stuff is contaminated with plutonium. Microscopic amounts of it can cause fatal lung cancer." Energy Department officials are confident in the safety of the complex transportation system: Large stainless-steel storage casks, described as "virtually impenetrable," will be hauled by trucks that are tracked by satellites and driven by specially trained drivers who are required to follow stringent safety protocols. According to the Energy Department, the activities at the pilot plant are just part of the nation's nuclear-weapons cleanup challenge. For example, the agency says it must also deal with 1.7 trillion gallons of contaminated groundwater and 40 million cubic meters of contaminated soil and debris at various sites, including Hanford. The agency concludes that the nationwide cleanup will require "long-term care and monitoring - or stewardship - for potentially hundreds of years at an estimated 109 sites." The department estimates it will spend as much as $212 billion through 2070 to get rid of waste from the nation's weapons plants. Pilot-plant officials said the material from Savannah River is "contact handled transuranic," or CH-TRU, waste, which emits radioactive alpha rays that are dangerous only if inhaled or ingested. "It won't penetrate a piece of paper, or your skin," said Dan Balduini, spokesman for Westinghouse TRU Solutions, the company that operates the pilot plant through a contract with the Energy Department. "It's not like you would get immediate radiation poisoning. "It has a long-term effect: Twenty years down the line there is a possibility that you would develop a cancer." Pilot-plant officials confirm that increasingly more radioactive shipments are scheduled to begin about 2004 from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. This "remote handled transuranic" waste is considered more dangerous because it emits gamma rays, which can penetrate the human body. Energy Department officials estimate there will be 473 shipments from Oak Ridge. Balduini noted, however, that before the more hazardous waste can leave Oak Ridge, the pilot plant must finish designing a more robust cask capable of shielding gamma rays. "It's not the same thing as what you'd encounter from nuclear fuel or a reactor core. It can't cause fission," he said. "But I don't want to minimize it. It is dangerous. It is toxic. It requires shielding." Cheney wants permanent dump WASHINGTON-- The Bush administration's turn to nuclear power as a long-term energy strategy will necessitate a permanent nuclear-waste dump, Vice President Dick Cheney said yesterday. "Now, with the gas prices rising as dramatically as they have, nuclear power looks like a pretty good alternative from an economic standpoint, if the permitting process is manageable and if we find a way to deal with the waste question," said Cheney, who is developing energy-policy recommendations for President Bush. In an interview on CNN, Cheney said his recommendations would include changes meant to speed federal permits to utilities seeking to build nuclear-power plants. The industry has not sought a government permit to build a new plant in more than 20 years, since before the accident at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island spread fear about nuclear power. Nuclear power provides 20 percent of the nation's electric capacity today. As to the thorny question of nuclear waste, Cheney said: "Right now we've got waste piling up at reactors all over the country. Eventually, there ought to be a permanent repository. The French do this very successfully and very safely in an environmentally sound, sane manner. We need to be able to do the same thing." He did not say where the government might put such a site.Waste from various Department of Energy sites has been coming to Washington's Hanford nuclear reservation for decades, a few thousand cubic meters a year. Last year, the Clinton administration named Hanford one of two permanent dumps for low-level radioactive byproducts of Cold War research. The other is in Nevada. In 1987, Congress passed a law designating Nevada's Yucca Mountain as the nation's only high-level nuclear-waste repository. Such a site would receive waste from both nuclear-power plants and from defense uses. Nevadans have been bitterly fighting the proposal for 14 years. ***************************************************************** 6 Officials keep close eye on hazardous cargoes Wednesday, May 09, 2001 - 12:00 a.m. Pacific The Seattle Times: Nation &World: By Knight Ridder Newspapers ** ARLINGTON, Texas - There is nothing like them on the nation's highways: tractor-trailer rigs hauling 10-feet-tall vertical containers packed with radioactive waste. Federal energy officials have developed a complex transportation system using the "best science available," said Dan Balduini, spokesman for Westinghouse TRU Solutions, the company that operates the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, N.M., through a contract with the Energy Department. He said the large stainless-steel Trupact-II storage casks are unusually tough. They will be hauled by trucks tracked by satellites and driven by drivers who are required to follow strict safety rules. Jim Channell, a member of an independent group that monitors the plant, said his organization insisted the Energy Department make changes to the cask, which was then redesigned. Channell is deputy director of New Mexico Environmental Evaluation Group - scientists and engineers federally funded to independently evaluate the plant's policies and procedures. "I personally witnessed the tests that involved dropping it from 30 feet and onto huge spikes," Channell said. "It's an excellent package." Roger Mulder is assigned to the Texas Energy Conservation Office, which reports to the state's comptroller. His primary job is monitoring the Pantex Plant, a nuclear-weapons assembly and dismantling site near Amarillo, Texas. He was also assigned to help ensure that Texas communities are ready for the shipments. Mulder said first responders to any accident involving a waste-hauling truck are instructed to keep the public away from the wreckage, then call for help. Officials said Energy Department specialists with emergency equipment would be sent to the accident to contain the waste and get it back on the road. Channell warned that the public should not discount the possibility of an accident. "On a study we did 10 years ago on accidents," he recalled, "we concluded that out of the 30,000 shipments headed to WIPP from everywhere over the next 30 years, there would be a handful of serious transportation accidents. "And of these, there would be one, two or three in which there could be a minor release of radiation, but the probability is very low." Channell noted there already have been a couple of shipments from Western states that reported mishaps. In one, a trace of radioactive material was detected on the outer skin of a cask. "We later learned that it wasn't from the stuff inside the Trupact, so perhaps it was from some natural contact. But as long as the incidents are as innocuous as these, there will be no real problem," Channell said. Gary Pipes, Arlington, Texas' emergency-management coordinator, agreed. "I think we are ready. We are prepared to detect all three levels of radiation," Pipes said. "But if there would be an accident with one of these trucks on I-20, the trauma from the injuries would probably be our first concern." seattletimes.com home ***************************************************************** 7 Radioactive waste begins trek to new facility in N.M. Wichita Eagle | By Bill Miller Knight Ridder Tribune ARLINGTON, Texas -- Federal energy officials Tuesday began a 34-year program to ship nuclear waste by truck to New Mexico. The first shipments are from the Savannah River Site near Aiken, S.C., and include items such as gloves, shoe covers, rags and tools that were exposed to plutonium and discarded during the production of nuclear weapons. The material is destined for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, N.M., where it will be stored nearly a half-mile underground in rooms surrounded by massive salt deposits. "This is all part of taking care of the legacy of the Cold War," said Tom Welch, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Energy in Washington. The leader of a Waste Isolation Pilot Plant watchdog group said there is some risk in transportation. "If it's handled correctly, people in your part of the world won't be exposed to waste, but if there is an accident, there could be a release," said Don Hancock, executive director of Southwest Research and Information Center of Albuquerque. Energy Department officials are confident in the safety of the complex transportation system: Large stainless-steel storage casks, described as "virtually impenetrable," will be hauled by trucks that are tracked by satellites and driven by specially trained drivers who are required to follow stringent safety protocols. According to an Energy Department fact sheet, the activities at the pilot plant are just part of the nation's nuclear weapons cleanup challenge. For example, the agency says it must also deal with 1.7 trillion gallons of contaminated groundwater and 40 million cubic meters of contaminated soil and debris. The agency concludes that the size of the nationwide cleanup will require "long-term care and monitoring -- or stewardship -- for potentially hundreds of years at an estimated 109 sites." The department estimates it will spend as much as $212 billion through 2070 to get rid of waste from the nation's weapons plants. © The Wichita Eagle ***************************************************************** 8 Radioactive waste to pass through Texas The Dallas Morning News: Metro First plutonium-contaminated shipment headed to New Mexico plant 05/09/2001 By Bill Lodge / The Dallas Morning News A tractor-trailer rig bearing three metal silos, each filled with tons of radioactive waste, pulled out of Aiken, S.C., Tuesday and headed west on Interstate 20 for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, N.M. A closer look The first of thousands of shipments of radioactive waste will be transported along Interstate 20 on Wednesday on its way to a storage site in New Mexico. What is in the shipments? " Known as transuranic wastes, the objects being transported include tools, clothing, glassware and solvents contaminated with plutonium and other radioactive materials during the production of nuclear weapons. Where do the materials that pass through Dallas come from? " Savannah River Site in Aiken, S.C.; Argonne National Laboratory-East in Argonne, Ill.; Mound Plant near Miamisburg, Ohio; and Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tenn. How dangerous are these materials? " Transuranic wastes are considered more dangerous than uranium tailings and low-level radioactive wastes but less dangerous than spent fuel from nuclear power plants. If inhaled, microscopic quantities of plutonium can cause lung cancer. What safety precautions are being taken? " The shipments are tracked by satellite, and municipal police departments are alerted when a truck crosses their state line. Steel silos, known as TRUPACT II containers, enclose the wastes and can survive temperatures of 1,400 degrees Fahrenheit, a 30-foot drop onto concrete or a 40-inch drop onto a 6-inch-thick steel bar. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Energy; the Energy Department's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; the Energy Department's Savannah River Site; Public Citizen; and the National Safety Council's Environmental Health Center The 9-ton load of plutonium-contaminated waste is the first to be sent to the WIPP from federal sites east of the Mississippi River. It also is the first of an estimated 4,300 shipments that will pass through Dallas and other cities over the next 33 years. U.S. Department of Energy officials would not estimate when that first truck would pass through Dallas on Wednesday or when it would speed through any other city. "I can't speculate," said Julie Petersen, a spokeswoman at the Energy Department's Savannah River Site near Aiken. WIPP officials in New Mexico also would not provide a schedule for the truck's progress, which is monitored by satellite. Radioactive waste to pass through Texas "That lack of information is pretty concerning," said Lisa Gue, a policy analyst with the Washington-based government watchdog Public Citizen. Ms. Gue said the extreme toxicity of plutonium should have compelled Energy Department officials to release a schedule of arrival times for the truck. Otherwise, she said, an accident could fatally contaminate bystanders. "There are terrorist concerns," Ms. Gue said, referring to reasons the schedule might be kept secret. "But the public deserves to know when they're being exposed to this kind of danger." Any fiery accident that pierced one of the transport silos would threaten the life of anyone who inhaled the smoke, she said. In New Mexico, Don Hancock of the nonprofit Southwest Information Research Center estimated that the radioactive waste would pass through Dallas at 9 a.m. Wednesday. He expressed dismay at the Energy Department's refusal to release an estimated time of arrival. "On the one hand ... [the Energy Department] says nothing can happen," Mr. Hancock said. "On the other hand, they don't want to tell people in advance when they're coming through. It doesn't make sense." In a written statement, Energy Department officials said a panel of the National Academy of Sciences has concluded that the steel containers are "safer than that employed for any other hazardous material in the U.S." "This shipment represents a milestone for Savannah River, allows the site to focus on disposal rather than only storage, and is a major accomplishment in our efforts to clean up the legacy of the Cold War," Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said. The waste being sent to the WIPP was contaminated with radioactive materials during the production of nuclear weapons. The waste has been stored for decades at several sites across the country. ***************************************************************** 9 Jeffco wells tested for refined uranium Denver Post Environment Writer Wednesday, May 09, 2001 - JEFFERSON COUNTY - The state health department is examining test results from 10 residential water wells in rural Jefferson County to determine whether they are polluted with processed radioactive waste. Health officials would not comment on the water quality in the Deer Creek Mesa subdivision until they recheck testing processes and notify affected homeowners. But preliminary results show that some of the wells may be contaminated with radioactive isotopes characteristic of enriched or processed uranium, rather than naturally occurring uranium ore that underlies the area. Some residents and citizen activists who have requested the tests worry that former rocket development plant in Waterton Canyon several miles to the south, or a mothballed Air Force base at the Martin site, could be the source of the pollution. The rocket plant was operated by Martin Marietta and now is run by Lockheed-Martin. John Vierthaler, whose well on Erin Lane was one of those tested, said he was concerned about his neighbors who are still drinking the water. Eleven years ago, tests of Vierthaler's water well showed high levels of uranium, but he thought it was due to a seam of uranium ore from the Seven Devils mine underneath the nearby Martin Marietta plant. "Now I find it's not," said Vierthaler, who paid $15,000 to hook up to municipal water. "It's from man-made sources - it's refined." Groundwater containing natural uranium typically has equal amounts of two isotopes, uranium 234 and uranium 238, according to Trudy Scott, lab manager for Acculabs Inc. of Golden, which analyzed the well water samples. Only one of the samples showed high levels of naturally occurring uranium, said Scott. "All other samples ... showed levels of U-234 that were significantly higher than for U-238," she wrote in an April 16 report to the Environmental Protection Agency. Some of the samples also contained traces of radioactive lead, cesium and plutonium. But state health officials said those preliminary results had not yet been verified. "If this is a man-made deal, believe me, we're not going to try to keep it secret," said Jeannine Natterman, a spokeswoman with the health department. "But we need to see if these results are due to natural factors." Officials for Martin Marietta attended an advisory board meeting Tuesday night in Littleton on the base closure. They said the facility was never licensed for and did not handle enriched uranium. Charles Johnson, who is overseeing the case for the health department, said the state has no record of uranium processing at either the Martin plant or the Air Force base. "We have people looking at (the test results) right now," said Johnson. "But until we get the (quality assurance report), we will not talk about the data." Also unclear is how the contaminants could have migrated north from the plant to the subdivision's water supply, though the rock formations underlying the area are fractured by an ancient fault. Environmentalists at Tuesday's meeting were upset to find that a discussion of the test results was initially not on the meeting agenda. The current operator of the plant was corrected on May 10. All contents Copyright 2001 The Denver Post or other copyright ***************************************************************** 10 Duke Energy defends mixed-oxide nuclear fuel plan *Updated 12:27 AM ET May 9, 2001* By James Pierpoint CHARLOTTE, N.C., May 8 (Reuters) - Duke Energy executives defended on Tuesday a plan to use mixed-oxide fuel at two North Carolina nuclear power plants and said the project's impact on the company's costs and profits would be "inconsequential." Michael Tuckman, senior vice president of nuclear operations for the company's Duke Power utility subsidiary, assured concerned residents its plan to convert 33 tonnes of weapons-grade plutonium into nuclear fuel for its reactors would be carried out safely. "You have given us your trust and we are not going to misuse that," Tuckman said at a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission hearing in Charlotte, North Carolina. "What we're trying to do is something to help non-proliferation in this world. That is our aim." Environmentalists at the meeting repeated a laundry list of concerns about the project, ranging from fears the plutonium could be hijacked in transport to a scenario that the hotter-burning fuel could contribute to a reactor meltdown. "Duke Power is doing this for greed, and don't let them fool you. This is all about money," said Denise Lee, a member of the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League. The U.S. Department of Energy is seeking to dispose of 50 tonnes of surplus weapons-grade plutonium, blending two-thirds with uranium to form the mixed-oxide fuel, and encasing the rest in ceramic so it can be "immobilized." A consortium that includes Duke Power, a U.S. unit of French nuclear reprocessing firm COGEMA, and contracting firm Stone &Webster, beat out two other bidders to construct a plant to blend the fuel, which then would be loaded into two Duke nuclear reactors beginning in about 2007. REMNANT OF THE COLD WAR Duke Power in 2004 plans to seek amendments to its NRC licenses for both its McGuire and Catawba plants, after testing mixed-oxide fuel assemblies in one or both of the plants the prior year. Both are located on lakes outside Charlotte. Company executives said local residents have been largely supportive. The company last week held three open houses -- two at the nuclear plants and one at its Charlotte headquarters -- for customers to voice concerns, and seven people showed up. Duke Power engineer Milton Hopkins, who attended the Tuesday evening hearing, said he has more than a professional interest in seeing the mixed-oxide fuel project move ahead. During the Cold War, Hopkins, 59, was an electronic warfare officer on a U.S. Air Force B-52 armed with nuclear warheads, some of which he now is helping to neutralize. "When we were on alert, we were ready for the call if the president said go to it," he told Reuters. "Now we're getting rid of the weapons material and burning it for electricity." "It's a great feeling to be a part of that," he said. [Reuters] ***************************************************************** 11 First SRS shipment heads out Augusta Georgia: Metro: *Web posted Wednesday, May 9, 2001 By Brandon Haddock *Staff Writer* The government-white flatbed truck that drove through Jackson, Beech Island and Augusta on Tuesday looked generic. Its cargo, however, was not. Sam Kelly, the president of BNFL Savannah River Corp., joins a crowd to watch the first shipment of nuclear waste leave Savannah River Site. The truck is scheduled to arrive in New Mexico today. *JONATHAN ERNST/STAFF* The truck carried radioactive remains from a Cold War past - gloves, rags, hoses and debris contaminated with plutonium during years of work at Savannah River Site. Its departure marked the first fulfillment of a decades-old promise to remove such waste from South Carolina soil. ``It's just a tremendous sense of satisfaction,'' said Tom Heenan, an assistant manager for the U.S. Department of Energy at SRS. ``There are a couple of hundred people who have worked real hard on this for, literally, years, and we are very proud of them.'' Mr. Heenan was one of about 30 people, mostly executives from the federal nuclear-weapons site, who gathered along South Carolina Highway 125 at the site's boundary to watch the truck pass shortly after noon. The truck, its back laden with three massive ``TRUPACT II'' containers filled with 42 55-gallon drums of waste, honked its horn as it rolled by, prompting cheers from the throng. A two-man team was scheduled to drive through the night. Sometime today, the flatbed is expected to arrive at New Mexico's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, where its cargo will be buried in a subterranean salt bed thousands of years old. Emergency planners from Aiken and Columbia counties said they were not concerned about the prospect of radioactive waste traveling their highways. ``We have been prepared for a decade,'' said Pam Tucker, the director of the Columbia County Emergency Management Agency. ``We all feel comfortable. ``If there should be a problem, we're ready to handle it. We feel that's not likely to happen, based on the training that we've had.'' Members of the site's Citizens Advisory Board, who had pushed for years to have SRS waste sent to WIPP, expressed relief Tuesday that moving day finally had arrived. ``This is a day we've been waiting for a long time,'' said Wade Waters, the chairman of the board's waste-management committee. ``We just hope that nothing more will stand in the way of getting these shipments out.'' The site will send about 1,800 truckloads of waste to WIPP during the next 30 years, according to Dale Ormond, the Energy Department's senior manager for the transuranic-waste program at SRS. The shipments will carry 55,000 barrels of waste to WIPP. A crowd watches a truck carrying barrels of radioactive waste leave Savannah River Site on its way to New Mexico. The truck left Tuesday for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, where its cargo will be buried in a subterranean salt bed. The program is expected to cost about $1.3 billion, Mr. Ormond said. Already, the site has spent $15 million to earn certification that it is ready to ship waste to WIPP and to prepare the first shipment, he said. Not everyone was thrilled about the shipment. Some nuclear activists say the WIPP shipments detract from more pressing environmental concerns at SRS, a Superfund site where thousands of gallons of soil and ground water are contaminated with hazardous chemicals and radioactive materials. ``These shipments do little, if anything, to alleviate the real waste problems at SRS,'' said Pat Ortmeyer, a field director for Women's Action for New Directions, in an e-mail message last week. ``These shipments really are just a justification for opening WIPP more than they are a cleanup solution for SRS.'' Chronology 1955: U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, the forerunner to the U.S. Department of Energy, asks the National Academy of Sciences to study the disposal of radioactive wastes. After the academy recommends burying some wastes in salt, the commission takes decades to choose a site, settling on a subterranean salt bed near Carlsbad, N.M. 1979: Congress authorizes the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant for research-and-development purposes. 1981: New Mexico sues the Energy Department and the U.S. Department of the Interior. Although the suit is settled, it is the first of many legal challenges to WIPP. The first exploratory shaft is drilled at the site. Underground excavation begins one year later. 1983: The Energy Department makes the final decision to construct WIPP. 1989: The Energy Department applies to withdraw 10,240 acres of federal land for WIPP use. 1992: President George Bush signs the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act into law. March 22, 1999: U.S. District Judge John Garrett Penn dismisses a 1992 injunction that prevented the Energy Department from shipping radioactive waste to WIPP. Two days later, a New Mexico court denies a request for a second injunction. March 25, 1999: First waste shipment from Los Alamos National Laboratory leaves for WIPP. April 27, 1999: First waste shipment from Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory leaves for WIPP. June 16, 1999: First waste shipment from Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site arrives at WIPP. May 8, 2001: First waste shipment from Savannah River Site leaves for WIPP. Reach Brandon Haddockat (706) 823-3409. All contents ©1996 - 2001 *The Augusta Chronicle*. All ***************************************************************** 12 Cheney: Nuclear waste dump can be safe Sandra Sobieraj ASSOCIATED PRESS May 9th, 2001 WASHINGTON— The Bush administration’s turn to nuclear power as a long-term energy strategy will necessitate a permanent nuclear waste dump, Vice President Dick Cheney said Tuesday. “Now, with the gas prices rising as dramatically as they have, nuclear power looks like a pretty good alternative from an economic standpoint, if the permitting process is manageable and if we find a way to deal with the waste question,” said Cheney, who is developing energy policy recommendations for President Bush. In an interview on CNN, the vice president said his recommendations would include changes meant to speed federal permits to utilities seeking to build nuclear power plants. The industry has not sought a government permit to build a new plant in more than 20 years, since before the accident at Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island spread fear about nuclear power. Nuclear power provides 20 percent of the nation’s electric capacity today. As to the thorny question of nuclear waste, Cheney said: “Right now we’ve got waste piling up at reactors all over the country. Eventually, there ought to be a permanent repository. The French do this very successfully and very safely in an environmentally sound, sane manner. We need to be able to do the same thing.” He did not say where the government might put such a site but Nevada officials fear it would almost certainly be built in their state. In 1987, Congress passed a law designating Nevada’s Yucca Mountain as the nation’s only high-level nuclear waste repository. Such a site would receive waste from both nuclear power plants and from defense uses. Nevadans have been bitterly fighting the proposal for 14 years. Shedding more light on the energy policy that Bush is scheduled to unveil next week, Cheney left open the possibility that Bush will seek the so-called “power of eminent domain” to construct new electrical transmission lines. Such authority allows the government to appropriate private property for public use. The federal government already has such authority with respect to laying gas pipelines. “The issue is whether or not we should have the same authority on electrical transmission lines, that’s never been granted previously. That’s one of the issues we’ve looked at. We’ll have a recommendation when we release the report next week,” Cheney said. He defended his energy-policy work against critics who say he has focused too much on increased production — boosting coal burning and drilling for oil and natural gas. “You’ll find that most of the financial incentives that we recommend in the report go for conservation or renewables, for increased efficiencies. Now, we don’t have a lot of new financial incentives in here to go out and produce more oil and gas, for example, so, we believe in conservation, we believe in renewables, we believe in wind and solar and all of those other technologies,” Cheney said. But, he added, renewable forms of energy provide just 2 percent of national electric generating capacity and cannot alone solve the nation’s problem of demand exceeding supply. © 2001 Reno Gazette-Journal ***************************************************************** 13 Nuclear-fuel producer favored in trade ruling The Seattle Times: Nation &World: By The Associated Press WASHINGTON - The Commerce Department said yesterday that European countries have subsidized the uranium-enrichment industry, a preliminary ruling that favors the United States' only producer of fuel for nuclear-power plants. The department said the French have given a subsidy of nearly 14 percent, while Germany, the Netherlands and Britain provided subsidies of less than 4 percent each. U.S. Enrichment Corp. (USEC), based in Bethesda, Md., filed the trade case against Eurodif, a French company, and Urenco, which exports uranium from Britain, Germany and the Netherlands. USEC complained that it lost millions of dollars worth of business because government subsidies let Eurodif and Urenco charge less for power-plant fuel. The European companies fought the complaint, arguing that USEC's prices were high because of its electricity-intensive, World War II-era technology and because it was weighed down by a money-losing contract to sell uranium retrieved from former Soviet weapons. Backing up the position of those competitors were lawmakers from North Carolina and South Carolina who said they didn't want their constituents to pay more for electricity. North Carolina gets more than 30 percent of its electricity from nuclear reactors, and nuclear-power plants generate more than 56 percent of South Carolina's electricity, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute. Even though the latest ruling is only preliminary, it can have a swift impact on prices because importers will have to pay a bond to cover the amount of the punitive duty, should that duty be upheld in a final ruling. USEC filed its trade complaint in December after more than a year of declining profits. seattletimes.com home ***************************************************************** 14 Urenco Reaction on Commerce's Preliminary Decision U.S. Newswire 8 May 18:10 On Subsidy Allegations To: National Desk Contact: John McInespie, 202-347-6875 WASHINGTON, May 8 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The US Department of Commerce on May 7 preliminarily determined that imports of LEU from the Urenco Group would be subject to a countervailing duty rate of 3.72 percent. This determination arises out of investigations initiated by USEC in December of 2000. USEC had claimed countervailing duties at a rate in excess of 20 percent. Commenting on the determination, Klaus Messer, Chief Executive of Urenco said: "We are gratified that the Department of Commerce upheld Urenco's position on nearly all of the subsidies alleged by USEC and are confident that, when the Department has verified the voluminous information we submitted and had a full briefing on the issues, Urenco will be fully vindicated." The Final Determination is expected later this year. Dr. Messer went on to state that "we are pleased that Urenco's position has been actively supported by the governments of Germany, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom, as well as by the European Commission. They share our view that these cases never should have been accepted by the Department of Commerce. Urenco provides services, not goods, and the international trade laws do not apply to services." From its inception, Urenco has successfully deployed its advanced gas centrifuge technology in three countries. Dr. Messer explained that "Urenco's centrifuge technology has allowed it to utilize the world's most efficient and economic enrichment process to stay well ahead of its competitors." He stressed that "it is this technology- not government grants made many years ago- that has fueled Urenco's competitiveness and consistent profitability." In contrast, USEC has succeeded to the largest, government-owned enrichment enterprise. That enterprise was, and remains, the world's largest supplier of enrichment services. To support its privatization, USEC was given a huge uranium stockpile, hundreds of millions of dollars worth of technology development, nominal rent for its plants which remain government-owned, government protection from past liabilities, and much more. Dr. Messer expressed his dismay that "a competitor with such government backing would blame its own market difficulties on its smallest competitor." "This case," Dr. Messer stated, "is about a competitor trying to protect itself from competition with the best technology. USEC, with all its government help, has not been able to develop modern enrichment technology. We are determined to bring the benefits of our world class centrifuge enrichment technology to our US customers." Copyright 2001, U.S. Newswire ***************************************************************** 15 Dingell Questions DOE On No-Bid Contract For USEC At Portsmouth - By George Lobsenz Energy Daily May 8, 2001 By George Lobsenz A senior House Democrat is questioning the legality of an Energy Department plan to bypass competitive bidding so it can hand USEC Inc. a major contract for cleaning out the Portsmouth uranium enrichment plant and placing it in cold stand-by. Rep. John Dingell of Michigan, ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, told Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham in a May 1 letter that the effort to give USEC a "sole-source" contract may violate federal procurement laws that require that big government contracts be put out for bid. Under law, DOE and all other federal agencies must issue a written justification explaining why they are not seeking competitive bids on major contracts. In general, federal law-and DOE-favor competitive bidding as likely to produce the lowest prices for the government. USEC appears to be in line to get the cold stand-by contract because it currently is leasing the Portsmouth plant near Piketon, Ohio. However, the Maryland-based company recently announced it is ending uranium enrichment operations at the plant because they are no longer economic, and it plans to relinquish its lease June 1. DOE officials have told congressional aides that the sole-source contract is needed so DOE can keep USEC on site and meet a tight schedule for placing Portsmouth in cold stand-by. Such a contract also would meet Bush administration promises to provide new employment to Portsmouth workers facing layoffs due to the end of enrichment operations. President Bush promised to aid Portsmouth workers during the presidential election campaign. In addition, the administration says putting Portsmouth in cold stand-by will bolster the nation's energy security by ensuring there is a backup enrichment facility to serve the U.S. nuclear power industry. Currently, the only active U.S. enrichment facility is operated at Paducah, Ky., by USEC, also under a lease from DOE. In his letter to Abraham, Dingell said he understood the need for a short-term sole-source arrangement so DOE could get the cold stand-by work under way. But he said the contract apparently under consideration for USEC could exceed $50 million and last two years, with more extensions possible. Altogether, he said the cold standby work could cost $200 million plus $20 million a year after that to maintain the plant. "I certainly understand that the department has been required to respond quickly to the administration's decision to place Portsmouth in cold stand-by," Dingell said. "However, the necessity of this work does not mandate non-competitive-and possibly illegal-long-term government contracts without proper justification." DOE officials did not respond to inquiries about Dingell's letter. Sole-source contracts generally are supposed to go to contractors with special skills or technology that makes them uniquely suited to do a particular job for the government. However, aides to Dingell say USEC appears to have no particular expertise in plant cleanup and decommissioning, and could even subcontract the work if granted the cold stand-by contract. The aides said the main reason DOE was looking to hire USEC was because it was the current leaseholder for Portsmouth. "DOE officials apparently think that an expiring real property lease can be used as a shell to sole-source a completely different scope of work and avoid receiving competitive bids for millions of dollars of government-funded work," said a Dingell staff analysis. "The size of the proposed [lease] 'amendment' alone and the total change of work scope should have alerted the department to proceed with caution under the federal acquisition regulations." DOE has run into controversy in the past on sole-source contracts. In 1996, it granted BNFL Inc. a large sole-source contract to clean up uranium enrichment facilities at its Oak Ridge, Tenn., site-over the complaints of competing firms that wanted to bid. Since that contract was awarded, BNFL has encountered cost overruns and technical problems. Copyright 2001 King Communications Group Energy Daily ***************************************************************** 16 Letter to Energy Department regarding USEC Text only of letters sent from the Committee on Energy and Commerce Democrats. May 1, 2001 The Honorable Spencer Abraham Secretary Department of Energy Forrestal Building 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20585 Dear Secretary Abraham: Last Friday, representatives of the Department of Energy (DOE) met with the U.S. Enrichment Corporation (USEC) apparently to begin negotiations on a sole source legal instrument to award USEC the cold standby work at the Portsmouth gaseous diffusion plant and some of the clean-up work. As you know, the value of an initial two-year contract is not insignificant, but most likely in excess of $50 million, and there are expected to be options to extend the contract beyond the initial term. (Over a five year period, cold standby will cost $200 million, and $20 million per year after that.) A second sole-source contract with Bechtel-Jacobs Corporation appears to also be under discussion. I understand and support the need for a short-term transitional sole source arrangement (although two years strikes us as long). This is important work, and must be handled well. That is why I now express our concerns that all legal requirements be complied with fully. Attached is a staff memorandum setting forth several issues regarding this matter. I certainly understand that the Department has been required to respond quickly to the administration’s decision to place Portsmouth in cold standby. However, the necessity of this work does not mandate non-competitive – and possibly illegal – long-term government contracts without the proper justification. There are also other issues involved, including who will ultimately own the $1 million in SWU removed from the cascades and the $30 million in freon remaining on the site, as well as the location of the assets DOE transferred to USEC to pay pension and health benefits to plant retirees. By this letter, I request that your staff brief Committee staff concerning this process by Friday, May 4, 2001. I also request that copies of all justifications for a less than full and competitive procurement be provided relating to possible negotiations with USEC and/or Bechtel Jacobs and copies of any notices that the Department may have posted in the *Federal Register* or other appropriate government publications concerning this contract and/or expanded scope of work. If you require additional information, please contact me or have your staff contact Edith Holleman, Minority Counsel, at (202) 226-3400. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, JOHN D. DINGELL RANKING MEMBER cc: The Honorable W. J. "Billy" Tauzin, Chairman Committee on Energy and Commerce ***************************************************************** 17 Batavia joins multi-state suit against EPA By Marie-Anne Hogarth STAFF WRITER Common problem: Fox Valley communities scramble to meet radium regulations BATAVIA — Batavia will join a Wisconsin city's lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency regarding radium levels in drinking water. Waukesha, Wis., challenged the federal agency's standard in February, saying it is not scientifically based. The standard is too stringent, Waukesha officials charged, and too costly for cities like itself to meet. Six other municipalities in Wisconsin, one in Minnesota, the National Mining Association, the Nuclear Energy Institute and the Radiation Science and Health Association also are involved in the suit. Batavia aldermen said this week it would not cost Batavia any money to join in. In 1991, the U.S. EPA set the standard for radium at 5 picocuries per liter of water, said a spokesman for the Illinois EPA. At the time, the agency did not enforce its rules, however, saying the agency likely would revisit the standard. Radium, a naturally occurring radioactive element in the earth's crust, has been linked to bone cancer when ingested. About 85 Illinois communities have radium levels in their drinking water that exceed the agency standard. Most of these communities are located in Northern Illinois, and many Fox Valley municipalities are impacted. It would take a person drinking 2 liters a day from the same water source 70 years before any complications would result, according to the Illinois EPA spokesman. Last December, the U.S. EPA set the same standard again, this time giving communities a deadline of Dec. 8, 2003, by which to comply. For many municipalities, this has means spending millions of dollars diluting or treating water. Batavia and Geneva are studying construction of a $43 million lime-softening plant. Batavia's deep wells have radium levels of 16 picocuries per liter, above the EPA standard of 5 picocuries, said John Dillon, superintendent of streets and water. The lime-softening plant also would result in a higher quality of water and the ability to treat shallow and deep well water, as well as water from the Fox River, officials said. Batavia's portion of the cost would amount to $28 million to $30 million, Dillon said. About $9 million to $10 million would be used for new water pipes and water towers. Seventh Ward Alderman Richard Ford suggested joining Waukesha's suit to protest the guidelines and also possibly gain funds that will help meet them. As another tactic, the council passed a resolution opposing the EPA standard. Ford said the council hoped that such a resolution might convince President George W. Bush's administration to change the regulation. Brandon Grometer, a spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert of Yorkville, said a request had been made in this year's federal budget appropriation to give some municipalities matching funds to meet radium standards. In the past, North Aurora, West Chicago, Elburn, Batavia, Geneva, Oswego, Yorkville and DeKalb all have received federal dollars to this end, Grometer said. While Batavia hopes other Illinois communities join Waukesha's suit, officials from many area towns knew little about it. A common goal, though, is meeting federal guidelines for fear of being held back from expansion plans later. "We just have to pay the piper," said Sugar Grove Village President Sean Michels. He added Sugar Grove was applying for federal assistance. In one well, Sugar Grove faces water with a radium level of 10 picocuries per liter, Michels said. The village is looking at correcting the problem by building a lime-softening plant and a new well close to it. *Staff writer Jennifer Savage contributed to this report.* ***************************************************************** 18 A phantom energy crisis Salon.com Politics | The Bush administration has convinced the nation that we're in the middle of a power emergency, but the facts indicate otherwise. By Dan Ackman May 8, 2001 | The Bush administration's new energy policy is, in a word, "more." The administration wants to mine more, drill more, generate more, use more. Vice President Dick Cheney, in a speech last week in Toronto, pointed to the situation in California as a harbinger of doom and said the government needed to encourage increased production. He also mocked conservation as a "sign of personal virtue" -- Jimmy Carter in his cardigan. It looks like the administration's public relations efforts are bearing fruit. A recent poll indicates that 53 percent of Americans believe we are in an energy crisis and a like number are willing to put the extraction of new supplies ahead of environmental concerns. In fact there is no crisis, and conservation is a big part of the reason. Despite declining real prices, Americans have barely increased their energy consumption. Between 1980 and 2000, overall consumption grew by just 26 percent, even while the nation's GDP increased by 90 percent. Although consumption has risen in absolute terms, there has never been a greater abundance of known oil, natural gas and coal reserves. California's rolling blackouts have made headlines and Cheney has used them to sell his plan. But the Golden State's problems are unique and are caused by a massive regulatory failure. Indeed, the "crisis" does not even cover all of California. Los Angeles, for example, is unaffected because it has its own municipal power service. "The potential crisis we face is largely the result of shortsighted domestic policies -- or, as in recent years, no policy at all," Cheney said, blaming the Clinton administration. But the United States has never had more abundant supplies of power selling at very low prices. The country has also never been smarter about energy use. Since 1973, fuel efficiency for the economy overall has improved by more than 42 percent. This dramatic gain in what energy analysts call "energy intensity" was not caused by fuel becoming more expensive. Indeed, the opposite has occurred. Between 1980 and 2000, energy prices rose by 44.8 percent, most of that rise occurring in the past two years. During the same 20-year period, non-energy prices increased almost three times as fast, by 119 percent. The price of a gallon of gas has declined by 39 percent in real terms. Low prices, efficient use, abundant supply: some crisis. American homes and workplaces have become dramatically more energy efficient, but not because Americans have become more "virtuous" (though perhaps they have). The reason is that refrigerators, lamps, buildings and factories have been redesigned with fuel efficiency in mind. No matter how cheap heat and electricity become, using less is cheaper still. Conservation is not, despite Cheney's derision, about putting on an extra sweater or sitting in the dark. It's about technology. It's employing a light bulb or a washing machine that uses much less power than the ones we used in years past. As well as Americans have done to conserve, however, they can do better. Between 1980 and 1995, the fuel efficiency of U.S. automobiles improved quickly. Since then, the trend has stalled and even reversed. But it's not because cars have become less efficient. It's because many drivers -- encouraged by low gas prices -- have switched from ordinary cars to light trucks or sport utility vehicles, which are less fuel efficient than smaller cars. One reason Cheney is selling the idea of an energy crisis is so the administration can also sell the idea of drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. But the administration's phony crisis cannot justify the drilling. Slight, even trivial, gains in automobile fuel efficiency would conserve far more oil than the U.S. could ever hope to extract from the Alaskan preserve. In fact, we have reduced our dependence on oil as a source of energy. Between 1980 and 1998, U.S. petroleum consumption hardly increased at all, from 34.2 quadrillion British thermal units to 37.39 quadrillion Btu. Petroleum consumption has plateaued because Americans used to get 44 percent of their energy from oil. Now the figure is 39 percent, though more of it is imported. Coal provides a greater share of U.S. energy than it did 20 years ago, as does nuclear power. Nuclear plants accounted for 3.6 percent of power in 1980. By 2000, that number had jumped to 8.1 percent. And no amount of drilling in Alaska or anywhere else is likely to have any impact on the financial and political crisis in California. Nearly all of the state's electricity is produced by natural gas and hydroelectric power. But Bush wants to capitalize on the fear that blackouts might occur elsewhere. "We need a full affront on an energy crisis that is real in California and looms for other parts of our country, if we don't move quickly," Bush told the Dallas Morning News last month. Cheney used to work in the energy business, as did the president, so they should know better. The crisis hype is phony. Is the administration talking up a crisis to help pay back its buddies in the oil business? Certainly, the false cries of crisis indicate a dark motive is afoot. salon.com Reproduction of material from any Salon pages without written permission is strictly prohibited Copyright 2001 Salon.com Salon, 22 4th Street, 16th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103 Telephone 415 645-9200 | Fax 415 645-9204 E-mail | Salon.com Privacy Policy | ***************************************************************** 19 Cheney says nuclear waste dump can be built safely [tahoe.com] CARSON Wednesday, May 9, 2001 Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - The Bush administration's turn to nuclear power as a long-term energy strategy will necessitate a permanent nuclear waste dump, Vice President Dick Cheney said Tuesday. ''Now, with the gas prices rising as dramatically as they have, nuclear power looks like a pretty good alternative from an economic standpoint, if the permitting process is manageable and if we find a way to deal with the waste question,'' said Cheney, who is developing energy policy recommendations for President Bush. In an interview on CNN, the vice president said his recommendations would include changes meant to speed federal permits to utilities seeking to build nuclear power plants. The industry has not sought a government permit to build a new plant in more than 20 years, since before the accident at Pennsylvania's Three Mile Island spread fear about nuclear power. Nuclear power provides 20 percent of the nation's electric capacity today. As to the thorny question of nuclear waste, Cheney said: ''Right now we've got waste piling up at reactors all over the country. Eventually, there ought to be a permanent repository. The French do this very successfully and very safely in an environmentally sound, sane manner. We need to be able to do the same thing.'' He did not say where the government might put such a site but Nevada officials fear it would almost certainly be built in their state. In 1987, Congress passed a law designating Nevada's Yucca Mountain as the nation's only high-level nuclear waste repository. Such a site would receive waste from both nuclear power plants and from defense uses. Nevadans have been bitterly fighting the proposal for 14 years. Shedding more light on the energy policy that Bush is scheduled to unveil next week, Cheney left open the possibility that Bush will seek the so-called ''power of eminent domain'' to construct new electrical transmission lines. Such authority allows the government to appropriate private property for public use. The federal government already has such authority with respect to laying gas pipelines. ''The issue is whether or not we should have the same authority on electrical transmission lines, that's never been granted previously. That's one of the issues we've looked at. We'll have a recommendation when we release the report next week,'' Cheney said. He defended his energy-policy work against critics who say he has focused too much on increased production - boosting coal burning and drilling for oil and natural gas. ''You'll find that most of the financial incentives that we recommend in the report go for conservation or renewables, for increased efficiencies. Now, we don't have a lot of new financial incentives in here to go out and produce more oil and gas, for example, so, we believe in conservation, we believe in renewables, we believe in wind and solar and all of those other technologies,'' Cheney said. But, he added, renewable forms of energy provide just 2 percent of national electric generating capacity and cannot alone solve the nation's problem of demand exceeding supply. *Copyright tahoe.com. Materials contained within this site may ***************************************************************** 20 Critics Rip W on Energy Plan New York Daily News Online | News and Views | Express Edition | May 08, 2001 THE ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON s the Bush administration prepares to release their energy plan next week, critics say President Bush and Vice President Cheney are more interested in helping their former colleagues in the oil business than consumers and the environment. The highly-anticipated energy report comes as another wave of rolling blackouts grips California and motorists across the country face sticker shock at the gas pump. Democrats and environmentalists accuse Bush and Cheney of pushing a plan that relies too much on fossil fuels such as oil, natural gas and coal. "The administration's rhetoric talks about balance," said Alan Nogee, director of the clean energy program for the Union of Concerned Scientists. "But the only proposals they have floated so far are increasing the supply of the same dirty, polluting, unsafe energy sources that we've been dependent on for decades." Bush believes the solution to the energy crisis is a comprehensive policy that includes increasing the supply of domestic oil, natural gas and electricity, aides said. The plan, being developed by a Cheney-led task force, will call for oil drilling on a small patch of the Alaskan wilderness and is expected to advocate building new oil refineries and nuclear power plants. "Conservation alone is not the answer," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said. "Nothing alone is the answer, and that's why the President's proposal will be a very well-rounded one." [Related Stories] Gas Prices Fuel Driver Resentment (5/8/01) Blackouts Hit Calif. 5th Time (5/8/01) ***************************************************************** 21 Fitch Encouraged By Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Recent Actions Yahoo - Tuesday May 8, 1:38 pm Eastern Time Press Release NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 8, 2001--Addressing the Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property, & Nuclear Safety of the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Steve Fetter stated that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) most recent actions are encouraging. The NRC has increased the clarity and transparency of the reactor oversight process and made its reviews focused on safety-related issues. Also, the NRC has made clear progress on the transfer and extension of nuclear operating licenses. Investors and interested parties are able to get more information from the NRC web site. These changes bode well for the future of the industry. `The NRC is at the center of investors' perceptions of the financial risks of the US nuclear industry. To the extent that these regulatory responsibilities are carried out in a consistent and predictable manner, investors will be more likely to support an expanded role for nuclear power,' Fetter said. Fetter also stated that there is much to support an expanding role for nuclear generation in the future. Fossil-fueled plants cannot match nuclear air quality benefits and nuclear fuel is not subject to the degree of volatility that the market has seen in natural gas prices in the western half of the United States. `The elephant in the corner is disposal of spent nuclear fuel. Progress on choosing and developing a permanent site for the disposal of spent fuel is a necessity. Before we see progress on planning for the construction of a new generation of nuclear plants, the waste issue must be resolved. Any delay in achieving this goal likewise delays the ability of the nuclear industry to assist in the country's future electricity needs,' Fetter said. For a copy of Steve Fetter's testimony, please contact James Jockle at 1-212-908-0547, New York. *Contact:* Fitch, New York Steve Fetter, 212/908-0511 Copyright © 2001 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy ***************************************************************** 22 Niagara Mohawk Files Proposed Settlement on Sale of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Stations May 8, 1:41 pm Press Release SOURCE: Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. Niagara Mohawk Files Proposed Settlement on Sale of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Stations SYRACUSE, N.Y., May 8 /PRNewswire/ -- Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of Niagara Mohawk Holdings, Inc. announced that yesterday it filed a joint proposal of settlement regarding the rate treatment of the sale of its interests in the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station to Constellation Nuclear, LLC. The settlement was reached with Multiple Intervenors (an association of large customers, on behalf of its members in Niagara Mohawk's service territory) and the staff of the New York State Department of Public Service. The settlement remains subject to approval by the New York State Public Service Commission. The key provisions of the joint proposal include: -- A $123 million reduction in the stranded costs that Niagara Mohawk will be authorized to recover; -- Full recovery of the remaining stranded costs, including a return, over a period projected not to exceed 10 years; and -- Approval of two purchased power agreements, one for 41 percent (Niagara Mohawk's ownership share) of 90 percent of the output of Unit 2 for a term of 10 years, and another for 90 percent of the output of Unit 1 until the end of its current license life. Niagara Mohawk officials noted that the sale of the nuclear plants and the joint proposal will not increase customer rates. The sale is consistent with an April 2000 New York State Public Service Commission order urging the owners to determine the market value of the plants through an open, competitive process. Department of Public Service staff participated in the auction process. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. is the owner and operator of Nine Mile Point Unit 1, a 609 megawatt plant. Niagara Mohawk operates and is a 41 percent co-owner of Nine Mile Point Unit 2, a 1,148 megawatt plant. The other co-owners are: New York State Electric & Gas Corp. (18 percent), Long Island Power Authority (18 percent), Rochester Gas and Electric Corp. (14 percent), and Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. (9 percent). The plants are located in Scriba, N.Y., approximately 40 miles north of Syracuse. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. has agreed to sell its ownership of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and Unit 2; and New York State Electric & Gas Corp., Rochester Gas and Electric Corp. and Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. have agreed to sell their ownership interest in Nine Mile Point Unit 2, to Constellation Nuclear under an agreement announced in December. The Long Island Power Authority is not participating in the sale. Constellation Nuclear was the successful bidder in a competitive auction for the plants. Niagara Mohawk will receive approximately $610 million -- $262 million at closing and five annual principal and interest payments totaling $348 million. In addition to the New York Public Service Commission, the sale is subject to approvals from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The transaction is targeted to close in mid-2001. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Niagara Mohawk Holdings, Inc., an investor-owned energy services company that provides electricity to more than 1.5 million customers across 24,000 square miles of Upstate New York. The company also delivers natural gas to more than 540,000 customers over 4,500 square miles of eastern, central and northern New York. ***************************************************************** 23 Nuclear still a mistake second time around [Thestar.com] May. 9, 01:31 EDT Those who don't remember the past, it is said, are condemned to repeat it. Premier Mike Harris, wrapped in a cloak of green, looks to be repeating one of the most expensive pieces of the past — our $38 billion nuclear past. Three times in recent days he has raised the possibility of building new nuclear plants. A week ago, he asked this: "Do you want 10 new coal plants in Michigan or Ohio blowing into Ontrio, or would you like one or two nuclear plants, the number one green energy alternative in the world today?" Soon after, he declared that "of all the practical, cost-effective solutions, nuclear energy is appearing more and more to be the green energy of choice." Yesterday, he spoke of "one, two or 10 nuclear plants, putting all those people to work, the safest, greenest electricity available." Moreover, Harris said that this is "something the Prime Minister and I have talked about." The nuclear lobby must be positively glowing. Safe, green, cheap — all the buzzwords of a first-class neutron and deuterium pedlar. Safe? Really? Just four years ago Harris himself shut down Bruce and Pickering for safety concerns. Green? Not exactly. Nukes are better on the air than coal. But the nukes wouldn't replace coal. They'd be in addition. And you have to put aside niggling little things, like reports of radioactive tritium migrating in groundwater and unusual levels of leukemia and prostate cancer among those living under our nuclear plumes. And then there's the cost and the risks associated with complicated technology. No doubt nukes can be cheap to operate, once they're running, if they can be kept running. But cheap to build? Darlington wasn't. Its costs more than tripled to $14 billion. Harris was in the Legislature when that happened. Has he forgotten that Darlington is the biggest single reason for our hydro debt? Why would we want to risk repeating that before Bruce is even back into full operation, and while Pickering is two to three years from getting back in service, if it makes the grade? Wouldn't it make more sense to see if our existing nukes can be made dependable before launching back into high-risk megaprojects? Legal Notice:- Copyright 1996-2001. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Distribution, www.thestar.comis ***************************************************************** 24 Yucca water runoff raises new concerns about nuclear waste www.tahoe.com CARSON Wednesday, May 9, 2001 Associated Press LAS VEGAS - New research raises the possibility that radiation from a proposed high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain or from the Nevada Test Site could be carried into nearby communities by floodwaters. A U.S. Geological Survey study shows that similar drainage has occurred in the past at the Nevada Test Site, where atomic testing occurred from 1951 to 1992. It is the first scientific evidence of water runoff heading from Yucca Mountain or the Test Site to populated areas. Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is the only site being studied to permanently store 77,000 tons of radioactive commercial and defense waste. The study also showed flash flooding in the 300-square-mile area including Yucca Mountain and the Test Site could close highways - disrupting the transportation of nuclear waste - and could interfere with above-ground repository operations, the Las Vegas Sun reported. The Energy Department, which is charged with studying Yucca Mountain's suitability as a repository site and would build and operate a repository if it is approved, downplayed the findings. ''It's not news that the area floods,'' DOE Yucca Mountain Project spokeswoman Gayle Fisher said. ''That's why it's called Fortymile Wash.'' The observations made by USGS scientists during storms in 1995 and 1998 will have to be considered in an environmental impact study under way on the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain. The floods showed that the Amargosa River ''has the potential to transport dissolved and particulate matter well beyond the boundary of the (Nevada Test Site) and the Yucca Mountain area during periods of moderate to severe streamflow,'' the report concluded. Contaminated water could travel as far as Death Valley in California, the report found. The DOE draft environmental impact report does not consider runoff into Fortymile Wash or Topopah Wash, the subjects of the USGS report. The DOE's final environmental impact study is expected to be released at the end of this year. After scientific studies are finished, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is expected to make a recommendation to President Bush on whether Yucca Mountain is suitable for storing the nation's nuclear waste. *Copyright tahoe.com. Materials contained within this site may ***************************************************************** 25 German Police Escort Nuclear Waste Shipment *Updated 3:57 AM ET May 9, 2001* A Cargo Train with Four 'Castor' Nuclear Waste Containers... (AP) RHEINSBERG, Germany (Reuters) - Thousands of German police on Wednesday escorted a train carrying nuclear waste from a power plant shut down over a decade ago. Police said there were only about 20 anti-nuclear activists protesting against the train, which carried 246 spent fuel rods from a Soviet-era power plant in Rheinsberg, 50 miles north of Berlin. The demonstrators were outnumbered by a force of 6,500 police officers. The train, on its way to a temporary storage facility in northern Germany, started its journey shortly after 0300 GMT. Thousands of demonstrators protested in March when Germany took back the first cargo of reprocessed waste from France since the German government banned the shipments in 1998 over concerns about radioactive leaks. In April a small group of German environmental activists chained themselves to rail tracks for several hours hoping to stop wagons they said were due to carry a shipment of nuclear waste. [Reuters] ***************************************************************** 26 Chernobyl raised mutations 600% Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Paul Brown, environment correspondent Wednesday May 9, 2001 The Guardian Children of the "liquidators" - those drafted in to clear up the Chernobyl disaster - suffer seven times the mutation rate of offspring whose parents were not exposed to radiation, research published today by the Royal Society shows. The "unexpectedly high" mutation rate, discovered by using DNA fingerprinting techniques, means that a significant proportion of the world's population doing jobs where even low-level radiation is present are exposing their unborn children to increased risk, the researchers say. This will be of serious concern to the nuclear industry, which has repeatedly rejected claims that exposure to radiation among its workers can affect children yet to be conceived. The theory was put forward by a team at Southampton University as the reason for the leukaemia cluster at Sellafield, but later rejected. The new findings show that the radiation from the striken Ukrainian reactor affected the sperm of fathers, leading to mutation in the DNA of the children. None of them showed physical deformities, because the DNA changes were slight, but the long-term effects are not known. Three teams of scientists, from the Institute of Evolution and the Kupat Holim National Cancer Control Centre, both in Haifa, Israel, and the Research Centre for Radiation Medicine in Ukraine tested children of parents involved in the Chernobyl accident. Families in which one child was conceived before the accident and one later were tested, along with control groups from areas with no radiation exposure. The increases in mutation rates as a result of the parents being exposed to ionising radiation was "highly significant", the paper says. The changes may cause increased risk of cancers or genetic instability in future generations. One hopeful finding was that the mutation rate in children conceived long after their fathers' exposure was reduced the longer the fathers had been in a radiation-free environment. The researchers say that lower doses of radiation also produce mutations, suggesting that low level occupational or medical exposure to radiation could double the mutation rate in offspring. This finding "needs serious attention," the researchers say. "This is all the more important when a significant proportion of the human population is subjected to mutagenic pressure, due to medical diagnostics, industrial accidents, occupation or growth in environmental contamination." Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001 ***************************************************************** 27 New Scientist: Chernobyl's children The children of people exposed to low doses of ionising radiation show very high levels of DNA damage The children of people exposed to low doses of ionising radiation show unexpectedly high levels of genetic damage, an Israeli study has found. Hava Weinberg and her colleagues at the University of Haifa, Israel, studied the families of men who helped in the clean-up operation after the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster in 1986. They used a technique called multi-site genome tagging to analyse blood samples from the parents, and from children in each family born both before and after the explosion. Surprisingly, they found seven times more mutations in the DNA of the children born after the accident, compared to those born before it, and compared to a group of children who were not exposed to any radiation from Chernobyl. Since the siblings in this study were all subject to the same environment, Korol says the huge increase in mutation frequency in children born after the accident was almost certainly down to their parents' exposure. "I cannot explain the results otherwise," he says. Dudley Goodhead from the Medical Research Council in Harwell, UK, says: "This adds to the seriousness with which we should look at these effects - it could be a cause for concern." He says evidence that large numbers of mutations can be passed down through generations is becoming convincing. Spontaneous abortion The men studied by the team were exposed to about 50 to 200 milliSieverts of radiation. Someone working in an aeroplane for 20 years, or a nuclear facility for ten years, would receive about the same dose. But the implications for the offspring of these workers is not clear. He points out the Chernobyl 'liquidators' received their radiation dose over a short period, which could have different consequences to long term exposure. Goodhead adds that none of the mutations detected in the study can be directly linked to any health problems. But an increase in mutations passed from parents to children generally increases the risk of disease, spontaneous abortion and malformation. "People can't ignore this problem anymore," says Korol. "The question is, what is the effect?" Cancer risk The multi-site genome tagging technique involves randomly amplifying segments of DNA from across the genome. By looking for sections of DNA that appeared in the children's genomes, but which did not come from either their mother or father, the team could spot genetic mutations. The research also revealed that parents who waited longer to conceive a child after the disaster produced offspring with fewer mutations. Abraham Korol, from the Institute of Evolution at the University of Haira, says this might mean that the mutated cells are thankfully less likely to survive over time. Previous studies have shown an increased risk of cancer in people exposed to low doses of radiation. The cancers are caused by mutations in cells that are not involved in reproduction. Showing the effect of low doses of radiation on human sperm or ova has proved much more difficult, in part because it is difficult to get samples. In 1996, a team looked at the effect of radiation on the children of parents who were exposed to fallout in Belarus. Yuri Dubrova, now at the University of Leicester, found they had twice as many DNA mutations as British children. But the study was criticised, says Korol, because the control group was not from the same area. More at: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Biological Sciences, (vol 268, p 1001) Related stories: Long term, low-level exposure to radiation creates many mutations in plants (04/10/2001) Mutation rate doubled in Chernobyl's children (27/04/1996) Correspondence about this story should be directed to 1041 GMT, 9 May 2001 Nicola Jones New Scientist Online News Sign up for our free newsletter © Copyright New Scientist, RBI Limited 2001 ***************************************************************** 28 NUCLEAR WASTE: Cheney: Repository is needed LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL: NEWS: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Reid, Ensign tight-lipped on meeting with vice president By TONY BATT DONREY WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada's senators avoided the media Tuesday following a 15-minute meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney after he told CNN the nation needs a permanent nuclear waste repository. Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., dispatched representatives to brief reporters outside the meeting, which occurred in the vice president's office in the Senate. Efforts to reach Ensign and Reid later in the day were unsuccessful. A few hours before meeting with the Nevadans, Cheney told CNN a repository is needed because "we've got (nuclear) waste piling up at reactors all over the country." Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is the only site being studied for the permanent storage of highly radioactive waste from the nation's nuclear reactors. Ensign and Reid already had scheduled their meeting with Cheney before the CNN interview, Reid spokesman Nathan Naylor said. Both were aware of Cheney's comments before they met with him, Naylor said. "They did not want to get into specific issues that they spoke about with the vice president," Naylor told reporters after the meeting in explaining the silent treatment. Ensign and Reid were being tight-lipped, Naylor said, because they want discussions with the White House on nuclear waste to continue. He said Tuesday's meeting was general, and intended to make sure the vice president understands Nevada's staunch opposition to nuclear waste storage in the state. Cheney wasn't talking either. "It is the vice president's view that his conversation with the senators was private and he would be the last to divulge a confidence," said Juleanna Glover Weiss, Cheney's press secretary. In the CNN interview, Cheney talked about energy policy recommendations he plans to make to President Bush next week. Among other things, he said he would recommend changes to speed federal permits to utilities seeking to build nuclear power plants. The nuclear power industry has not sought a government permit to build a new plant in more than 20 years because of the fear spread by the 1978 accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania. Nuclear power provides about 20 percent of the nation's electricity supply. In a joint news release after the meeting, the Nevada senators said Bush and Cheney are not trying to intervene in the dispute between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission over the radiation standard for groundwater at Yucca Mountain. EPA has the authority to set the standard, but it has not been completed. In August 1999, EPA recommended a 15 millirem annual radiation dose limit for Yucca Mountain groundwater, a more stringent standard than the 25 millirem exposure proposed by the NRC. A person is exposed to about 5 millirems of radiation during a chest X-ray. Reid also said he was pleased the Bush administration "is living up to its promise not to pursue interim waste storage at Yucca Mountain." Ensign said in the news release the meeting with Cheney "was very positive." While the Nevada senators were close-mouthed, Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., issued a statement challenging Cheney's comment to CNN that France stores nuclear waste safely. She said France does not have a nuclear waste repository and has given itself 100 years to find one. "The French reprocess, or recycle, their spent nuclear fuel, and store the waste `on site,' or next to the nuclear reactors," Berkley said. Local communities in France also have a veto power over any proposed repository, she added. Before meeting with Cheney, Reid told NRC officials in a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing that statements they've made criticizing EPA's proposed groundwater standard are inappropriate. He reminded NRC Chairman Richard Meserve that Bush and Cheney said EPA should be the lead agency in developing the water rule during last year's presidential campaign. "The EPA would have issued the standard a long time ago but for the pressure of your entity and others," Reid said. "The nuclear power industry is trying to force (EPA) not to have a rule they feel is the right one." While his agency disagrees with EPA, Meserve said, the NRC will comply with the law. He told Reid the NRC "is not driven on behalf of the nuclear (power) industry," and is "trying to push for an appropriate rule as we see it." "Just as you, Senator, have the right to submit comments to EPA (about the groundwater rule for Yucca Mountain), we do as well," Meserve said. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 29 Nuclear still a mistake second time around [Thestar.com] May. 9, 01:31 EDT Those who don't remember the past, it is said, are condemned to repeat it. Premier Mike Harris, wrapped in a cloak of green, looks to be repeating one of the most expensive pieces of the past — our $38 billion nuclear past. Three times in recent days he has raised the possibility of building new nuclear plants. A week ago, he asked this: "Do you want 10 new coal plants in Michigan or Ohio blowing into Ontrio, or would you like one or two nuclear plants, the number one green energy alternative in the world today?" Soon after, he declared that "of all the practical, cost-effective solutions, nuclear energy is appearing more and more to be the green energy of choice." Yesterday, he spoke of "one, two or 10 nuclear plants, putting all those people to work, the safest, greenest electricity available." Moreover, Harris said that this is "something the Prime Minister and I have talked about." The nuclear lobby must be positively glowing. Safe, green, cheap — all the buzzwords of a first-class neutron and deuterium pedlar. Safe? Really? Just four years ago Harris himself shut down Bruce and Pickering for safety concerns. Green? Not exactly. Nukes are better on the air than coal. But the nukes wouldn't replace coal. They'd be in addition. And you have to put aside niggling little things, like reports of radioactive tritium migrating in groundwater and unusual levels of leukemia and prostate cancer among those living under our nuclear plumes. And then there's the cost and the risks associated with complicated technology. No doubt nukes can be cheap to operate, once they're running, if they can be kept running. But cheap to build? Darlington wasn't. Its costs more than tripled to $14 billion. Harris was in the Legislature when that happened. Has he forgotten that Darlington is the biggest single reason for our hydro debt? Why would we want to risk repeating that before Bruce is even back into full operation, and while Pickering is two to three years from getting back in service, if it makes the grade? Wouldn't it make more sense to see if our existing nukes can be made dependable before launching back into high-risk megaprojects? Copyright 1996-2001. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights ***************************************************************** 30 Nuclear dump design undecided [Las Vegas Review-Journal] Wednesday, May 09, 2001 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Scientists: Issue need not be settled prior to recommendation By STEVE TETREAULT DONREY WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Scientists still are pondering designs of the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain and will not settle on a final configuration until after the energy secretary decides whether to recommend the Nevada site for radioactive waste burial, program officials said Tuesday. Using computer models, scientists are studying the placement of nuclear waste canisters within a planned 2,900-acre maze of tunnels to try to predict how best to control heat that will be thrown off by the radioactive waste within the packages. Speaking as part of a daylong series of briefings before a government technical review board, Yucca Mountain officials said modeling is continuing on "cool" designs that would spread tunnels containing the canisters along a larger portion of the repository, reducing its heat. Repository design manager Larry Trautner said the work is not among the items that need to be settled before Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is asked to decide, possibly later this year or early next year, whether to recommend the site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas to be fully developed into a repository. He said managers have yet to discuss with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission whether it may be possible to fine tune the design beyond the submission of a license application, expected sometime in 2003 if Yucca Mountain passes tests in Congress. "We are trying to develop the best available technology for a repository that is flexible, forgiving and robust and not foreclose options in the future," said Lake Barrett, acting director of the Yucca Mountain program. Repository design was among topics discussed during briefings by Energy Department and contractor scientists to members of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, the panel evaluating the science involved in determining whether Yucca Mountain can be made to safely store 77,000 tons of radioactive waste. Several members of the board questioned the program's work on repository designs. "I am looking for one design, a workable design," said board member Paul Craig, an engineering professor emeritus at the University of California, Davis. "What we seem to be doing is raising flexibility to a high art form. It is going to be extremely difficult for someone on the outside to figure out what you're going to be talking about. I would prefer to see one design you think is the best." During the day, Yucca Mountain managers discussed progress scientists have made in four priority areas identified by the technical review board over the past year. The board had recommended managers better quantify what uncertainties will remain in repository performance assessments; that they make progress in predicting the rate that nuclear waste containers might corrode; that they evaluate "cool temperature" repository designs; and that they develop "multiple lines of evidence," analogies that could bolster their case for repository safety. The Energy Department plans to issue a supplemental science report this summer with results of these studies. They were not included in a 1,500 page science report released Friday. Department officials say that after close to 20 years of study, they have found no scientific show-stoppers that might disqualify Yucca Mountain. Nevada leaders disagree, arguing there is enough uncertainty on water invasion and other issues to set aside the site. A site recommendation decision is expected late this year or early next year and, if approved by the president and Congress over the protests of Nevada, a license application could be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2003. The Energy Department would hope to have a repository built and accepting waste by 2010. This story is located at: http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/May-09-Wed-2001/news/16055559.html ***************************************************************** 31 Yucca project a boon to some, bust to others Elko Daily Free Press: Content May 7 2001 12:00AM By By GARY BÉGIN Some Nevada counties will get millions of dollars, as they have been for years, while other counties will continue to go begging, like Elko has. The "why" of the money spread is a deceivingly simple one, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Counties that border the Yucca site's home county, Nye, are receiving funds for research and for possible environmental mitigation due to potential pollution and other factors such as what used to be called PILT, or payment in lieu of taxes. According to DOE statistics, money has been doled out on a grand scale to Clark, Lincoln, Eureka, Esmeralda, Mineral and White Pine counties, but scarcely a whisper about Elko County is ever heard. Recently when a group from Elko's Navy League went to visit the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Repository Site, not one of the tour guides, who are far more than just guides in the traditional sense, but trained engineers and scientists, mentioned Elko even though they were talking to Elko citizens including Mayor Mike Franzoia and County Commissioner Mike Nannini, as well as Elko Convention and Visitors Authority board member and League President Bill Nisbet and ECVA Director Ralph McMullen. The faux pas of not mentioning Elko County was probably one of sheer habit as the guides are not used to citizens coming from so far away from the site to visit. Nannini has been arguing for quite some time now, to deaf ears, that Elko should at least get some money to prepare for nuclear waste shipments which will definitely be coming through the county, either by rail or by truck or both. The most likely scenario is the use of U.S. Highway 93 as a north-south corridor for the waste that comes from and through Idaho, Washington, Oregon and Montana. Another equally probable route is by rail on the east-west corridor which parallels I-80 turning south near Carlin at Beowawe on a spur to be built upon final program approval. Whether by truck or train, Nannini argues the county needs money for training and equipment to protect its citizens against the possibility of an accident. After touring the site last month, almost every Navy Leaguer expressed confidence the transportation of the waste can and will be carried out safely. The DOE went through exhaustive testing and documented each test with video which they gladly showed to the tour while they were on a bus headed to the site from the base rendezvous point in Goldfield. The film showed the nuclear container being dropped, burned and crashed into without any apparent harm being done to it and no signs of radioactive leakage. However, in a strange irony of fate, none other than consumer advocate Ralph Nader came on one video of a PBS Frontline show and said radioactive hazards were the worst because they couldn't be seen. Nader has been highly critical of the nuclear industry for decades and now finds himself strange bedfellows with conservative Nevada Republicans and environmentalists who both think the DOE can't be trusted. The DOE on the other hand has gone through billions of dollars in expenses preparing a site they continue to insist is still just a "possible site," but critics are quick to point out that it is rare indeed for the government, business or anyone to spend billions on preparing a site unless they were pretty darn sure it was the site of choice. The DOE admits it has already abandoned several other possible sites as scientifically and politically unfeasible such as sites in states with large congressional delegations like Texas, which also happens to be Bush's home state and the home state of House Majority Whip Tom Delay. Nevada, with only two congressmen, cannot withstand the pressure from the more populous states like California, New York, Florida and Texas if the other states decide to band together and vote for the bill. The DOE promises to work hand-in-hand with the U.S. Department of Transportation and state transportation offices to ensure the safest truck routes are picked and major metropolitan areas are supposed to be exempted from any waste passing through them, but because of politics once again, it isn't certain if the promises made today by the DOE will be kept once the shipments begin in 2005. That's what worries Nannini and others. "It isn't fair not to give us more time to prepare," Nannini said last summer to two DOE traveling experts who were extolling the virtues of the Yucca project in front of the Elko County Commission. "We should be given money now or as soon as possible in order to buy the necessary special safety equipment and train people," he said. Nannini, who hails from Wells and has the largest district by far, geographically, of any other commissioner, is especially concerned because Wells sits at the crossroads of two, possibly three, of the most likely routes for both trains and trucks at the intersection of U.S. 93, I-80 and the east-west rail corridor. Despite Nannini's cries of unfairness, the DOE project, its guides and its seemingly bottomless pockets, are unlikely to care about Elko County or fork over much money to Elko and other rural counties unless forced to do so when the actual routes become official, according to several Navy Leaguers on the trip. However, when that happens, every rural county in America which is crossed by the waste will be clamoring like hatchlings for their share of the nuclear loot, say some DOE critics who favor leaving the waste where it was produced. Proponents of the project say the producers of nuclear waste will be glad to pay extra, and in fact have been paying extra, and hoarding away millions into a fund designed to expedite the ridding of waste from their doorsteps and onto ours. The handful of Nevadans who actually approve of this project say at least the state can make some money from being the nation's garbage dump, but most of that money will definitely not be coming to the rural counties. The state itself has been refusing to accept millions of dollars in PILT payments offered by the DOE for years now, saying that if accepted, it implies acceptance of the program itself. Gov. Kenny Guinn, Sens. Harry Reid and John Ensign and Reps. Jim Gibbons and Shelley Berkley are all against the project. However it is possible Bush and the rest of the nation may force Nevada to accept the plan with the possibility of even more money being dangled in front of the state as an incentive to go along with the plan, albeit grudgingly. One sign that Bush and the DOE are planning more financial incentives for Nevada is the recent disclosure DOE is seeking a 13 percent budget increase for the 2001-2002 federal fiscal year which begins Oct. 1. Much of the asked-for $747.2 million is earmarked for Nevada and various programs, but almost half, $365 million, is aimed directly at further Yucca Mountain project expenses. The DOE isn't just using raw money power to lure Nevadans into agreeing with their claims of safe transportation and storage, but public relations as well. A DOE spokesman, the same fellow who helps out on tours and spoke to Elko's Navy League recently, Senior Engineer Patrick Rowe, is scheduled to speak to Elko's Rotary Club May 30 at the Commercial Casino during a luncheon there. Last week, the DOE joined with the Nevada Department of Transportation to sponsor a seminar in Las Vegas under the auspices of the Community Advisory Board for Nevada Test Site Programs, a pro-Yucca group. The seminar featured answers to the posed question: "Are you concerned about the transportation of nuclear waste over Nevada's highways?" Most of the state's residents already answered "yes" to that question a long time ago, but the DOE is still telling them it is acting in a safe and prudent manner and perhaps, in the DOE's mind anyway, convince them there is nothing to fear - but fear itself. *©Elko Daily Free Press 2001* ** In 1989-90 we the citizens of western NY defeated New York in locating it's "Low-Level Radioactive waste Facility" in Allegany county through Civil Disobiedience and education.If the US Govnmt. continues to pursue Yucca , "We the People" of this great nation MUST lock arms, step up and say "NO" every time they attempt to get on sight. It will take education, courage ,belief, organization and LOTS of people to make this happen. It CAN be done without violence, as WE have demonstrated in Allegany Co.NY. Until we force our Govnmt. to find effective user-friendly ways to Power US, they will they will dangle Carrots in front of US and take the quik-fix approaches to current crisis. WE MUST make them understand that we will simply not accept user-UNfriendly ways any more, period. Tim Lloyd, Allegany County, New York Name: Timothy Lloyd E-Mail:lloydy@dctnet.net Copyright © 1995-2000 PowerAdz.com, LLC. Zwire!, AdQuest, AdQuest ***************************************************************** 32 The Toxic Mountain FEED | Politics &Society - The Toxic Mountain Daily | 05.07.01 Michael Amon on Yucca Mountain, the site singled out for nuclear waste disposal Pop culture's most vivid portrayal of nuclear power's place in society can be found on *The Simpsons,* where it has been sent up as a parody of American excess. In one memorable episode titled "Two Cars in Every Garage, Three Eyes on Every Fish," an investigative reporter reveals that waste from Springfield's nuclear reactor has spawned fish with three eyes. In another, the reactor is brought to the brink of meltdown by an incompetent safety director -- Homer. But now commercial nuclear power, a political untouchable since the late 1970s, has undergone an image makeover. The industry has dubbed itself "The Clean Air Energy" and runs feel-good ads about its environmental record. In a major speech on energy policy last week, Vice President Dick Cheney called nuclear power "a safe, clean, very plentiful energy source" and proposed the construction of the first new nuclear plants since before the Three Mile Island accident in 1979. And, in a sign that nuclear power is really here to stay, the Energy Department is expected to announce this summer that a permanent underground dump for spent nuclear waste is safe and ready to go at Yucca Mountain, a sloping sun-baked hump in the middle of the Nevada desert about ninety miles northwest of Las Vegas. Without the waste repository at Yucca Mountain, the administration's plans to ease the nation's "energy crisis" with more nuclear power would fizzle. Waste has been piling high at the country's 103 current nuclear plants for more than 40 years. More than 70,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel rods (think of the green glo-stick rod Homer finds in his car in the opening credits of *The Simpsons)* are being temporarily stored at the plants, and room is running out. Part of the problem is that no one wants nuclear waste, least of all Nevada, which feels it has had enough of nukes since 1940s atomic-bomb testing caused mass cancer outbreaks in rural areas. Nevadans feel especially snubbed because of a 1987 amendment to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1983 or the "Screw Nevada Bill," as it's known in the Silver State. The amendment designated Yucca Mountain as the only site in the country to be studied for nuclear waste burial. Under the original deal that former president Reagan struck with the nuclear industry in 1983, there would have been a repository in each region of the country. Instead, Congress members from politically powerful states being considered for waste dumps (like Louisiana, Texas, Pennsylvania, and Washington) bucked that plan and wrote the Screw Nevada Bill. So before any scientific study of the site had even begun, that legislation made it almost inevitable that Yucca Mountain would become the nation's burial ground for nuclear waste for the next million years. State officials, anti-nuclear environmental groups, and citizen action groups came together to marshal opposition to the Yucca Mountain project, delaying its completion by citing health, geological, and environmental considerations. Two respected particle physicists have even claimed there is a real possibility the waste could react with the mountain's rock and spontaneously explode. Those issues were enough to sway former president Clinton to veto three bills authorizing the Yucca Mountain project. But federal scientists have consistently said a repository in the mountain is safe. And most officials who are involved in the process doubt the state's ecological qualms would persuade President Bush, an oil man with the needs of big business close to his heart. Of course, scrapping plans at Yucca Mountain would be costly, too. It is the biggest public works project in American history, and already more than six billion dollars has been spent burrowing tunnels into its base and conducting scientific studies. But no country with any reliance on nuclear power has ever really solved the problem of radioactive waste disposal. France, which relies on nuclear power for more than seventy-five percent of its energy compared to twenty percent in the United States, couldn't convince its public that a permanent underground disposal site would be safe. A French official overseeing nuclear waste told PBS's *Frontline* that if France's waste problem isn't solved, "I do not see how we can continue our nuclear program." Above all, Yucca Mountain is a debate about energy policy. Oil, coal, natural gas, nuclear power, and everything else the Bush administration has focused its energy policy on are what environmentalists call "unsustainable" sources -- eventually we will run out of oil and gas and we will run out of room to store nuclear waste. Advanced Accelerator Applications, a company developing technology to take the radioactivity out of nuclear waste, predicts that a Yucca Mountain-style repository will have to be built every four years if the world keeps producing nuclear power at its current clip. (The U.S. produces about a third of the world's nuclear power.) As we all know, alternative energy like solar and wind power are things we will never run out of, and they don't pollute. But in his budget recommendations, Bush slashed funding to alternative energy, saying these sources are a long way from any practical use. Then again, so was nuclear power in the mid-twentieth century. A mountain of government cash took nuclear power from blowing people up in 1945 to lighting houses up in 1957. Alternative energy will always be "years down the road," as Cheney put it last week, as long as the government cuts its funding and instead spends billions on burying a GOP-donor industry's waste. Michael Amon*is a writer living in Brooklyn.* Other articles by Michael Amon Share your thoughts in the Loop... Printer Friendly Email to a Friend 05.11 | Daily The Origins of Madness Christiane Culhane on the role of essential fatty acids in schizophrenia and human evolution 05.09 | Daily Anatomy of Your Self Christine Kenneally on scientists' discovery of the part of the brain that controls much of our personality 05.08 | Interview The Taste Test Steven Johnson talks to OpenCola's Cory Doctorow about his bid to reinvent the intelligent agent. - Bang Your Head, Gently -- Senior Citizens Accidentally Stumble Into Mosh Pit "When sixtyish New Zealander John Anderson won two tickets to a concert in a newspaper-sponsored contest, it's safe to say, he wasn't expecting to spend the evening with 1500 head-banging hooligans listening to speed-metal band Pantera." - "Colin and Fidel, A Love Story" -- Powell and Castro Exchange Valentines (Sort Of) "Powell, demonstrating a frightful disrespect for the glowing legacy of Fulgencio Battista, recently admitted that Castro had 'done good things for his people,' the sort of effusive praise that it takes a snubbed superpower about four decades to work - English Country Doctor May Be The World's Most Prolific Serial Killer "Suspected victims of Harold Frederick Shipman number at least 300, and yet due to the potential overwhelming of the British legal system, it seems likely that he will only be charged with a handful of the murders." - "Onion Pacific" Vs. The Union Pacific Gestapo "Microsoft had approached UP to videotape the operation of real locomotives. UP denied their cooperation based on security concerns. Fans got wind of this and voiced their aversion." - Would Movies Be Better Off Without Critics? "People think I'm cynical when I say that if we had no critics at all we'd have a healthier film culture. But all too often film criticism now means telling the public that they're spending their money wisely." --> Copyright © 2000 FEED Inc. All rights reserved. [FEED ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Nuke protesters hit fund-raising trail May 9, 2001 By Frank Munger News-Sentinel senior writer [Frank Munger] It costs money to stage protests and preach peace, so it's hardly surprising that the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance is engaged in fund-raising. OREPA hopes to secure about $20,000 from its grassroots membership with the Peace Partners fund-raising effort, launched recently with a mail solicitation. A benefit concert also will be held later this month. It costs money to stage protests and preach peace, so it's hardly surprising that the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance is engaged in fund-raising. OREPA hopes to secure about $20,000 from its grassroots membership with the Peace Partners fund-raising effort, launched recently with a mail solicitation. A benefit concert also will be held later this month. The money raised will supplement the group's annual budget, which this year totals about $160,000. Most of the funding comes from foundations, such as grants from the John Merck Fund and the W. Alton Jones Foundation. Ralph Hutchison, the peace alliance's coordinator, said he expects next year's budget to be about $200,000 -- enough to add at least one more full-time staffer. Mind you, the Oak Ridge group has big plans. Hutchison said he expects the Stop The Bombs campaign to grow exponentially in the next couple of years, with a goal of having 7,000 participants at the Hiroshima Day (Aug. 6) protest in 2002. That would be quite a jump from recent protests, which drew several hundred, but Oak Ridge reportedly is becoming a national focal point for peace activism. The Y-12 National Security Complex is one the few remaining warhead production sites in the United States. OREPA's supporters are staging "house parties" and building ties with anti-nuclear groups across the country, particularly in South, Midwest and East. "I don't know if we'll attract people from the West Coast, but on the East Cost this is the place," Hutchison said. Meanwhile, activists are trying to stage a continuous presence at the front of Y-12. Last year, Mary Dennis Lentsch, a nun from southeast Tennessee, spent a week camped on the federal lawn near the plant's entrance, and she returned to Oak Ridge again last month. Following the April 8 demonstration, Geoffery Hennies of Georgia began a month-long vigil at the Oak Ridge weapons site. GOOD &BAD: The Energy Department last week announced its was increasing in-lieu-of-tax payments to the city of Oak Ridge and Anderson and Roane counties. The payments will go up about 15 percent. Susan Gawarecki, executive director of the Local Oversight Committee, which represents local governments on environmental issues, said the news was good. But she said it should not obscure the really bad news about DOE's proposed budget for 2002 -- which includes a significant cut in Oak Ridge's environmental cleanup fund. The $300,000 increase for in-lieu-of-tax payments "will not offset the huge negative economic impacts to the region caused by the loss of $90 million and the employment and business interests that funding supports," Gawarecki wrote to interested parties. K-25 WORKERS: Ben Gaylor, a retiree with the Worker Health Protection Program, said about 800 former workers at the Oak Ridge K-25 plant have received medical screenings so far. Another 1,700 people have registered for the exam, which includes a CT scan and other tests to look for illnesses possibly related to workplace exposures, Gaylor said. The health program is expanding at the PACE (Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers) International Union's Oak Ridge office at 133 Raleigh Rd. Also, Gaylor said the program has new telephone numbers: (865) 481-3394 and (865) 481-3395. SURPLUS SAFE?: There have been continuing reports and rumors that federal contractors want to tap into the employee pension fund's surplus to help supplement the operating budgets at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Such as move was proposed a couple of years ago by Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, then manager of the Y-12, but later rejected at Department of Energy headquarters in Washington -- largely because Oak Ridge retirees raised a stink. A section in the Internal Revenue Code allows money from a pension-fund surplus to be used to fund employee medical costs -- what's known as a 420 transfer. That, in turn, would free up DOE money targeted for those annual costs to be shifted to the operating budgets. Although the current contractors (UT-Battelle and BWXT Y-12) apparently still favor the 420 transfer as a way to boost tight budgets at the Oak Ridge facilities, DOE's local management has emphatically stated that's not going to happen -- at least not in the foreseeable future. We'll see if that stance remains firm. Senior Writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for the News-Sentinel. He can be reached at 865-482-9213 or at twig1@knoxnews.infi.net. This column is also available on the Web at www.knoxnews.com/editorsview/munger/ ***************************************************************** 2 Advisory group discusses cleanup, preservation Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 10:40 a.m. on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 by Paul Parson Oak Ridger staff Declining environmental cleanup funds and preserving a portion of a historic Oak Ridge facility were among the items discussed Tuesday night by a local advisory group. Several members of the Citizens' Advisory Panel of the Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee expressed concern that the Department of Energy's 2002 environmental management budget could be disastrous locally. The Citizens' Advisory Panel met Tuesday evening at the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation building on Emory Valley Road. Oak Ridge stands to lose $90 million in cleanup funds, which could halt cleanup projects and result in layoffs. Funding for a compensation program for job-sickened nuclear workers could also come from the environmental management budget. However, Norman Mulvenon, chairman of the Citizens' Advisory Panel, said it's all speculation until the final budget is approved. At its meeting Tuesday, the Citizens' Advisory Panel discussed the possible preservation of a portion of a historic building at the Oak Ridge K-25 Site that is marked for demolition. The group first discussed salvaging some of the K-25 building at its April meeting. Susan Gawarecki, executive director of the Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee, said she's talked with a historian at DOE headquarters in Washington, D.C., and several local officials about the matter. Gawarecki said a plan of action on the matter should come together in the next month or two. All Contents ©Copyright* The Oak Ridger * ***************************************************************** 3 REID PRAISES ADMINISTRATION DECISION TO SWIFTLY COMPENSATE NEVADA'S SICK NUCLEAR WORKERS [Sen. Reid Press Release] May 9, 2001 Washington, D.C. - Senator Harry Reidpraised today's decision by Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chaoto designate the Nevada Test Siteas a resource center for the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. Senator Reid had vowed to ensure that Nevadans exposed to radiation and other deadly substances during the Cold War would be swiftly compensated for their sacrifice. "Secretary Chao made the right decision for Nevada's sick Cold War heroes," said Harry Reid. "A resource center located at the Nevada Test Site will be of tremendous value to these veterans of the Cold War. Secretary Chao should ensure that the resource center is up and running as quickly as possible so as not to delay the distribution of these benefits any longer. Our nation owes a debt of honor to these men and women, many of whom do not have the luxury of time." Last year, Congress authorized more than $60 million for the Department of Labor to establish the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program to compensate nuclear weapons laborers for their work-related cancers. Senator Reid was one of the authors of the legislation that created this program. This program is critical to the thousands of men and women who worked at nuclear facilities around the country during the Cold War, including the Nevada Test Site. Earlier this year Senator Ensignjoined Senator Reid in sending a letter to President George W. Bushasking for a quick implementation of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. ***************************************************************** 4 Not surprised to learn data missing The Oak Ridger Online - Opinion - Your Views 05/09/01 Story last updated at 1:25 p.m. on Wednesday, May 9, 2001 To The Oak Ridger: Surprise, surprise. Who would have thunk it, missing data from a hard drive, another coverup. During my past eight years dealing with Lockheed Martin and DOE, Oak Ridge. Upon filing an employee concern I found they investigated tests performed in the wrong years, came up with data not produced in 1997 as requested and certified by the director of Safety and Health Protection which was not there when verified by an independent third party investigator in 1997 but showed up in a 1998 investigation. This revelation never ends. They do whatever it takes and receive the blessings of all concerned still feeding their families from there until it's their time to be hung out and then they scream and nobody listens! Thank goodness Ms. Dever is on her way back so she can put organization in this thing before someone wakes up and stops it. All you folks turning your heads better enjoy it now, you may have to sit and watch it kill your grandchildren. I have personally had the privilege of spending January, February and part of April this year at Methodist Medical Center and I really enjoy those high doses of medications to keep me breathing at about 20 percent. Ronald Morrison Harriman Anderson County's Promisee Wants continued progress on cleanup To The Oak Ridger: The DOE budget is "blowing in the wind." Or at least the straws are. As usual there is no public release of information about pending budgets or budget changes, even though it is the public's money. Since it does no good to cry over spilt milk, one is forced to act on the basis of the most probable gossip. The current rumors of budget cuts and reallocations are said to originate in the White House and will not only have serious consequences for jobs in Oak Ridge but they will essentially end all serious remediation work needed to make the Oak Ridge disposal areas safe in the long term. This comes at a time when actual physical remediation work (not studies and planning) was about to get under way. This is not to say that the current risks are substantive but that the processes of erosion, unless the promised and necessary steps are taken to prevent it, will inevitably allow the escape of hazardous materials to the environment, principally to the Clinch River. No administration that has such a low regard for the well-being of its future citizens can be called environmentally friendly or even a "compassionate conservative." To substantially renege on promised safeguards for future residents is not only economically and politically shortsighted but is best characterized as a double-cross (the kindest term I can consider accurate). It is probably also illegal. Oak Ridge residents have worked hard for cost-effective safeguards for the ORR disposal problems but now is the time to insist that the promises to provide the agreed upon remedies are kept in a timely manner. It is also the time for the state of Tennessee to take the decisive actions that will ensure performance by the federal government. I would urge each citizen to write to legislators and administrators alike and express their concerns for reductions in or elimination of cleanup implementations. It will be too late to lock the gate after the cesium has bled. To those of you who say I sing a different tune, you are correct; someone changed the sheet music and I want the old music back. I want to see continued progress in waste cleanup. Al Brooks Oak Ridge Nuclear: the MRS deserves another look To The Oak Ridger: Most readers have probably noticed the recent revival of interest in nuclear energy. Utilities are applying for extension of operating licenses for existing reactors. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is reviving its licensing capability for new reactors, and applications seem imminent from several utilities. Vice President Cheney presages the upcoming report of his panel on energy as advocating nuclear as a contributor to increased supply, along with other sources more polluting, like coal, or otherwise damaging to the environment, like dams or drilling for oil or gas in our vanishing fraction of unspoiled territory. Meanwhile, he discounts possible contributions of energy conservation, or sources enamored by environmentalists, such as wind and solar. Burning coal loads the atmosphere with such undesirables as sulfur and nitrogen oxides and mercury, as well as the greenhouse concern, carbon dioxide. Natural gas to a lesser extent contributes nitrogen and carbon oxides. Nuclear of course puts out none of these. If numbers I have seen are correct, about 40 percent of U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide come from electricity generation. If we were to raise the roughly 20 percent of central-station nuclear production to the 70 percent level of some European countries, about 20 percent of our CO2 would be eliminated, enough to approach the target of the Kyoto negotiations. Most of the news stories floating nuclear include the caveat that there is no generally accepted long-term solution to the disposal of nuclear wastes. Although the argument can be made that this is because people opposed to nuclear energy have raised specious objections to all reasonable proposals, the fact remains that this is a major barrier to the nuclear option. I suggest that we take another look at hosting an interim solution, a managed retrievable storage facility, or MRS. For those who came in late, or whose memory has faded, an MRS here was considered in Lamar Alexander's administration. The purpose would be to fulfill the federal obligation to take spent reactor fuel from utilities' holding ponds, an obligation for which the private sector has generated a large fund. The MRS would hold the material until resolution of technical and political questions about permanent repositories, such as Yucca Mountain. A local committee studied the issue, and concluded that an MRS could be safely managed here, without appreciable effect on our environment. The incentive would be commitment of payments to the community over the life of the facility, adequate to insure our ability to provide services for a competent work force, without prohibitive local taxes, a recurrent problem. What are the disadvantages? The main one seems to be the image associated with being a waste site, the reason that Alexander vetoed the original initiative. It is feared that recruitment of industry by CROET and other promoters would be hindered. This is not a trivial objection, although if an MRS solved the tax problem, our need for new industry would be ameliorated, and it is arguable whether an MRS is more of a deterrent to new industry than high local taxes. Another is the possibility that no acceptable long-term repository will eventuate, and the MRS continues into the indefinite future. As long as the money kept coming, we might not mind. . . In any case, it would seem worthwhile for council and the Anderson and Roane County commissions to appoint a committee of qualified people to reexamine whether or not we should invite location of an MRS here. Josh Johnson Oak Ridge All Contents ©Copyright* The Oak Ridger * ***************************************************************** 5 State balks at cleanup delay This story was published 5/9/2001 By John Stang Herald staff writer The state recently told Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham it won't accept any delays in Tri-Party Agreement deadlines when the Department of Energy overhauls its cleanup programs and timetables. Tom Fitzsimmons, director of Washington's Department of Ecology, sent an April 24 letter to Abraham repeating that long-held state stance after DOE hinted it might want to modify its cleanup agreements with Washington and other states. The state's letter came after Abraham sent an April 4 letter to Gov. Gary Locke that said DOE wants to join the states in finding "ways to improve the compliance framework that governs much of our (cleanup) work." Abraham wants to do a "top-to-bottom" review of DOE's nationwide cleanup programs to trim the 70-year, $300 billion estimate to take care of all of DOE's contaminated old Cold War production sites. So far, DOE has released no details or timetables on how it wants to tackle such a review. In the past, Abraham also has mentioned meeting with the governors of states with DOE sites on how to coordinate and overhaul the states' and federal government's approaches to nationwide nuclear cleanup. Many of these states and the Environmental Protection Agency have legal cleanup agreements that are similar to the Tri-Party Agreement among Washington state, the EPA and DOE for Hanford's cleanup. On April 4, Abraham wrote that he directed Carolyn Huntoon, DOE's acting cleanup czar, who is scheduled to be replaced soon, to lead a study on how national cleanup projects can be done safely, on schedule and within budget. However, Abraham's first DOE budget request to Congress proposes trimming Hanford's 2002 budget by $56 million to $1.4 billion, which would be at least $469 million less than what the site needs to meet its legal obligations. That proposed budget includes $500 million for Hanford's key tank waste glassification project, which is $190 million short of what is needed to meet its Tri-Party Agreement deadlines. Meanwhile, Fitzsimmons wrote on April 24 that the state already has cut DOE a lot of slack on meeting its legal obligations. He said the Tri-Party Agreement and similar pacts in other states already give DOE extra time to meet federal and state laws "that everyone else has had to comply with for many years. Compliance is not discretionary." The state's letter blames much of the current cleanup delays on DOE underfunding projects and routinely changing the directions of its efforts. Copyright 2000 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 6 Last Cold War nuclear weapons leave Fairchild *Monday, May 7, 2001* By NICHOLAS K. GERANIOS THE ASSOCIATED PRESS SPOKANE -- Spokane is no longer on the list of nuclear superpowers. After nearly half a century as home to nuclear weapons, the last of the lethal munitions were removed from Fairchild Air Force Base in the past year, The Spokesman-Review newspaper reported in Sunday's editions. The Air Force refused to confirm or deny the presence of nukes at Fairchild, the same policy the military extends to all its facilities. "I really have no comment on that," base spokesman Maj. Perrin Ashmore said Monday. Ashmore had appeared earlier to confirm that nukes were no longer part of Fairchild's arsenal. The comment came last week when he was asked about plans to build a new administration building for people who maintain the weapons at Fairchild. "We still store some munitions here," Ashmore told the newspaper, including bullets and non-nuclear cruise missiles. Asked about nuclear weapons, Ashmore said "no," according to the newspaper. Monday, he refused to say if the newspaper's account was accurate. "I've told you as much as I can," Ashmore said. Assuming Fairchild is now nuclear-free, the only place in Washington where nuclear weapons are believed to be stored is Naval Submarine Base Bangor in Puget Sound, home to the Navy's Pacific fleet of Trident nuclear missile subs. "I cannot confirm or deny that," Bangor spokesman Paul Taylor said Monday. Fairchild's membership in the nuclear club began sometime after 1949, when a fleet of B-29 bombers were stationed at the base. The Air Force didn't announce when the first atomic bomb arrived. But in September 1953, a base official told the Spokane Chamber of Commerce the city was a "primary target" for the Soviets. Fairchild's B-29s were replaced by B-36s in 1951 and by B-52s in 1956. While the United States and Soviet Union pursued a policy of mutual assured destruction, bombers sat on the flight line at Fairchild with nuclear bombs in their bellies or nuclear missiles on their wings. During the Cuban missile crisis, Atlas intercontinental ballistic missiles in silos around the base were poised for launch. The system was declared obsolete and the missiles removed in the mid-1960s. Fairchild crews never had a serious incident with a nuclear weapon. In 1957, a Fairchild B-52 lost control just after takeoff and crashed in a field. For nearly 35 years, anti-nuclear groups and even some U.S. government sources listed the crash as a nuclear accident. But the plane was on a training mission and was not carrying any bombs, the sole survivor of the crash said in 1991. The closest call was in December 1983, when a bomber loaded with Short Range Attack Missiles, carried on the wings, caught fire as it was taxiing down the runway. Air traffic controllers used the term for a nuclear accident -- "a broken arrow" -- when calling for firefighters. After firefighters extinguished the blaze, base officials refused to acknowledge the bomber was armed with nuclear weapons. But the Air Force awarded 29 firefighters special achievement medals for "working under adverse weather conditions and ... the aircraft's weapon system." A copy of the plane's manifest, included in the accident report, said the plane was loaded with SRAMs. In 1982, the Air Force announced it was sending 300 cruise missiles to Fairchild. That was a de facto announcement that the base had atomic weapons because at that time cruise missiles only came in a nuclear version. The summer after the cruise missiles arrived, a Fairchild squadron set up a dummy missile at the base open house. The squadron raised money for a local charity by taking pictures of people sitting on the missile, much like actor Slim Pickens rode a bomb in the movie "Dr. Strangelove." Public reaction to that prompted base officials to order the squadron to find another way to raise money. The last B-52s were removed from Fairchild in 1994. But nuclear munitions workers remained at the base, apparently overseeing the weapons stored in special bunkers. In 1998, the Natural Resources Defense Council environmental group did a study of government documents and estimated Fairchild had about 85 bombs in storage. The Air Force didn't comment. These days, Fairchild is a base for KC-135 air tankers. [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 ***************************************************************** 7 Report: no more nukes at Fairchild Army Times: This week's news May 08, 2001 Associated Press SPOKANE, Wash. —After nearly half a century as home to nuclear weapons, the last of the lethal munitions were removed from Fairchild Air Force Base in the past year, The Spokesman-Review newspaper reported in Sunday’s editions. The Air Force refused to confirm or deny the presence of nukes at Fairchild, the same policy the military extends to all its facilities. “I really have no comment on that,” base spokesman Maj. Perrin Ashmore said Monday. Ashmore had appeared earlier to confirm that nukes were no longer part of Fairchild’s arsenal. The comment came last week when he was asked about plans to build a new administration building for people who maintain the weapons at Fairchild. “We still store some munitions here,” Ashmore told the newspaper, including bullets and non-nuclear cruise missiles. Asked about nuclear weapons, Ashmore said “no,” according to the newspaper. Monday, he refused to say if the newspaper’s account was accurate. Assuming Fairchild is now nuclear-free, the only place in Washington where nuclear weapons are believed to be stored is Naval Submarine Base Bangor on Hood Canal, home to the Navy’s Pacific fleet of Trident nuclear missile subs. Copyright 2001 Army Times Publishing Company. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 Plutonium use raises concerns [charlotte.com] Posted at 12:02 a.m. EDT Wednesday, May 9, 2001 *Residents question safety of plan to use fuel at McGuire, Catawba * By BRUCE HENDERSON Opponents of a plan to turn surplus weapons plutonium into power-plant fuel on Tuesday questioned the suitability of two Duke Power nuclear plants to use the fuel and the ability of area residents to flee an accident. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission meeting in Charlotte was intended to seek public input on an environmental study of the facility where the mixed-oxide fuel, or MOX, would be manufactured, at the Savannah River Site near Aiken, S.C. Comments from a room-filling crowd ranged from the safety of shipping plutonium to SRS and the Duke plants, McGuire on Lake Norman and Catawba on Lake Wylie, to where the radioactive waste from the project would end up. Among the first 16 speakers, only four defended the plan. The plan emerged from a joint U.S.-Russian agreement to rid the world of excess bomb material. A blend containing about 5 percent weapons-grade plutonium and 95percent depleted uranium would fill fuel rods to be used at the Duke plants beginning in 2007. European nuclear plants have used a non-weapons form of plutonium for decades. "It's not new; it's not experimental," said Michael Tuckman, a senior nuclear power executive for Duke. "I have absolutely no motivation not to want to operate those plants safely." Several speakers alleged that McGuire and Catawba are unsafe by design. The plants rely on ice-filled beds that would condense radioactive steam to water during reactor accidents. Most other U.S. nuclear plants use thick shells of reinforced concrete to contain accidental releases. "Take (McGuire and Catawba) off the table," said Mary Olson of the Nuclear Information &Resource Service, which opposes the MOX plan. Federal authorities have said ice-condenser designs are substantially more likely to fail during a severe, but unlikely, reactor accident. But Duke and the NRC have said the plants are safe, and the use of MOX fuel isn't likely to increase the risks of such an accident. Some speakers questioned the ability of residents near Catawba and McGuire to evacuate on congested roads if an accident did occur. Others wondered what would happen to the highly radioactive wastes, for which the government has located no permanent disposal site. Wastes are now stored on-site at nuclear plants. From South Carolina, League of Women Voters official Mary Kelly said the MOX environmental impact statement should include detailed analyses of radioactive materials and wastes already stored at the Savannah River Site. "We are greatly concerned that the Savannah River Site is becoming the collecting site for plutonium in the United States," she said. Plutonium is both a long-lived radioactive element and extremely toxic. Duke itself became the point of some speakers. "Duke did not get where they are today without taking extraordinary environmental and safety considerations," said Carolyn McDaniel, who lives near Catawba. "Duke is doing this for greed," said Denise Lee of the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League. "This is all about money." The meeting was the first chance for Charlotte-area residents to speak on the plan since it was announced in 1999. More public comment will be taken when a draft environmental study for the fuel-making plant at Savannah River Site comes out in February. The NRC will hold more public meetings when Duke applies to amend the nuclear plants' licenses, allowing the company to use the new fuel. Additional safety and environmental studies will be required before full-scale use is allowed. Duke hopes to begin testing the new fuel at McGuire in 2003. The NRC will accept written comments on the environmental-impact statement until May 21. Fax them to (301) 415-5398, attention Tim Harris; e-mail to teh@nrc.gov; or write to Mike Lesar, Acting Chief, U.S. NRC, Rules &Directives Branch, Division of Administration Services, Office of Administration, Mail Stop T6D59, Washington, DC 20555. ***************************************************************** 9 New Scientist: Nuclear boom Attempts to smuggle radioactive materials have doubled over the past five years, boosting fears of nuclear terrorism Exclusive from New Scientist magazine Attempts to smuggle radioactive materials have doubled over the past five years, according to figures released this week by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency. The revelations bolster fears that the threat of nuclear terrorism is increasing. The IAEA's database on trafficking in nuclear materials has logged more than 550 incidents since 1993, it revealed at a conference in Stockholm. The rate of incidents in 1999 and 2000 was twice that in 1996. In the first three months of 2001, there were 20 confirmed cases, including thefts in Germany, Romania, South Africa and Mexico. The majority of cases involved the movement of materials which could not be made into bombs, such as contaminated scrap metal or radioactive sources. But 15 instances since 1993 involved plutonium or enriched uranium, which could be used in bombs. No single consignment has so far contained enough for a bomb, but the most worrying to the IAEA was the seizure of nearly a kilogram of enriched uranium in April last year in the former Soviet republic of Georgia. Staggering legacy The risk of nuclear terrorism is "the worst of all nightmares", says Morten Bremer Maerli of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs in Oslo. The cold war has left the world with "a staggering legacy" of 3 million kilograms of fissile material, he says - enough for a quarter of a million bombs. Maerli says two of the most notorious terrorist groups - Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaida in Afghanistan and the Aum Shrinrikyo cult in Japan - -have been trying to acquire a nuclear capability. Alex Schmid of the UN's Terrorism Prevention Branch suggests that there could be as many as 130 terrorist groups that pose a nuclear threat. "Vigorous efforts need to be made to keep the nuclear genie in the bottle and out of the hands of terrorists," he says. 1900 GMT, 9 May 2001 New Scientist Online News ***************************************************************** 10 Bush says terrorism threat is `very real' May 9, 2001 *Office of preparedness in the planning stages* RON HUTCHESON WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON President Bush launched an effort to guard against terrorism Tuesday, warning that the nation faces a ``very real'' threat of attack by biological, chemical or nuclear weapons. Bush directed Vice President Dick Cheney to coordinate the federal government's defenses against terrorism and announced plans for a new Office of National Preparedness. Bush acted after a critical government report was issued in March and as three Senate committees are examining the possibility of a future terrorist attack surpassing the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing that claimed 168 lives. ``The magnitude of this threat is just beginning to sink in,'' said Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., citing a host of terrorism experts who have predicted that, when it comes to a devastating attack, ``It's not a matter of if, but when.'' Bush said the spread of weapons of mass destruction to countries with ties to terrorist groups has heightened the potential danger. ``Against this backdrop, it is clear that the threat of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons being used against the United States -- while not immediate -- is very real,'' he said. Bush's approach seeks to prevent an attack and to deal with the consequences of a successful terrorist act. The federal government spends at least $11 billion a year on counterterrorism including fortifying embassies, training special operations units, gathering intelligence and maintaining airport security. The General Accounting Office, Congress's watchdog agency, concluded in late March that the efforts were hindered by a lack of coordination. If an attack succeeds, the new Office of National Preparedness will seek to coordinate the government's response. Longtime Bush aide Joseph Allbaugh, who is also responsible for disaster relief in his role as director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, will head the office. Bush's announcement drew a mixed reaction from Congress. Lawmakers praised Bush for addressing the problem, but some took issue with the specifics of his approach. Three Senate committees -- Intelligence, Armed Services and Appropriations -- are examining the threat of terrorism in three days of hearings that opened Monday. Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., expressed fears that the focus on emergency response in the event of an attack could divert attention from law enforcement efforts to catch the terrorists. Online: Federal Emergency Management Agency, www.fema.gov © 2001 PioneerPlanet / St. Paul (Minnesota) Pioneer Press / TwinCities.com- ***************************************************************** 11 FEMA, Cheney will head anti-terrorism efforts BY EUN-KYUNG KIM The Associated Press WASHINGTON - President Bush created a new office Tuesday to assess the nation's ability to deter terrorism and to coordinate a "harmonious and comprehensive" response to terrorist attacks, including those involving biological, chemical or nuclear weapons. "Prudence dictates that the United States be fully prepared to deal effectively with the consequences of such a weapon being used here on our soil," the president said. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, the government body that deals with floods, tornadoes and other natural disasters, will head the anti-terrorism effort through the newly created Office of National Preparedness. Bush also said his vice president will lead an administration working group to assess terrorist threats. Dick Cheney, during a CNN interview, said the team will "figure out how we best respond to that kind of disaster of major proportions that in effect would be man-made or man-caused." Cheney's group was expected to report its findings to Congress by Oct. 1, with the recommendations to be reviewed by the National Security Council. The announcements Tuesday came as a Senate panel held the first of three days of hearings on the subject. "The president's purpose is to bring clarity to the 46 agencies that have a piece of the pie," FEMA director Joe Allbaugh told members of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State and the Judiciary. "Preparedness is the key to everything, whether you are talking about tornadoes or flooding or terrorism events," Allbaugh said. "I'm an old Boy Scout, and I believe in the motto, 'Be Prepared.' And the way we can be prepared is to educate and to train, particularly those who are the first responders - those who put their lives at risk every day." Allbaugh stressed that the office will serve only as an organizer to make sure local and state agencies are prepared for terrorism: "We are not a deterrence agency, we are not in the intelligence business." The new office created some concern among lawmakers who feared the effort might cause additional confusion for local governments unsure of who they must report to during an attack. Many roles that will be examined by FEMA now fall under the jurisdiction of the Justice Department or other federal agencies. Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., cited a training exercise conducted last year to gauge the ability to respond to a major terrorist attack. He said many "bodies" lay on the ground for hours while emergency workers tried to figure out "who was in charge." Allbaugh said that kind of problem will be among those examined by his new office, as well as Cheney's working group. In additional to Allbaugh, other administration officials appeared before the Senate panel to testify about the increasing difficulty of combating terrorism because of new technology and growing economic connections between nations. Many senators expressed unhappiness with government efforts to face the growing threats of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. "Our programs are both fragmented and overlapping," said Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W. Va. "Fortunately, Congress and the executive branch both appear to recognize this fact and both branches of government are working or at least beginning to work to find solutions." Secretary of State Colin Powell called terrorism "part of the dark side of globalization." He said he was comfortable receiving "all the information it is possible to have" about national security. But he acknowledged that "there is somebody out there who is going to find a weak link." Copyright © 2001, Lincoln Journal Star. All rights reserved. 926 P Street Lincoln NE 68508 402 475-4200 feedback@journalstar.com ***************************************************************** 12 Statement by Dr. ElBaradei on Non-Proliferation And Nuclear Disarmament: A Status Report on 14 March 2001 Stockholm, 7 May 2001 Opening Statement at the International Conference on Security of Nuclear Material and Radioactive Sources by IAEA Director General Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei From the earliest days of discovery and experimentation with nuclear science, nuclear and radioactive materials have held extraordinary potential — the potential for being of great benefit to humankind, as well as for causing significant harm. For the past forty four years, the IAEA has played an important role in ensuring that nuclear technologies and materials are used only for peaceful purposes — in producing nuclear energy, and in helping to fight disease, enhance agricultural production, manage water resources and monitor the environment. At the same time, the Agency’s safeguards programme has been providing assurances that international undertakings to use nuclear facilities and materials for peaceful purposes are being honoured. An area of recent focus for the Agency has been the prevention of illicit trafficking in nuclear and radioactive material. In the wake of the Cold War, the smuggling of these materials has emerged as a real and dangerous threat. Since 1993, over 370 cases of illicit trafficking have been confirmed. While most of these incidents do not involve material that can be used for making nuclear weapons, the high number of events shows that we have reason to be concerned. In response, the international community, working through the Agency and through bilateral assistance, has stepped up efforts to prevent unauthorized uses of or trafficking in nuclear material and other radioactive sources. For any State, the first step in ensuring the security of their materials is an effective national system of control. Such a system must contain multiple elements, including physical protection measures, material accountability arrangements, reliable detection capabilities, and plans for rapid and effective response when material is found to be lost, stolen or otherwise not under proper control. The system must also cover illegal waste dumping and other activities that would result in the release of radioactive material into the environment. All these measures should be based on well founded legal and regulatory structures. In many cases, the responsibility for these various elements lies with different bodies, and co-operation between them is vital to the success of the national system. For many States, some of the elements of a viable national system for the security of nuclear and radioactive material already exist. They may be in place as part of the State’s safeguards undertakings, or as a result of the State’s being party to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material. Where already in place, these elements can work together to serve multiple purposes, thereby leveraging the resources devoted by the State to security measures. In other words, where the State already has a safeguards system in place, the efforts to combat illicit trafficking should be integrated into this overall system. The International Atomic Energy Agency can be of service to a State that is seeking to upgrade its security measures for nuclear and radioactive material — through the transfer of technology, exchange of information, assistance and training in the implementation of internationally accepted standards, and help with regional co-operation. An important component of our efforts has been to work in close association with responsible national and international authorities, including customs and law enforcement organizations, to share best practices and conduct assistance visits. In response to requests, we also have organized International Physical Protection Advisory Services (IPPAS), using experts from our Member Statesto conduct peer evaluations of national systems for physical protection. Since 1996, we have conducted these missions in 11 States in various regions of the world. An increasing number of States are also requesting our assistance in training their customs officers in radiation monitoring at border stations — as well as providing support to national authorities and border officials in preventing, detecting, and responding to illegal uses of nuclear and radioactive materials. We have initiated a co-ordinated research project that consolidates ongoing research activities to improve the technology used to detect nuclear material at border stations. And we will continue to work with Interpol, Europol, the World Customs Organization and other international organizations in conferences such as this one, to bring together experts in the field and determine how progress can best be achieved. In November 1999, I convened an informal, open ended meeting of experts to discuss whether the Convention on Physical Protection of Nuclear Material should be revised. I expect to receive a report from the Expert Group within the next few months. Looking towards the future, it is clear that broad international co-operation will be needed to upgrade security measures, to improve capabilities for intercepting and responding to illicit trafficking, and to enhance the protection of facilities against terrorism and sabotage. The most difficult challenge will be the effective consolidation of all these measures into integrated, efficient national systems, ensuring that the security of nuclear and other radioactive material is woven into the infrastructure of nuclear safety and security. It is my sincere hope that this conference will provide a forum for productive discussion and comprehensive consideration of these issues, and I wish you every success in these endeavours. ***************************************************************** 13 Pakistan joins DU producer nations - Jane's Asia/Pacific News 9 May 2001 Among the exhibits at was a model of the new 125mm armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) projectile with a depleted uranium (DU) long-rod penetrator, which is being developed by the Pakistani National Development Complex (NDC) for use with T-80UD tanks. It follows the development of a DU round for the Pakistan Army's Chinese-designed T-59 tanks, which have been re-armed with 105mm guns and currently fire a license-built version of the British L64A4 tungsten APFSDS projectile. The latter is credited with a range of 4km against a NATO single heavy target. The 105mm DU APFSDS round has a muzzle velocity of 1,450m/s and can penetrate more than 450mm of rolled homogenous armor at an unspecified range. The performance of the 125mm round is said to be 25% greater. A noticeable feature of the saddle-type sabots of the NDC 125mm projectile and of the Norinco 125mm tungsten APFSDS projectiles (now being license-produced by Pakistan Ordnance Factories) is the reconfiguration of their forward bore-riders so that the projectiles align accurately with the autoloading system of the T-80UD. (It was reported in 1998 that unspecified 'loadability' problems had arisen between Chinese projectiles and Ukrainian autoloaders. The same problem is not thought to have been encountered with the loading systems of the 125mm smoothbore guns mounted in Chinese Type 85-IIAP tanks.) Among the exhibits at IDEX 2001 was a model of the new 125mm armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) projectile with a depleted uranium (DU) long-rod penetrator, which is being developed by the Pakistani National Development Complex (NDC) for use with T-80UD tanks. ***************************************************************** 14 IAF fine-tuning nuclear interception techniques The Indian Express: Top stories: Full story May 9, 2001 Express News Service New Delhi, May 8: Early interception and destruction of a nuclear weapon equipped aircraft is the best form of protection against nuclear strikes and the Air Force is seeking to fine tune its nuclear attack interception capability, a senior IAF official said today. ‘‘Our aim is to intercept the enemy aircraft and shoot it down before it comes inside our territory.’’ Air Marshal S. Krishnaswamy, Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief Western Air Command said. ‘‘So we have to detect it as far away from our territory as possible and we are improving our interception capabilities. The final version of the Su-30 will be able to detect and destroy targets which are much farther away,’’ he said. ‘‘We cannot differentiate whether the enemy aircraft is carrying a conventional payload or nuclear payload. Therefore, there are clear instructions to the army and air force personnel to identify whether the aircraft is a friend or foe. And if it is a foe, destroy it as far away from own territory as possible,’’ he said. To achieve this during the war games, the Air Force is trying to ensure that its defences are not porous. Even the upgraded MiG-21B is up to the task, he added. Both ground troops and the Air Force personnel are getting special training for survival in nuclear, chemical and biological warfare. The IAF pilots are now being trained to fly through radioactive areas. ‘‘The new combat aircraft have the capability to shut off external air consumption to enable pilots to fly through affected nuclear zones,’’ he said. Along with training personnel on ground and in air, the commanders are constantly studying the ‘‘nuclear threshold’’ of the enemy. ‘‘Nuclear threshold refers to the break-point at which the enemy will go beyond conventional warfare and resort to launching nuclear strikes. The warfare has to be kept close to the threshold but it should not reach the break-point,’’ he said. © 2001: Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 15 India using Nuclear-weapons carrying aircraft -DAWN - Top Stories; 09 May, 2001 NEW DELHI, May 8: The Indian air force is practising new methods of intercepting enemy aircraft laden with nuclear weapons in the biggest ever war-games along the Pakistan border, officials said on Tuesday. Air Marshal S. Krishnaswamy, in charge of the air element of the exercises, informed a press conference his men and officers were practising against a nuclear arms backdrop. "Every day we are including methods of detection which come in handy to intercept an enemy aircraft with nuclear weapons," Krishnaswamy said. "Our troops have also been directed to wear special apparatus if a scene of nuclear or biological attack is created." The biggest war-games in 13 years, code named "Operation Complete Victory", began on Saturday and are being conducted jointly by the Indian army and air force. Around 60,000 troops have been mobilized, as have 120 fighter and transport aircraft, including state-of-the-art Mig-29s and MI17 IV helicopters. The exercises have one main objective, which is to train men in a "war-like" situation, Krishnaswamy said. "The important issue here is the training. I am training. I am not demonstrating. We're certainly not demonstrating," Krishnaswamy said. The Indian air force has conducted 720 sorties since Saturday and is likely to conduct a total of 900 to 1,000 sorties by May 10, the day of the final assault. Witnesses reported that columns of armour had rolled into the hot deserts of Rajasthan, the main battleground for the exercises.-AFP © The DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2001 ***************************************************************** 16 N. Korea nuclear pact is verifiable Livermore lab, Stanford report urges openness *May 08, 2001* By Glenn Roberts Jr. STAFF WRITER Compliance with a 1994 agreement intended to limit nuclear weapons development in North Korea can be verified, a report by Stanford University and Lawrence Livermore Laboratory experts has concluded. But North Korean officials must "make . . . operations in the nuclear area -- past and present, actual and suspected -- fully open," the report states. And inspectors from an international nuclear organization, the International Atomic Energy Agency, likely will need additional resources to verify whether North Korea has met the terms of that 1994 agreement, called the Agreed Framework. The United States and its allies agreed, under this framework, to build two nuclear-power reactors in North Korea and to provide fuel-oil shipments until the reactors are built. North Korea, in exchange, agreed to declare how much material it has produced for nuclear weapons, to stop production of the material at specific facilities, and to remain a part of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Former Secretary of Defense William J. Perry had requested the study, which was conducted by the Center for Global Security Research at Livermore Lab and the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford. Michael May, a former Livermore Lab director, led the Stanford effort and Ronald F. Lehman II, director of the lab's global security center, headed the lab effort. Robert Schock, a senior fellow with the global security center who worked on the report, said a workshop was held in September 2000 and another from Jan. 31 to Feb. 1 this year to gather information from experts about the agreement with North Korea. Schock said the report noted some important issues in the plan to build nuclear reactors in North Korea. "Arrangements need to be made to take care of the spent fuel from nuclear reactors, and also spent fuel from the North Korean weapons program," he said. It isn't clearly defined, he said, what will become of the spent radioactive fuel from the reactors once it is removed from the reactors. And spent nuclear fuel, which contains highly radioactive elements, represents a proliferation risk. "What we pointed out is that it's very important for those agreements on the disposition of those materials to be worked out very early." The "bottom line" of the report is that the agreement with North Korea is verifiable, "assuming that North Korea comes clean" about the details of its weapons program, he added. Fuel shipments already have begun to North Korea, and the site for the reactors has been prepared. But there have been delays in the construction of the reactors. The report refers to a "non-cooperation" by North Korean officials with international nuclear inspections at some sites in North Korea. Denials or delays in inspections could lead the United States and other supporting countries to stop delivery of key nuclear components for the reactors, the report states. A copy of the report is available on the Web at: http://cisac.stanford.edu/news/pressrelease.html *****************************************************************