***************************************************************** 06/12/01 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 9.147 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS 1 Nuclear energy, and its waste, make comeback 2 Nuclear Self-Storage 3 UNDERGROUND REPOSITORIES NEEDED FOR NUCLEAR WASTES 4 Ex-DOE Head Joins Anti-Nuke Trustees 5 Duke Power preparing to license 2 nukes 6 U.S. delays decision on joining Paducah plant suit 7 NRC ends Cook's special oversight 8 ADAMS: Items of Interest - Tuesday, June 12, 2001State of Nevada 9 British Energy eyeing Ontario expansion 10 Iodine report usable in future health projects 11 ADAMS: Items of Interest - Tuesday, June 12, 2001 12 Fort St. Vrain power plant reborn after checkered past - 13 Germans agree nuclear exit plan 14 NRC Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste to Meet in Rockville, 15 Germany signs end to nuclear power 16 German Nuclear Shutdown Protested 17 Malaysia's Mahathir says don't trust nuclear power 18 Ongoing problems bedevil power plant 19 CDU, CSU Would Scrap Nuclear Phaseout 20 A Chronology of Nuclear Energy in Germany 21 EUROTECH'S Radiation-Resistant EKOR Applied in New Role of 22 Bulgaria to Renovate Nuclear Plants 23 AGs Warn Feds: Radioactive Waste Cleanup Delays Will Be Costly 24 Northwestern N.C. sees high radon in well water NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS 1 Beryllium report attacked in court 2 Meetings scheduled for exposed workers 3 Woman speaks out over Maralinga nuclear test claims 4 Claims disabled people used in Maralinga nuclear tests 5 Settlement of whistle-blower lawsuit closer 6 Technology:Cleanup of leakage continues 7 *The weak joints of a nuclear weapons power * 8 A-tests death squad claim 9 Fluor Hanford to take over DynCorp's duties 10 Hanford claims program criticized 11 Official had doubts about beryllium_ ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Nuclear energy, and its waste, make comeback News &Letters - The Journal of Marxist-Humanism - April 2001 April 2001 For years the nuclear industry has been quietly preparing for an opportunity to gain its lost prominence as an energy provider. Now, with the administration's support, they are using California's apparent energy crisis as the pretext for reviving an industry once struck down by mass opposition. In sync with President Bush, Senator Murkowski (R-Alaska) is pushing the "National Energy Security Act of 2001" that goes far beyond opening up the fragile Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil drilling. Declaring "We have an energy crisis in this country," Murkowski says the solution is increased energy production, so his bill will "concentrate on increasing the supply of conventional energy--clean coal, nuclear, gas and oil." Subsidizing those industries is the focus of the bill--to the tune of $20 billion to be handed over to corporations such as Exxon-Mobil which made record profits of $17 billion last year. It's no surprise that Murkowski, Bush, and Cheney want to award their oil industry buddies gigantic subsidies from tax money. But less noticed is the nearly $1 billion in spending on nuclear power. Besides proposing tax credits, subsidized loans, and direct state funding for nuclear power reactors, the bill extends the Price-Anderson Act, a kind of free liability insurance just for nukes. And where Bush and his allies are for the free market when that means rejecting price caps on electricity for California's working people, they are all for price guarantees for nuclear power producers, in case the electricity they produce should get too cheap. What's not in the bill is anything more than token support for renewable energy such as solar or wind power, or any measures to improve efficiency. Small increases in auto fuel mileage standards would save more oil than could ever be pumped out of the Arctic . But would that help oil and nuclear corporations? As if Congress could decree it, Murkowski's act declares nuclear power a "renewable energy resource!" He even wants nukes to qualify for Clean Air Act non-pollution credits. The Clinton administration similarly wanted international global warming accords to allow industrialized countries to earn greenhouse gas credits for building nukes in the Third World--until vociferous protests from below forced a near--unanimous rejection of this position in last November's talks at The Hague. As for nuclear waste, Murkowski and the administration not only want to shove the proposed Yucca Mountain high-level waste dump down Nevada's throat, the bill would also establish an Office of Spent Nuclear Fuel Research to encourage "recycling" of radioactive waste, including spent nuclear fuel. Recycling, long ago banned by the U.S. because it would provide an abundant source of plutonium for whoever wanted to make an atomic bomb, also multiplies the amount of radioactive waste, which cannot safely be disposed of. Today this waste is piling up at reactors across the country, and is one of the biggest obstacles to reviving the industry. What has been occurring with deregulation is a major restructuring of the nuclear industry, with big mergers and a handful of companies buying up old nukes at bargain prices. By 2005 there may be as few as five companies owning all U.S. commercial reactors. Ratepayers are paying three times over for this restructuring. First, nuclear, which was supposed to be "too cheap to meter," turned out to be so costly that it drove up electricity rates wherever it was used, which gave part of the impetus for deregulation. Second, in California and other deregulating states, part of the high rates consumers are paying goes to reimburse utilities for "stranded costs," that is, the money they wasted building nukes that so many of us vehemently opposed in the first place. Third, the cash in their decommissioning funds, collected from consumers to pay for the eventual dismantling of highly contaminated plants when they shut down, would go untaxed under Murkowski's bill, and we should not be surprised if all the cash is spent and taxpayers get stuck with the tab a second time. Internationally, the global warming talks illustrate part of the restructuring strategy: Western governments would obtain greenhouse credits by building nukes in Central and Eastern Europe that would generate electricity with less environmental and safety regulations. China, desperate to power its massive industrialization, would guarantee the industry business by receiving virtually unregulated nukes. Mexico and Canada would be energy satellites for the U.S. Beyond the vested interests of the nuclear and fossil fuel industries, there is a deeper cause for the desperate drive to intensify energy production even to the point of exhaustion of all oil reserves and to lift all environmental restrictions. Capitalism's inherent tendency is toward ever-growing production, with such reckless compulsion that it "allows its actual movement to be determined as much and as little by the sight of the coming degradation and final depopulation of the human race, as by the probable fall of the earth into the sun" (CAPITAL, Vol. I, by Karl Marx). The hunger for ever more oil-burning and nuclear fission proves that capitalism is not sustainable ecologically. Its total disregard for human life calls for nothing less than a total uprooting of this anti-human, nature-destroying social order. --Franklin Dmitryev ***************************************************************** 2 Nuclear Self-Storage The Salt Lake Tribune June 12, 2001* A consortium of electric utilities wants to store spent nuclear fuel rods from the rest of the nation in Utah. The stuff would be placed in huge steel and concrete casks and parked on a giant slab on the Goshute Indian Reservation in Skull Valley. But there's an easier solution. Store the stuff the same way near the nuclear reactors that produce it. That is already happening at 16 of the nation's 103 reactor sites. If the dry-cask storage method is safe, as the nuclear industry claims, why move the stuff to Utah? Leave it where it is, and don't risk accidents during transport. The utilities do not want to hear that. But Utahns don't relish the idea of becoming a nuclear dump, and there is no good reason why this state, or any other, should accept highly radioactive waste from nuclear reactors scattered elsewhere across the nation. The utilities claim that Utah would be only an interim stop for the fuel rods, which eventually would be moved to a permanent repository to be operated by the federal government at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. But the Democrats' newfound control of the U.S. Senate bodes further delays for the Nevada storage plan. The Democrats' return to power in the Senate has made Nevada's Sen. Harry Reid the majority whip. According to the new majority leader, Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., that means the Yucca Mountain storage facility will not open. "I think the Yucca Mountain issue is dead," Daschle said during a visit to Las Vegas. "As long as we're in the majority, it's dead." Even under different political circumstances, the earliest Yucca Mountain could open is 2010. And even if that happens, its capacity will not be adequate to store all of the nation's spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive research waste. So the term of the proposed "temporary" storage in Utah remains uncertain. The initial lease on the site would be 20 years, and it could go as long as 40. The utilities propose to open the Utah facility in 2004. Given that many reactor facilities already are developing dry-cask storage on site, it makes more sense simply to leave the waste there. © Copyright 2001, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on ***************************************************************** 3 UNDERGROUND REPOSITORIES NEEDED FOR NUCLEAR WASTES Environment News Service: AmeriScan: June 11, 2001 _AmeriScan: June 11, 2001_ _WASHINGTON, DC,_ June 11, 2001 (ENS) - A report by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) says that countries should move forward with the development of deep underground repositories for the safe storage and disposal of spent fuel from nuclear reactors and other high level radioactive waste. The new report by an international committee of the academy's National Research Council says four decades of study have determined that the geological repository option is the only "scientifically credible, long term solution for safely isolating waste" without having to rely on active management. "Although there are still some significant technical challenges, the broad consensus within the scientific and technical communities is that enough is known for countries to move forward with geological disposal," the committee said. The committee noted that the U.S., Finland and Sweden have plans to begin placing waste in geological repositories early in this century, but that other countries, such as Russia, have no timetable set for the construction and use of deep repositories. "Difficulties in garnering public support have been seriously underestimated, and opportunities to increase public involvement and to gain trust have been missed," said committee chair D. Warner North, president of NorthWorks Inc. in Belmont, California. "Waste management programs around the globe should direct their efforts beyond technical development to emphasize public participation in the decision making process." The committee noted that spent nuclear fuel and high level waste have been kept at storage facilities on or near the Earth's surface since the nuclear age began more than 50 years ago. But it said the amount of waste, particularly spent fuel, is exceeding the current capacity of existing facilities in many countries, and some storage sites have not performed up to acceptable standards. The full committee report is available at: http://lab.nap.edu/catalog/10119.html * * * _ACTIVISTS UNITE AGAINST YUCCA MOUNTAIN NUCLEAR DUMP_ _LAS VEGAS, Nevada,_ June 11, 2001 (ENS) - Activists from across the country gathered Friday to voice solidarity with Nevada's struggle against the proposed permanent nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. "We are here to assure Nevadans that they have our support," said Lisa Gue, policy analyst with Public Citizen in Washington, DC. "We will continue to actively oppose the industry-driven scheme to make Yucca Mountain into a high level nuclear waste dump." Representatives of national groups were in Las Vegas at the meeting of the Nevada Commission on Nuclear Projects to speak in support of Nevada Governor Ken Guinn's Nevada Protection Plan to defeat the Yucca Mountain proposal. National and Nevada activists emphasized the role of public interest groups in fostering informed citizen involvement at the grassroots. "A broad based national effort is needed to defeat the Yucca Mountain Project and redirect nuclear waste policy to protect the health and safety of all Americans," said John Hadder, northern Nevada coordinator for Citizen Alert. The presence of groups from outside of Nevada demonstrated the national significance of the Yucca Mountain Project, the groups said. The nuclear transportation network that would be launched if the repository proposal were approved would send high level waste shipments through 43 states and within one half mile of 50 million people. "Across the country people are waking up to the dangers of transporting highly radioactive waste through their communities to a leaky dump in Nevada. Awareness is growing that Yucca Mountain is in everyone's back yard," said Michael Mariotte, executive director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Washington, DC. Yucca Mountain, located about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is the only site now being studied for a permanent repository for the nation's nuclear wastes. Last week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency released final standards for the amount of radiation that would be allowed to escape the site, bringing the proposal another step closer to a reality. "After 14 years of study, we are at a critical juncture in the Yucca Mountain process," added Gue. "National groups are committed to working closely with Nevadans and concerned citizens across the country to defeat this dangerous and inherently flawed project." Copyright© 2001 Lycos, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Lycos® is a ***************************************************************** 4 Ex-DOE Head Joins Anti-Nuke Trustees June 12, 2001 Albuquerque Journal--> _By Jennifer McKee_ *Journal Staff Writer* Bill Richardson, who has served as a New Mexico congressman, ambassador to the United Nations and U.S. Energy secretary, has been elected to the trustees of an environmental group that has repeatedly sued the Energy Department. Richardson was unanimously elected to the board of trustees on Thursday of the National Resource Defense Council, a 31-year-old environmental and public health organization with 450,000 members nationwide. The group opposes nuclear weapons and works to halt global warming, among other things. As head of U.S. Energy Department, Richardson was charged with overseeing the nation's weapons labs — including Los Alamos National Laboratory — which invented, perfected and maintains America's nuclear-weapons arsenal. Since retiring with the end of the Clinton administration, Richardson has also joined the boards of two Texas-based oil companies. Allan Metrick, communications director for the Defense Council, said those things were not strikes against Richardson. "He brings the respect of many world leaders who are concerned about climate change and global warming," Metrick said. "His access to a large portion of the global community will be really beneficial to our organization." Richardson joins 41 other trustees, among them actor Robert Redford, Chief Operating Officer of Warner Bros. Alan Horn, and George Woodwell, the man who first sounded an alarm over global warming. Richardson is the first and only trustee to ever head a cabinet-level government agency, Metrick said. "We thought he was an excellent administrator," he said of Richardson's stint as Energy secretary. "He brings to the board geographic diversity, ethnic diversity and a great intellect and drive." Metrick said it would be "inappropriate" to disqualify Richardson from the board of the defense council because Richardson's former duties as top caretaker of several thousand nuclear bombs and warheads. Trustees, who are not paid, meet four times a year to set the organization's policy, Metrick said. Trustees serve two-year terms and can only be re-elected by a vote of the entire organization. They also must agree to the group's principles, said Christopher Paine, a senior analyst with NRDC who often works on projects in New Mexico, which includes pledging to support a variety of environmental and health concerns such as nuclear proliferation and global warming. Paine and Greg Mello of the Santa Fe-based Los Alamos Study Group, which has been a watchdog of the Los Alamos lab for years, said Richardson's new role as a trustee bodes well for New Mexico, especially since Richardson seems to be headed for a race for governor. "His decision to put his counter down on the side of the environment and go with that is great," Mello said. "If this means he's attaching more importance to the environment and recognizing how threatened it is, both in New Mexico and worldwide, I can only say it's a good thing." Richardson was traveling Monday and could not be reached for comment. Karen Golembeski, Richardson's spokesperson, said Richardson joined "the superb international organization primarily for its work on global climate change." Copyright Albuquerque Journal ***************************************************************** 5 Duke Power preparing to license 2 nukes NC Business Wire _ [newsobserver.com, Raleigh, NC] JUNE 13, 2001 CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) -- Duke Power Co. is preparing license renewals that would extend the life of two nuclear power plants for about 40 years. The application are expected to be filed Wednesday with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the company's nuclear plants on lakes Norman and Wylie near Charlotte. Duke wants the licenses extended 20 years beyond their original 40-year terms and if granted the four reactors at the McGuire and Catawba plants could run until 2041 and 2043. The two reactors at McGuire started producing power in 1981 and 1984, and the reactors at Catawba began operating in 1985 and 1986. Last year, Duke's Oconee nuclear plant in South Carolina became the second nuclear power plant in the nation to have its license extended. Renewing the other two licenses at once lets Duke tap the expertise of the team that worked on Oconee, offers stability to plant employees and neighbors and makes economic sense, said Mike Tuckman, Duke's executive vice president for nuclear generation. The process is expected to take 24 to 30 months. Opponents of nuclear power are expected to oppose the license renewal. News & Observer. All material found on newsobserver.com is ***************************************************************** 6 U.S. delays decision on joining Paducah plant suit Daily news from Louisville, Kentucky and Southern Indiana from courier-journal.com June 12, 2001 By James R. Carroll, The Courier-Journal WASHINGTON -- After two years of investigation, the federal government said yesterday it wants more time to decide whether to join a lawsuit alleging the former operators of the uranium processing plant in Paducah exposed workers and their families to harmful radiation levels. Late last week, the government appeared ready to decide. But yesterday's Department of Justice filing in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky asked for an extension until Aug. 13. The request means neither the Justice Department nor the Department of Energy has decided whether to join the ''whistle-blower'' suit filed in June 1999 by former employees of the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant and by the Natural Resources Defense Council. The suit alleges that Lockheed Martin Corp. and its predecessors made false reports to the government on the extent of contamination from processing uranium at the plant. The Energy Department is the principal agency responsible for the plant. The latest extension request isn't a matter of concern, said Joseph Egan, an attorney for the plaintiffs. After several previous delays, the Clinton administration left the decision on government participation in the suit to the Bush White House. In its application yesterday for another extension, the Justice Department said its staff attorneys ''made their recommendation whether the government should intervene in or decline . . . the complaint.'' ''The staff's recommendation is being reviewed and considered by the Departments of Energy and Justice, and this 60-day extension is necessary to allow time for the government to make its decision,'' the document said. Assistant U.S. Attorney William Campbell in Louisville declined to say what the attorneys recommended. ''We are working with the Department of Energy to provide (the agency) information so (it) can make its recommendation to the Department of Justice,'' Campbell said. Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis agreed with Campbell. ''DOE has not made any recommendations to the Department of Justice on the merits of the lawsuit,'' said Davis, who called the extension request ''part of the normal process.'' Campbell said Justice, while working with Energy, is conducting ''an independent investigation'' and could decide to pursue the case without the Energy Department. However, he said, ''our strong preference is that we work with the agencies that are affected.'' Lockheed Martin has talked with government attorneys and did not object to another extension, said company spokeswoman Gail Rymer. Lockheed Martin, Lockheed Martin Energy Systems and its predecessors, Martin Marietta Corp. and Martin Marietta Energy Systems, were named as defendants in the suit. The companies together were the chief management contractors at the Paducah facility for about 12 years. ''We feel we met all of our contractual obligations,'' Rymer said of the allegations in the suit. ''Everything we did we did with the knowledge of the DOE. . . . We worked hand-inhand with the DOE to identify and remediate waste and other issues that predated our involvement as well as activities during our tenure.'' Copyright 2001 The Courier-Journal. ***************************************************************** 7 NRC ends Cook's special oversight SouthBendTribune.com: June 12, 2001 _Process ends for AEP's Bridgman nuclear plant_ _By MATTHEW S. GALBRAITH_ _Tribune Staff Writer_ BRIDGMAN -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has disbanded a special panel overseeing the restart of both reactors at Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant. That means Cook will return to the normal oversight process for all nuclear plants. James E. Dyer, NRC Region 3 administrator, notified plant officials last week that Cook "no longer warrants" the heightened presence of an oversight panel. Dyer said the plant has demonstrated safe operation, overall improving performance and an effective program to update and maintain the plant design. Cook's reactors were returned to service last year after being shut down in 1997 subsequent to NRC safety inspections. David Mayne, a corporate communications assistant with American Electric Power, said the NRC's vote of confidence was a result of the hard work and sacrifices from plant employees. "It's good to bring official closure to that chapter of our history," Mayne said. Both units are operating well, he added. Unit 2 has run continuously for 136 days and Unit 1 for 113 consecutive days. The plant was shut down in September 1997 after its emergency core cooling systems were declared inoperable due to numerous engineering deficiencies. Later inspections identified concerns regarding the ice condenser systems and fibrous materials inside containment. Mainly, the accident-controlling systems did not meet design requirements and were found in degraded conditions. That led to a $500,000 fine against plant owner AEP. The shutdown also cost company shareholders an estimated $700 million. The NRC established a restart oversight panel April 17, 1998, to review the plant's outage activities and startup preparations. It was known as an 0350 panel because it was created under NRC Inspection Manual Chapter 0350. That chapter outlines the agency's response when significant performance problems cause an extended reactor shutdown. The panel met regularly with plant officials to discuss performance issues, plan inspections, determine restart readiness and monitor both unit restarts. During that time, the ice condensers of both reactors were rebuilt. Each system contains 1,944 baskets of ice to reduce pressure and absorb gases in the event of a loss-of-coolant accident. Also undertaken was a plantwide systems review that resulted in thousands of repairs known as corrective actions. More recently, the panel monitored the plant's corrective-action response to structural problems found in containment. The containment structures are operable, Dyer noted, and safety margins are improving through refined calculations. Other than some equipment problems, no other significant operational problems, operator errors or procedural flaws were reported for either unit. In the future, problems that result in plant power changes will be handled through the NRC's reactor oversight process. Cook's end-of-cycle assessment will be announced at a public meeting set for 1 p.m. EDT July 6 at the plant training building. It will be a partial assessment since the plant is not fully integrated in the program. *Staff writer Matthew S. Galbraith: mgalbraith@sbtinfo.com (219) 235-6359* ***************************************************************** 8 ADAMS: Items of Interest - Tuesday, June 12, 2001State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects ADAMS - Items of Interest Recent Released Documents Added - Tuesday, June 12, 2001 These documents and others may be retrieved at the NRC PERR web site Item ID: 011620011 Accession Number: ML011560252 Date Added: 6/11/01 9:11:38 AM Title: 05-24-2001 Meeting Minutes of Internal Meeting of the D.C. Cook Nuclear Plant Manual Chapter 0350 Panel Author Affiliation: NRC/RGN-III/DRP Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620290 Accession Number: ML011280086 Date Added: 6/11/01 4:12:23 PM Title: 05/04/01 Copies of testimony to be presented by Chairman Meserve at the 05/08/01 Senate Oversight Hearing Author Affiliation: NRC/OCA Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620195 Accession Number: ML011620038 Date Added: 6/11/01 11:11:26 AM Title: 06/13/01 Meeting Notice: Forthcoming U.S. NRC and U.S. DOE Mgmt Meeting to Discuss Mgmt Issues, Describe Progress in Program and Discuss Mgmt Concerns. Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS/DWM/HLWB Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620194 Accession Number: ML011620034 Date Added: 6/11/01 11:11:21 AM Title: 06/13/01 Meeting Notice: Forthcoming U.S. NRC and U.S. DOE Quality Assurance and Key Technical Issues Mgmt Meeting Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS/DWM/HLWB Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620013 Accession Number: ML011560132 Date Added: 6/11/01 9:11:48 AM Title: 2001 Peach Bottom Assessment Meeting Invitation Author Affiliation: NRC/RGN-I/DRP/PB4 Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620284 Accession Number: ML003771541 Date Added: 6/11/01 4:11:07 PM Title: 475th ACRS Meeting Minutes Author Affiliation: NRC/ACRS Document/Report Number: ACRS-3215 _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620034 Accession Number: ML011520136 Date Added: 6/11/01 9:14:26 AM Title: A Platinum Year OUC 2000 Annual Report Author Affiliation: Orlando Utilities Commission Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620192 Accession Number: ML011160013 Date Added: 6/11/01 11:11:03 AM Title: Affirmative Employment Plan to all NRC Employees Author Affiliation: NRC/SBCR Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620157 Accession Number: ML011370741 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:16:05 AM Title: Memo to Martin Virgilio, Dir., NMSS, from Charles Hughey, TA, NMSS re: Summary of May 9, 2001, Public Meeting with the NEI on Mutual Items of Interest. Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620190 Accession Number: ML011590442 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:22:17 AM Title: NEI Organizational Chart. Author Affiliation: Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620091 Accession Number: ML011520314 Date Added: 6/11/01 9:28:38 AM Title: Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) 10 CFR Part 52 Applications and Licensing Plan. Author Affiliation: Exelon Generation Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620157 Accession Number: ML011370741 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:16:05 AM Title: Memo to Martin Virgilio, Dir., NMSS, from Charles Hughey, TA, NMSS re: Summary of May 9, 2001, Public Meeting with the NEI on Mutual Items of Interest. Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620189 Accession Number: ML011590405 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:22:00 AM Title: NMSS Organizational Chart. Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620190 Accession Number: ML011590442 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:22:17 AM Title: NEI Organizational Chart. Author Affiliation: Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ ***************************************************************** 9 British Energy eyeing Ontario expansion Yahoo - June 12, 12:19 pm Eastern Time_ TORONTO, June 12 (Reuters) - With Ontario's electricity market set to open up to competition within a year, the head of British Energy Plc (*quote from Yahoo! UK & Ireland*: BGY.L) said on Tuesday it is eyeing further expansion in the province, including the construction of more nuclear plants. ``We believe that Ontario is a very good place to do business. There is going to be deregulation in Ontario and we will take a very keen interest in these transactions,'' British Energy's chairman designate Robin Jeffrey, told reporters in Toronto. Jeffrey is also chairman of Bruce Power, a partnership with Canadian uranium supplier Cameco Corp. (Toronto:CCO.TO - news), which operates the Bruce nuclear plant in southwestern Ontario. Jeffrey said British Energy would look to add other generating stations to its Canadian operations, including nuclear plants. ``Having a balanced generating portfolio is something that can be important to business,'' he said. However, he said any further movement would be contingent on how fast Ontario moves on its deregulation plans, an issue that has been echoed by other power producers. ``Clearly for us to construct and operate plants, deregulation will have to have taken place. But at this point in time, we have completed the Bruce transaction and once the competitive market is there we will consider doing other things,'' he said. In April, Ontario, Canada's most populous province, said the long awaited plan to deregulate its electricity market would be brought into effect by late spring of 2002, following the lead of other jurisdictions, including California and Alberta. The province had already pushed back its previous target date of last November by one year to try to avoid the kind of problems encountered by California, which has been plagued by supply shortages, rolling blackouts and bankruptcy. In Alberta, deregulation has sparked a surge in power costs. Last month, provincially owned Ontario Power Generation and Bruce Power closed a C$3.2 billion ($2.1 billion) lease agreement on the Bruce nuclear plant, about 125 kilometres (80 miles) northwest of Toronto, making Bruce Power the operator of the Bruce A and B stations until 2018, with an option to extend the lease another 25 years. The plant has four operating reactors at the Bruce B station, with a capacity of 3,140 megawatts, and four inactive reactors at the A station. Bruce Power plans to bring two of the A station's reactors into operation in two to three years. Once they are all up to full operation, they are expected to generate C$40 million in annual earnings per reactor. ($1 equals $1.52 Canadian) Cameco Corp (Toronto:CCO.TO - news) ***************************************************************** 10 Iodine report usable in future health projects Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 12:15 p.m. on Tuesday, June 12, 2001 It's been "determined" that a dose reconstruction report of iodine-131 releases in Oak Ridge is an important tool to use in planning future public health efforts locally. That conclusion is included in a technical review of the report that was ordered by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, which oversees the Oak Ridge Reservation Health Effects Subcommittee. ATSDR officials said four "technical experts" participated in the review. They were Jon A. Broadway, who manages the environmental consulting program at Auburn University; Geoffrey G. Eichholz, a regents professor emeritus of nuclear engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology; Kenneth L. Mossman, a professor of health physics and director of the Office of Radiation Safety at Arizona State University; and Fritz A. Seiler, president of Sigma Five Consultants, a consulting firm in New Mexico. The dose reconstruction report was released in early 2000 and was prepared by scientists working under contract with the Tennessee Department of Health. One thing the study investigated was the possible risks of thyroid cancer from the releases of I-131 at Oak Ridge National Laboratory between 1944 to 1956 at 41 representative locations, including Oak Ridge, Oliver Springs, Clinton, Kingston and Knoxville. I-131 seeks out the thyroid gland almost exclusively, and those most at risk for exposure were people born between 1944 and 1954 who lived nearby and drank milk from backyard animals only, according to the report. Those at greatest risk are women born in 1952 living near Gallaher Bend, located east of ORNL, who drank goat milk. At its meeting on Monday, the subcommittee heard several presentations pertaining to the I-131 report including one by Bob Peelle and Tom Widner, who talked about the research that went into preparing the document. Also giving a presentation was Owen Hoffman, president of SENES Oak Ridge Inc., Center for Risk Analysis, an organization that analyzes health risks related to radiation exposure. Hoffman also participated in the dose reconstruction effort. Hoffman used computer software, known as an interactive risk and dose calculator, to conduct several demonstrations assessing an individual's risk of thyroid disease from iodine-131 exposure, based on when the individual was born, where the person lived and how much and what type of milk the person drank. The subcommittee consists of citizens primarily from the Oak Ridge area, including Knoxville and Roane County residents, who work with community members and advocacy groups to offer advice and recommendations to several federal agencies regarding health concerns in Oak Ridge. ATSDR, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, is responsible for appointing subcommittee members. Contents ©Copyright* The Oak Ridger * ***************************************************************** 11 ADAMS: Items of Interest - Tuesday, June 12, 2001 State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects ADAMS - Items of Interest Recent Released Documents Added - Tuesday, June 12, 2001 These documents and others may be retrieved at the NRC PERR web site ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Item ID: 011620011 Accession Number: ML011560252 Date Added: 6/11/01 9:11:38 AM Title: 05-24-2001 Meeting Minutes of Internal Meeting of the D.C. Cook Nuclear Plant Manual Chapter 0350 Panel Author Affiliation: NRC/RGN-III/DRP Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620290 Accession Number: ML011280086 Date Added: 6/11/01 4:12:23 PM Title: 05/04/01 Copies of testimony to be presented by Chairman Meserve at the 05/08/01 Senate Oversight Hearing Author Affiliation: NRC/OCA Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620195 Accession Number: ML011620038 Date Added: 6/11/01 11:11:26 AM Title: 06/13/01 Meeting Notice: Forthcoming U.S. NRC and U.S. DOE Mgmt Meeting to Discuss Mgmt Issues, Describe Progress in Program and Discuss Mgmt Concerns. Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS/DWM/HLWB Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620194 Accession Number: ML011620034 Date Added: 6/11/01 11:11:21 AM Title: 06/13/01 Meeting Notice: Forthcoming U.S. NRC and U.S. DOE Quality Assurance and Key Technical Issues Mgmt Meeting Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS/DWM/HLWB Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620013 Accession Number: ML011560132 Date Added: 6/11/01 9:11:48 AM Title: 2001 Peach Bottom Assessment Meeting Invitation Author Affiliation: NRC/RGN-I/DRP/PB4 Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620284 Accession Number: ML003771541 Date Added: 6/11/01 4:11:07 PM Title: 475th ACRS Meeting Minutes Author Affiliation: NRC/ACRS Document/Report Number: ACRS-3215 _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620034 Accession Number: ML011520136 Date Added: 6/11/01 9:14:26 AM Title: A Platinum Year OUC 2000 Annual Report Author Affiliation: Orlando Utilities Commission Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620192 Accession Number: ML011160013 Date Added: 6/11/01 11:11:03 AM Title: Affirmative Employment Plan to all NRC Employees Author Affiliation: NRC/SBCR Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620157 Accession Number: ML011370741 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:16:05 AM Title: Memo to Martin Virgilio, Dir., NMSS, from Charles Hughey, TA, NMSS re: Summary of May 9, 2001, Public Meeting with the NEI on Mutual Items of Interest. Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620190 Accession Number: ML011590442 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:22:17 AM Title: NEI Organizational Chart. Author Affiliation: Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620091 Accession Number: ML011520314 Date Added: 6/11/01 9:28:38 AM Title: Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) 10 CFR Part 52 Applications and Licensing Plan. Author Affiliation: Exelon Generation Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620157 Accession Number: ML011370741 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:16:05 AM Title: Memo to Martin Virgilio, Dir., NMSS, from Charles Hughey, TA, NMSS re: Summary of May 9, 2001, Public Meeting with the NEI on Mutual Items of Interest. Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620189 Accession Number: ML011590405 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:22:00 AM Title: NMSS Organizational Chart. Author Affiliation: NRC/NMSS Document/Report Number: _________________________________________________________________ Item ID: 011620190 Accession Number: ML011590442 Date Added: 6/11/01 10:22:17 AM Title: NEI Organizational Chart. Author Affiliation: Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Document/Report Number: ***************************************************************** 12 Fort St. Vrain power plant reborn after checkered past - 2001-06-11 - The Denver Business Journal _Cathy Proctor_ Business Journal Staff Reporter Shortly after dark on May 24, an old steam generator once hitched to Fort St. Vrain's troubled nuclear power plant roared back to full capacity, reborn and repowered by the exhaust of three natural gas-fired turbines. The moment marked the end of the plant's $283 million conversion from nuclear power to natural gas, and came a week after President Bush released his new national energy plan. Ironically, Bush's plan advocates the rebirth of the nuclear power industry. The moment marked another first in Fort St. Vrain's life. In the 1960s and '70s, Fort St. Vrain was the first of its kind to be built in the United States with new technology that used helium gas, rather than water, to cool the nuclear plant. In 1989, Fort St. Vrain was the first, large commercial nuclear plant to be shut down, its radioactive waste buried in a concrete bunker on the site about 35 miles northeast of Denver. And it's the first nuclear plant to be reborn using a new fuel source. Churning out an average of 720 megawatts of power -- enough to supply nearly three-quarters of a million people -- Fort St. Vrain's natural gas and steam generators now put out more than twice the electricity it was capable of producing as a nuclear plant. It is the largest plant Xcel Energy Inc., formerly Public Service Company of Colorado, owns in the state, accounting for 17 percent of the company's Colorado generating units. This summer, as demand soars on the hottest days, Fort St. Vrain is expected to supply 13 percent of Xcel's power needs, according to the company's figures. "It felt good," said Chuck Fuller, Xcel's vice president of regional generation, of the realization that Fort St. Vrain is finally operating at full capacity. Fuller was hired at Fort St. Vrain by Public Service Company in the 1970s to provide information to federal regulators about the nuke plant's operations. Over time, he has managed the plant, shut it down, overseen its repowering and now oversees its operations in conjunction with Xcel's other assets. "I have never had Fort St. Vrain not be a part of my life," Fuller said. Troubled life The plant demanded a lot from its operators. Fuller remembers three Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays -- in a row -- spent at the plant fixing one thing or another. The truth is that Fort St. Vrain, as a nuclear plant, never worked as intended. Over the decade between 1979 and 1989, the plant averaged just 14 percent of capacity. The trouble started early. Expected to open in 1973 at a construction cost (in 1969 dollars) of $230 million, design problems delayed operations by six years. Finally accepted by Public Service in 1979, the plant was swiftly attacked as being too expensive for Colorado electricity consumers. In the fall of 1986, Public Service agreed to refund customers $73 million over two years to settle six lawsuits about the cost of the nuke plant's electricity, and also agreed to remove Fort St. Vrain from the "rate base," meaning the company and its shareholders would assume all financial responsibility for the plant. Over the next five years, the company and its shareholders lost $400 million trying to keep the plant operating, company officials told state regulators in 1991. "The plant was a huge financial failure," said Ken Reif, a former lawyer for Public Service and now head of the state's Office of Consumer Counsel. "It would run at a certain level and the fuel rods would start to shake and the plant would have to shut down. PSCo.'s engineers actually fixed that problem, but as soon as they did that, something else broke that would cost millions of dollars to fix," Reif said. "The plant ended up operationally unacceptable," said Fuller, Fort St. Vrain's former plant manager. "But it wasn't the reactor, it was the support equipment and the weak design." Unique, then doomed Fort St. Vrain was, and is, a one-of-a-kind in the United States. It wasn't supposed to be that way. There were supposed to be six nuclear reactors in the United States that used gas, rather than water, to cool the reactor, Fuller said. The new technology was considered safer than that of other nuclear reactor plants, one that allowed operators time to figure out how to fix things if something went wrong. The six new nuclear plants were to share the high cost -- three times the cost of "normal" nuclear fuel -- of manufacturing a special type of fuel the new technology required. "But," said Fuller, "Three Mile Island happened." On March 28, 1979, a nuclear reactor in the power plant in rural Pennsylvania started to overheat. A small amount of radiation was released into the atmosphere, but a larger meltdown was averted. It was the worst nuclear accident in America's history and one that damned the nation's nuclear industry for more than two decades. Plans to build the five other gas-cooled nuke plants were abandoned. Fort St. Vrain was left alone to shoulder the cost of its fuel. "Even if the plant had operated beautifully, it wouldn't have covered the cost of the fuel," Fuller said. Continued problems through the mid-'80s led Public Service to announce in December 1988 that the plant would be shut down by June 1990. But meanwhile engineers, and the industry, were getting better at operating the plant. In July 1989, Fort St. Vrain set a record for the amount of electricity it generated in a month, according to company records. The very next month, engineers discovered hairline cracks in steam tubes leading to the generator. Fixing the tubes would take months and millions of dollars, Fuller said. It was the last straw. Fuller, then plant manager, remembers asking to see Public Service's CEO immediately. "I'm the guy who went to the CEO and told him it was time to shut it down," Fuller said. "He looked at me and said, `Are you sure?' and I said, `Yes, sir, I'm sure.'" The emotional hit came later, Fuller said, when he gathered the staff to tell them it was over. "Here was an extraordinary group of people who had tried for years to make Fort St. Vrain a success, and had had three pretty successful years. And they were seeing the fruits of that labor going away," Fuller said. Rebirth Given a choice between mothballing the plant for 55 years or decommissioning and decontaminating it immediately, state regulators decided in November 1991 that ratepayers should loan the company $124 million over 12 years, through a special rider on their monthly bills, to move ahead swiftly. "It is this generation that made the decision to build this nuclear plant and it is this generation that received the power generated by the plant," the Public Utilities Commission ruled. "This commission is unwilling to close its eyes to the potential future environmental and financial risks being passed on to future generations for purposes of political expediency. This generation must bear the responsibility for its actions." Yet even as company engineers, working with state and federal regulators, began shutting down and cleaning up the plant -- a feat that netted the company the utility industry's top engineering award in 1996 -- plans were forming to reincarnate Fort St. Vrain as a natural gas-fired plant. Thrown into a 1993 competition with other power plants to supply electricity for Colorado's growing population, Fort St. Vrain -- the natural gas version -- proved to be financially competitive. State regulators approved the addition of two natural gas turbines and the company broke ground on the project in June 1995. Each of the two turbines sent its exhaust into the old steam generator that had once relied on nuclear power. Last month, installation of the third and final natural gas turbine was completed -- under budget and ahead of schedule, according to the company. The plant now uses an average 90 million cubic feet of natural gas a day to operate, enough to heat 90,000 homes on a day with temperatures in the high 40s, according to the company. Every year, the plant is expected to use 22 billion cubic feet of natural gas. And there's "absolutely no" possibility Fort St. Vrain will return to its roots as a nuclear plant, Fuller said. That would require starting all over, and hoping for a different ending. Copyright 2001 American City Business Journals Inc. Click for permission to reprint (PRC# ***************************************************************** 13 Germans agree nuclear exit plan Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | _Kate Connolly in Berlin Tuesday June 12, 2001 The Guardian_ The German chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, and the executives of four major power companies provoked the wrath of pro- and anti-nuclear campaigners yesterday by signing a historic deal to phase out nuclear power. Hatched between the Social Democrat-Green coalition and the power industry a year ago, the agreement outlines the closure of Germany's 19 nuclear plants after they have completed 32 years of fuel production. The first plant is to shut in 2003, the last in 2020. The deal will also halt the highly controversial transport of nuclear fuel and waste. Power utilities have made it plain they are prepared to lobby future governments to reverse the decision. "We did not agree with the phase-out goal of the government," said a spokesman for one of the signatories, E.ON Energie, "it was more of a pragmatic compromise than anything." Some politicians are calling for the plan to be enshrined in the constitution to ensure it is followed through by future governments. Susanne Ochse, Greenpeace Germany's nuclear expert, said the deal amounted to practically nothing in environmental terms. "Even in 2020 the same level of atomic power will be being produced as it was when it was first introduced," she said. Nuclear power accounts for a third of electricity used in Germany. The government has pledged to promote alternative sources, such as wind power. The architect of the accord, Jürgen Trittin, environmental minister and a Green - whose party's central reason for forming a coalition with the SPD was the nuclear phase-out - said the deal provided "the proper contrast" at a time when the USwas pushing to increase its dependence on nuclear fuel. "For the first time in history a specific form of energy production is being brought to an end with the consensus of those who earn their money from it," he said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001 ***************************************************************** 14 NRC Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste to Meet in Rockville, Maryland, on June 19 - 21 Press Release 2001 - 071 - _U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION_ _Office of Public Affairs_ _Telephone: 301/415-8200_ _Washington, DC 20555-001_ _E-mail: opa@nrc.gov_ _Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA_ No. 01-071 June 12, 2001 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) will meet on June 19-21 in Rockville, Maryland, to be briefed by the NRC staff on, among other things, the status of the license application for a proposed spent fuel storage facility at Tooele, Utah, an update on activities at the Sequoyah Fuels facility and a discussion of selected technical issues for the proposed high-level waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The meeting, which will be open to the public, will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency's Two White Flint North building, at 11545 Rockville Pike, beginning at 8:30 a.m. each day. A complete agenda is attached. For additional information or agenda changes, contact Howard J. Larson at 301-415-6805. ACRS meeting notices, transcripts and letters are available on the internet, at http://www.nrc.gov/ACRSACNW/. Persons planning to attend this meeting are encouraged to contact Mr. Larson one or two working days prior to the meeting to determine if there have been any schedule changes. _ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACNW Agenda_ _TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 2001_ 8:30 - 10:15 A.M.: Opening Statement/Planning and Procedures (Open) - The Chairman will open the meeting with brief opening remarks. The Committee will then review items under consideration at this meeting and consider topics proposed for future ACNW meetings. 10:30 - 11:30 A.M.: Overview of Private Fuel Storage (Open) - The Committee will receive an information briefing from the NRC staff on the status of the facility application for a license to store spent fuel in a facility to be constructed outside Tooele, Utah. 1:00 - 2:00 P.M.: Update on the Pre-Closure Approach - NRC (Open) - The Committee members will receive an update and information briefing from NRC on their approach to pre-closure issues at the proposed high level waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. 2:00 - 3:00 P.M.: Public Outreach Activities (Open) - The Committee members will receive an information briefing from NRC on their public outreach activities. 3:00 - 4:00 P.M.: Break and Preparation of Draft ACNW Reports - The cognizant ACNW members will prepare draft reports, as needed, for consideration by the full Committee. 4:00 - 6:30 P.M.: Discussion of Proposed ACNW Reports (Open) - The Committee will discuss proposed ACNW reports on High Level Waste Chemistry; Public Outreach Activity; Yucca Mountain Pre-Closure Approach; Risk-Informed, Performance Based Waste Management and Decommissioning. _WEDNESDAY, JUNE 20, 2001 _ 8:30 - 8:40 A.M.: Opening Remarks by the ACNW Chairman (Open) - The ACNW Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. 8:40 - 10:30 A.M.: Key Technical Issues (KTIs) - Vertical Slice Report (Open) - The Committee members will discuss their progress and the elements of a report on assigned KTIs. 10:45 - 11:45 A.M.: Meeting Reports (Open) - The Committee will hear reports from the members and staff on meetings attended since the 126th ACNW Meeting, including the Symposium on Quantitative Risk Assessment, Public Workshop on NRC's Hearing Process for Proposed Yucca Mountain Project; Waste Package Peer Review Kickoff Meeting, NRC Meeting with Italian Delegation on Nuclear Waste Issues and Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board Meeting with NRC Commissioners. 11:45 - 12:00 Noon: Election of ACNW Officers (Open) - The Committee will nominate and elect members to the positions of Chairman and Vice Chairman for the period July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2002. 1:00 - 3:30 P.M.: DOE's Science and Engineering Report (Open) - The Committee will hear a presentation by DOE on its recently released Science and Engineering Report. 3:30 - 7:00 P.M.: Preparation of ACNW Reports (Open) - The Committee will discuss proposed reports. _THURSDAY, JUNE 21, 2001 _ 8:30 - 8:35 A.M.: Opening Remarks by the ACNW Chairman (Open) - The ACNW Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. 8:35 - 9:30 A.M.: Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Cooperation on Multimedia Environmental Models (Open) - The Committee will receive an information briefing on the recently signed MOU for Interagency Cooperation in Research and Development of Multimedia Environmental Models for Human and Environmental Health Risk Assessment. 9:30 - 11:00 A.M.: Discussion of Proposed ACNW Reports (Open) - The Committee will continue its discussion of proposed ACNW reports. 11:00 - 12:30 P.M.: Overview of Sequoyah Fuels (Open) - The Committee will receive an information briefing from the NRC staff on the current status of activities at the Sequoyah Fuels Corporation Facility. 1:30 - 2:00 P.M.: Miscellaneous (Open) - The Committee will discuss matters related to the conduct of Committee activities and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of information permit. ***************************************************************** 15 Germany signs end to nuclear power BBC News | EUROPE | 12 June, 2001, 07:14 GMT 08:14 UK [Biblis nuclear power station, Germany] The last nuclear power station will close in 2021 Germany has signed a historic agreement to entirely phase out nuclear energy over the next 20 years. Juergen Trittin came under fire from some environmentalists Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and representatives of the nuclear industry signed the deal which gives each of Germany's 19 nuclear power plants a 32-year life span. This means the first plant is set to close in 2003, while the newest plant will keep running until 2021. Germany is home to a strong Green and anti-nuclear lobby and the pledge to negotiate an end to nuclear energy was a keystone of the coalition agreement between Mr Schroeder's Social Democrats and the Greens. _Green 'sell-out'_ "It is a historic moment," Environment Minister Juergen Trittin told the Tagespiegel newspaper. "Overseas in particular it is considered as such, as Germany is committing itself to a complete ecological programme that contrasts with those in other countries," he added. But Mr Trittin, himself from the Green party, has come under fire from a section of the environmentalists' lobby which believes he has sold out in subscribing to the deal. Protesters held up trains carrying nuclear waste earlier this year They demand a more immediate end to the use of nuclear energy. He has been particularly criticised for backing down from his initial demand that the transport of nuclear waste in Germany be banned at the beginning of 2000. Now July 2005 is the deadline for waste transports to stop leaving Germany but there is still no date for when transports will no longer be allowed into the country. Environmentalists chained themselves to train tracks earlier this year in protest at trains carrying nuclear waste through Germany. _Security_ The nuclear industry, which produces one-third of Germany's energy, says the deal provides it with security in face of ever-decreasing acceptance of nuclear energy by the German public. "The federal government has guaranteed the uninterrupted operation and the disposal of our power stations in the long term. For the industry this means the end of large, incalculable economic risks," Gert Maichel of RWE Power AG told the Welt am Sonntag newspaper. The signing of the deal closes a chapter in Mr Schroeder's policy which frequently threatened the stability of the coalition. The agreement will now be debated by the German government and is expected to come into force by the end of the year. ***************************************************************** 16 German Nuclear Shutdown Protested June 11 8:34 AM ET_ *By GEIR MOULSON, Associated Press Writer * BERLIN (AP) - Supporters and opponents of nuclear power on Monday protested a deal being signed by the German government and utilities to shut down the country's 19 nuclear power plants. Hailed by its backers as a historic shift of energy policy in Europe's biggest economy, the deal could take decades to carry out. Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and executives of four power companies were to sign the deal in Berlin later Monday. The government and utilities approved the nuclear phaseout a year ago, but needed time to negotiate details of the legislation to be submitted to parliament. The last of the power companies, E.On, approved the deal Sunday. Anti-nuclear activists oppose the deal, which sets no fixed date for the last plant to close, because they want a quicker shut down. Pro-nuclear politicians do no want Germany to abandon nuclear power and warn that it could impede efforts to curb emissions of greenhouse gases in line with the international pact signed in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, by forcing Germany to switch to other fuels, such as oil. Nuclear plants provide almost a third of German electricity. The government has said it plans to promote other energy sources, including wind power. The accord says the nuclear plants should have a standard life span of 32 years, which would see Germany's newest nuclear plant shutting down in 2021. The first of the plants, at Stade in northern Germany, is to close in 2003. However, the accord stipulates that the transport of nuclear fuel and waste - which has attracted massive protests from Germany's anti-nuclear lobby - should end in mid-2005. The environmental group Greenpeace placed containers filled with contaminated soil from reprocessing plants in France and England outside the headquarters of the Social Democrats and Greens, the two parties in Germany's governing coalition. ``The government pretends it has resolved the end of nuclear energy once and for all,'' said the organization's energy expert, Susanne Ochse. ``Anyone who knows the deal knows that is complete nonsense.'' Utilities, in turn, have made plain that they would look to future governments to stop the phaseout. E.On chairman Ulrich Hartmann insisted that ``nothing in life is irreversible.'' ``I'm sure that nuclear energy will still play an important role in the future,'' he said in an interview with the daily Die Welt. Copyright © 2001 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 17 Malaysia's Mahathir says don't trust nuclear power June 12, 6:51 PM_ KUALA LUMPUR, June 12 (Reuters) - Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said on Tuesday he did not trust nuclear power as scientists knew too little about how to control its destructive force. "Nuclear power is like a malevolent genie which once released from the bottle, cannot be tamed and put back in again," Mahathir said on the sidelines of an Asian oil and gas conference in the Malaysian capital. He cited nuclear disasters like Chernobyl, in the Ukraine, where the harmful effects were still manifest 15 years after the nuclear reactor explosion. "I frankly don't trust nuclear power," he said. "I think our knowledge of its use and nuclear engineering expertise is still very primitive. We hear of too many accidents." Malaysia has no nuclear power plants, relying on oil, natural gas and water for its energy needs. Mahathir, speaking on the need for environmentally friendly fuel sources in the future, said he would opt anytime for hydro power which he described as "most viable" and "cheapest". The prime minister has approved the building of the giant Bakun hydroelectric dam in Sarawak state on the island of Borneo, drawing fire from green groups opposed to its destruction of tropical rain forest and relocation of native tribes. "I am not fanatic about the environment but I do care about it," Mahathir said. Copyright © 2001 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 Ongoing problems bedevil power plant The Taipei Times Online: 2001-06-11 Although construction has resumed on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, many contractors have annulled their contracts, and the manpower remaining is insufficient to make up for past delays. PHOTO: GEORGE TSORNG, TAIPEI TIMES TROUBLE AHEAD: Nuclear energy experts said that resumption of construction at the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, already months behind schedule, might be hampered by environmental problems _By Chiu Yu-Tzu_ STAFF REPORTER Although the Legislative Yuan last week allocated NT$3.17 billion to Taiwan Power Co (Taipower, ¥x¹q) to pay contractors affected by the suspension of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant (®Ö¥|¼t) project, that doesn't ensure construction will resume smoothly. Legislators last week also passed a resolution asking the Control Yuan to investigate whether Premier Chang Chun-hsiung (±i«T¶¯), Minister of Economic Affairs Lin Hsin-yi (ªL«H¸q) and other officials are responsible for financial losses resulting from the project's delay. In addition, legislators have demanded quarterly reports on the progress of the plant's construction from Taipower. Officially, the project was suspended for three and half months while the Legislative and Executive Yuans wrangled over the fate of the project. Managers working at the site, however, told the media last week that it may take longer before construction work is back in full gear. Specialists from the Atomic Energy Council, who are overseeing construction, inspected the site last week. Lin Chu-wan (ªL©~¸U), Taipower's site manager in Kungliao, said that the completion date would be put back about 10 months, meaning the plant would only start supplying electricity close to the end of 2005. According to Lin, all construction had been suspended prior to the Cabinet's decision to restart work on Feb. 14. After the announcement, Taipower formally notified all its contractors to return to the job. As a result of political differences, however, only contractors for the reactor and control buildings, turbine building, mechanical equipment installation and piping installation expressed a willingness to continue. Taipower soon after awarded bids for several construction projects, including the intake and pump house, radioactive waste building, circulating water discharge tunnel, spent fuel building and hot machine shop. Meanwhile, Taipower has been eagerly looking for new contractors for the breakwater intake structure, reservoir and simulator building. "The effect of the construction packages having to be re-awarded has resulted in an adverse situation, which will cause longer delays than the three and a half month suspension period," a Taipower official said during a public presentation last week in Kungliao. _More challenges _More challenges still exist. Council experts said last week that resumption of construction may be hampered by unresolved environmental problems, existing both inside and outside the construction site. Since mid-February, council officials have been looking into all aspects related to resuming construction, including environmental safety. Council Vice Chairman Ouyang Min-shen (¼Ú¶§±Ó²±) said their is no problem with safety at the site. Experts from the Taiwan Construction Research Institute (¥xÆWÀç«Ø¬ã¨s°|), National Central University (¤¤¥¡¤j¾Ç) and Taiwan National Taiwan University of Science and Technology (¥xÆW¬ì§Þ¤j¾Ç) have also examined the incomplete construction. They said that rust on the surface of reinforced bars did not pose a safety threat. Environmentalists have been inquiring about engineering safety related issues since the Cabinet announced the resumption of work. To eliminate such concerns, Ouyang said that information pertaining to the recent safety examination would be made available to the public via the Internet. Ouyang, who is also in charge of a subordinate committee supervising the site's environmental impact, said that he was focusing on how to make the plant a component of the environment in Kungliao. After inspecting the 480-hectare construction site last week, committee members said that unresolved environmental problems would make the resumption more difficult. Activists have said that available artifacts show that the site could be related to Taiwan's indigenous Katagalan culture (³Í¹F®æÄõ¤å¤Æ). Committee members told Taipower that it was unwise to alter the condition of the historical site. Taipower officials, however, argued that scholars from National Taiwan University had conducted a preliminary investigation and concluded that the site should not be protected. Committee member Yeh Hung-An (¸­§»¦w), director of the Technical Department of the Cabinet's Public Construction Commission (¤½¦@¤uµ{©e­û·|), said that clear signs were not even posted around the site. "Taipower should have adopted ecologically friendly methods to carry out the construction," Yeh said. In addition, committee members were disappointed with the lack of management around the reservoir, where construction is halted until new contractors are hired. Committee members warned that exposed land could collapse at any time and said thick vegetation needed to be planted. Lin, Taipower's site manager in Kungliao, admitted that recent heavy rains had damaged the unprotected land. "We will carry out a geological investigation and change the design, and we hope to find a new contractor very soon," Lin said. _Problems outside the plant _Outside the plant, environmental deterioration is visible. Officials of the Tourism Bureau under the Ministry of Transportation and Communications said they had received complaints from tourists, who reported that the beach at Yenliao Bay (ÆQ¼dÆW) near the site had been damaged. Jason Chung (ÄÁºÖªQ), director of the Northeast Coast National Scenic Area Administration, said that the beach had been losing sand. Fishermen have also complained about damage to the marine environment. To express their anger, Kungliao fisherman last Monday blockaded the shipment of two generators to the plant's site. They said pollution from construction had spread to waters outside a specially designated zone. Chao Kuo-tung (»¯°ê´É), Kungliao township chief, said that Taipower should have listened to complaints from fishermen. Taipower officials interpreted the fishermen's actions as a threat, believing they planned to ask for more compensation, and suggested that the fishermen consider using the Public Nuisance Disputes Mediation Act (¤½®`ªÈ¯É³B²zªk) to achieve their goal. "But we don't think that construction of the plant has had any environmental impact on waters surrounding the plant," Tu Yueh-yuan (§ù®®¤¸), the director of Taipower's environmental protection department (¥x¹qÀô«O³B), told the *Taipei Times*. Tu said that at times residents have unfairly blamed Taipower for local environmental problems. "For example, activists said that the pollution of Shihting Creek (¥ÛÞä·Ë) could be attributed to the construction of the plant. But several pig farms along the creek are actually the main sources of the pollution," Tu said. Lee Sun-kuan (§õ¤T©[), a recently appointed vice president of Taipower, said that the company was willing to discuss the compensation issue with protesting fishermen. Since April, the Kungliao Fishermen's Association has been dominated by a new local faction, which prefers more compensation to enhance local infrastructure. The anti-nuclear faction of the group vehemently opposes the plant. The dominant faction of the association has considered taking the NT$210 million in compensation awarded by Keelung District Court (°ò¶©¦a¤èªk°|). The money, paid by Taipower for the fishermen's loss of fishing rights within a 4.4-hectare designated zone, has been held by the court for 26 months. This story has been viewed 342 times. URL=[http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2001/06/11/story/0000089520] Copyright © 1999-2001 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 19 CDU, CSU Would Scrap Nuclear Phaseout F.A.Z. - English Version13. Jun. 2001 By Manfred Schäfers BERLIN. Even before the ink dried on Monday on the "nuclear consensus," a pact to phase out nuclear power agreed between the German government and the energy industry, the main opposition parties said they would scrap it if they won the next election. Friedrich Merz, the Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union parliamentary leader, said the government was abandoning self-sufficiency in energy provision without offering an alternative. The pact would cost all Germans dearly, he said, adding that it would have lasting, negative consequences for the country. Representatives from the energy industry also warned against interpreting the agreement as an irreversible consensus. Environmentalists, for their part, criticized the residual periods agreed between the government and the utilities. According to the deal, which was signed into law in the federal Chancellery on Monday evening, the last nuclear power station in Germany could still be connected to the national grid 20 years from now. The German Federation for the Environment and Nature Conservation, International Doctors for the Prevention of Nuclear War and the Robin Wood group protested the signing outside the Chancellery. Representatives of the governing Social Democratic Party (SPD) and Alliance 90/The Greens defended the agreement, with the deputy chairman of the SPD parliamentary group, Michael Müller, speaking of a new era in energy policy. "For the first time in a major industrial nation with a high proportion of nuclear energy, the chapter on nuclear power is to be closed," he said. Claudia Roth, the Greens' cochairwoman, said the pact was a major success for her party. She said it would be impossible to do more within the coalition or internationally. But Mr. Merz said the agreement would leave Germany, Europe's biggest economy, without an adequate, long-term source of energy. He pointed out that the deal was not irreversible, and that a CDU/CSU-led government would scrap it. The governing coalition wants to pension off nuclear power prematurely, like an long-reliable but increasingly troublesome worker. Wrangling over the details of the end to nuclear power has been going on for a long time, but the deal that was finally reached is one that Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and the board chairmen of the operating companies can live with. Under it, the residual operating periods for nuclear power stations will be restricted; the number of Castor transports of spent nuclear fuel rods are to be reduced; nuclear waste reprocessing abroad will be banned from mid-2005, and the development of the Gorleben salt mine as a final storage depot will be discontinued for a few years. The contents of the agreement will be inserted as an amendment to the Atomic Energy Act to prohibit the building of new reactors. Upon its signing, the agreement brought to an end a negotiating marathon on the subject of nuclear energy that had lasted more than 10 years. When the CDU/CSU coalition was in power, the objective was wider. Negotiations at that time concerned the whole range of possible energy sources. One idea under consideration was whether the government and industry should retain the option of building a new type of reactor. Both the years and the protagonists moved on, except for one -- Mr. Schröder. During the last legislative period, Mr. Schröder, who was then still the premier of Lower Saxony and the negotiator for the SPD, voted to keep open the option of building new nuclear power plants sometime in the future. Within the SPD, however, he failed to gain support for his views. The SPD/Green coalition government took entirely different principles on board. The two parties' coalition agreement reads that "the comprehensive and irreversible phase-out of nuclear power is to be settled by the end of this legislative period." The Greens, after all, were born of the anti-nuclear movement. The coalition never sought to incorporate the conservative Union parties or the Free Democrats, saying the chances for agreement were too small. Instead, the government put pressure on the utilities. At the talks, the coalition was represented by Environment Minister Jürgen Trittin, who ham-handedly tried to force a quick end to reprocessing, and the independent Economics Minister Werner Müller, once a leading manager at two utility companies, RWE and Veba, and a longtime adviser to Mr. Schröder on energy issues. Both the coalition and the energy industry had something to lose, so Mr. Schröder reached agreement on the overall figures with Germany's four big producers last year. All nuclear power plants together would be permitted to generate 2,623 terawatts of electricity. In terms of time, that granted each plant 32 years of active service. It was a deal that made concessions to both sides. The coalition could boast that the utilities had signed on to limits on nuclear power production. This also saved the government from lawsuits arising from subsequent terminations of originally unlimited operation licenses. In return, the utilities got the government's assurance that it would refrain from otherwise interfering in operations, as some federal states had already done by enacting "phaseout-oriented legislation." The coalition subsidizes alternative energy sources such as solar, wind, and biogas energy, supports cogeneration plants, which are more efficient than normal power plants, using the heat they create while producing electricity. In all, the SPD_Green coalition hopes to double the proportion of energy production from renewable sources to 10 percent of total production by 2010. That will hardly suffice to fill the resultant shortfall in energy production, however. Recently, Germany's 19 nuclear plants were producing a third of the country's electricity. Meanwhile, as Germans prepare to forsake nuclear power, the international discussion is heading in an entirely different direction. The United States government is considering allowing new nuclear plants, after having built none for decades. And in Finland, construction has already begun.Jun. 11, 2001 © Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 2000 ***************************************************************** 20 A Chronology of Nuclear Energy in Germany F.A.Z. - English Version13. Jun. 2001 Jun. 13, 2001 January 1960: Legislation regulating the peaceful use of atomic energy in Germany comes into force. June 17, 1961: The first nuclear energy is fed into the national grid from the Kahl test reactor near Frankfurt. May 1966: East Germany's first nuclear power plant goes on line at Rheinsberg in Brandenburg. Oct. 29, 1968: The first commercial nuclear power plant in West Germany, the Obrigheim light water reactor, goes on line . 1973: During the world oil crisis, supporters of nuclear power press for its use to be extended. Feb. 22, 1977: The former Gorleben salt mine is chosen as an end storage site for radioactive waste. To date, it has only been used for interim storage. March 28, 1979: The first major nuclear accident happens in the U.S. city of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. In Germany, local anti-nuclear power groups begin to organize into a movement opposed to the use of nuclear energy. Attacks on power lines follow. April 26, 1986: The Chernobyl nuclear disaster occurs. Germany's Social Democratic Party (SPD) adopts a policy for putting an end to the use of nuclear power. Sept. 9, 1988: The Federal Administrative Court rescinds provisional permission for a nuclear power plant at Mülheim Kärlich in Rhineland-Palatinate. After 10 years of legal dispute, the ruling is upheld. 1990: Russian-built nuclear power plants in eastern Germany are taken off line for safety reasons. Nuclear power accounted for around 10 percent of former East Germany's energy requirements. October 1998: The Social Democrats and Alliance 90_The Greens sign a coalition agreement containing a commitment to phase out the use of nuclear power in Germany. Jan. 13, 1999: The SPD-Green coalition agrees to outlines for new nuclear energy legislation. Draft legislation calls for nuclear power use to be "ended safely and in an orderly manner," and the recycling of nuclear waste is to be banned from Jan. 1, 2000. French and British companies with whom the German government has recycling contracts threaten to sue for damages. June 19, 1999: The Ministry of Economics releases the outline of an agreement to phase out the use of nuclear energy. In the outline negotiated by Economics Minister Werner Müller and energy officials, the utility companies agree to respect the government decision to phase out nuclear power. All nuclear reactors are to be switched off after an operating life of 35 years. June 22, 1999: The power companies question the 35-year operating limit, saying the deadline should be extended to 42 years to account for time during which the factories do not run at full capacity. July 7 1999: The Greens say they are only prepared to support an operational life span of 25 years at the most. Dec. 6, 1999: Environment Minister Jürgen Trittin offers the power industry a "pool solution" allowing energy companies to continue to operate more modern reactors for a negotiable fixed term if they take other plants offline earlier. Dec. 14, 1999: The Greens agree to accept an operating life span of a maximum of 30 years. Jan. 19, 2000: The SPD-Green coalition adopts the Greens' position. Jan. 27, 2000: The power industry says it is ready to reach an agreement and proposes a solution with no fixed operating periods. June 14, 2000: At talks hosted by Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, the government and energy bosses reach a consensus on nuclear phaseout. Each nuclear plant will be allowed to produce a fixed amount of energy with no specific date named for switching off the last plant. (F.A.Z. Archive) Jun. 11, 2001 © Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 2000 ***************************************************************** 21 EUROTECH'S Radiation-Resistant EKOR Applied in New Role of Radioactive Dust Suppression at Chernobyl Yahoo - June 11, 9:32 am Eastern Time_ Press Release WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 11, 2001--EUROTECH, Ltd., (AMEX: EUO- news), announced today that new EKOR applications were successfully applied at the site of Chernobyl's reactor accident to address additional critical problems resulting from the nuclear reactor failure - radioactive dust suppression and decontamination of the surfaces. The successful encapsulation of a fuel-containing mass with EKOR under the failed Reactor No. 4 inside the sarcophagus in March 2000 encouraged Chernobyl's Shelter Management to move forward with these additional field application developments. The new applications of EKOR at Chernobyl were made to the radioactive dust-covered surface areas in a main pumping room inside the sarcophagus. These surface applications were designed to fix radioactive dust in place, preventing its dispersion, as well as, enable decontamination of the surface area. Until the tons of scattered fuel and contaminated debris can be removed from the sarcophagus, an EKOR protective blanket can preclude radioactive dust from being released to the environment and also increase the safety of the planned construction works at the Shelter. EKOR can also enhance the safe removal of the debris, its transportation and final disposal. The Shelter managers stated that before EKOR was available, attempts to use conventional materials in the role of dust suppression only resulted in their rapid decomposition in the radiation environment. Each of the EKOR applications has convincingly demonstrated that EKOR has all of the features necessary for making the Shelter into a safer environment. Under a 1995 agreement with Chernobyl's Shelter Management, Eurotech supplied radiation-resistant EKOR material to the Shelter for the development of EKOR applications to remedy radioactive contamination problems from Reactor No. 4 that have been unresolved since the 1986 accident. Under this agreement the Shelter Team applied the first EKOR in March 2000, to encapsulate a molten fuel pile inside of the sarcophagus. Since that application fifteen months ago, EKOR has demonstrated its ability to perform as designed at the world's most challenging nuclear waste site. EKOR was lab-tested to maintain its encapsulating properties for the equivalent over 1000 years in the present corrosive radiation environment being demonstrated at Chernobyl. In their recent report, Chernobyl's Shelter Management stated that EKOR's performance remains unchanged after an accumulated radiation dose of greater than 10.5 megarads gamma, neutron exposure, confirming the tests of radiation, adhesion, and resistance to other aggressive mediums. The broadened use of EKOR demonstrating its effectiveness at Chernobyl, and Ukraine's certification of EKOR for wider application, make the radiation-resistant EKOR a feasible solution for many containment challenges at the accident site. Over the last year, Eurotech, established commercial production of EKOR in North America and tested EKOR to US standards for use on Department of Energy nuclear sites. EKOR is now available to US and international nuclear waste managers as a long-term solution to difficult containment, transportation, storage and disposal problems. For photographs of EKOR applications inside Chernobyl's sarcophagus and additional information about Eurotech, visit the Company website www.eurotechltd.com. Certain information and statements included in this release constitute ``forward-looking statements'' within the meaning of the Federal Privates Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance, or achievements of the company to be materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements. *Contact:* EUROTECH, Ltd. DawnVanZant, ECON Investor Relations, Inc., 800/665-0411 ***************************************************************** 22 Bulgaria to Renovate Nuclear Plants [Xinhua News Agency] Story Filed: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 2:03 AM EST SOFIA, Jun 11, 2001 (Xinhua via COMTEX) -- Bulgaria is going to renovate two units of Kozlodoui Nuclear Power Plant on Tuesday, the State Energy and Energy Resources Agency said in a news release Monday. The program will cost 378 million U.S. dollars, and will be implemented with the assistance of world leaders in the nuclear energy sector, such as Westinghouse, Framatome, Siemens and Atomstroyexport, said an agency spokesperson. Loans for the initial stage are being provided by Ex-Im Bank of the United States and the European Union's Euroatom. The renovation of the two nuclear reactors, scheduled to occur between the years 2001-2005, will improve their safety and help them meet international standards of operation, while preserving their competitiveness relative to the cost of generating energy, said the agency. Copyright 2001 XINHUA NEWS AGENCY ***************************************************************** 23 AGs Warn Feds: Radioactive Waste Cleanup Delays Will Be Costly June 12, 1:09 pm Eastern Time_ Press Release OLYMPIA, Wash.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 12, 2001--The U.S. Department of Energy's proposed budget to clean up the nation's nuclear waste is inadequate and will unnecessarily cost taxpayers billions of dollars, Washington Attorney General Christine Gregoire warned Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham in a letter sent today. ``The federal government needs to fulfill its cleanup commitments just like anyone else,'' Gregoire said of the letter. ``Hanford is one of the worst waste sites in the nation and Energy should set an example for responsibly cleaning up its mess.'' The Hanford Nuclear Reservation holds 60 percent of the country's most highly radioactive waste in tanks that are decades past their expected lifespan. At least one million gallons of the waste have already leaked into the ground. ``Each day that we delay cleaning up contamination and decommissioning obsolete and dangerous contaminated facilities costs millions of dollars because it is just another day that DOE must continue to maintain the enormous `mortgage' cost of keeping its facilities and the nuclear materials in them in a safe, secure and stable condition,'' the letter from Gregoire and nine other attorneys general said. Additionally, delays will likely result in expensive court battles as states take legal action to force DOE to comply with existing agreements on cleanup deadlines. DOE is obligated to begin construction of a nuclear waste glassification plant at Hanford this summer and to begin the actual process of turning the liquid waste into more easily storable glass by the end of 2007. Gregoire has instructed attorneys in her office to begin preparation for legal action against DOE if it does not demonstrate the capacity to meet those deadlines. ``The Department not only has the responsibility to be a good steward of tax dollars, it also has the obligation to comply with the law,'' the AGs wrote. ``Happily, these interests coincide in this case, because keeping cleanups on track ... can save billions of dollars that would otherwise be wasted keeping the lights on in surplus, contaminated facilities.'' The DOE has requested a reduction of approximately $58 million in its 2002 budget for nuclear cleanup at Hanford compared with this year's figures. To meet its obligations at the Hanford site, the department would need an increase of several hundred million dollars next year. Today's letter to the Energy Secretary was signed by the attorneys general of Washington, Colorado, California, Idaho, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Ohio and Oregon. In the letter to Secretary Abraham, the AGs expressed skepticism that management reform or new technologies could make up for the substantial budget cuts he has requested. The attorneys general also provided Abraham with recommendations on increasing efficiency at DOE cleanup sites and pledged to work with him to streamline management at the sites. *Contact:* AG Public Affairs Cheryl Reid, 360/586-4802 or Senior Assistant Attorney General David Mears, 360/586-6743 ***************************************************************** 24 Northwestern N.C. sees high radon in well water Posted at 11:15 p.m. EDT Monday, June 11, 2001 _*Review by federal agency reveals levels in region to be among highest found across nation*_ _By BRUCE HENDERSON _ Wells in North Carolina's northwestern corner have some of the nation's highest levels of radon, a radioactive gas that is the second-leading cause of lung cancer, the U.S. Geological Survey said Monday. As he, Alleghany and Watauga counties were among those with high readings in the New River watershed of North Carolina and Virginia. But radon is much more dangerous in air than in water, a state official said. "To find that kind of level, it's not really that high compared to other regions," said Felix Fong of the N.C. Division of Radiation Protection. Nearly 90 percent of the 30 wells tested had radon levels above a proposed drinking-water standard the federal government has proposed. A Virginia well was 100 times higher. One-third of the wells had radon concentrations that were nearly 10 times as high as the national average. That was news to Danny Staley, the health director for all three N.C. counties. "It does cause concern when things like that pop up," he said. "It would have been nice to know." The counties have no history of high radon levels in well water, Staley said, and no resources to move people off contaminated water supplies. Like state agencies, Staley's department concentrates on radon in air, not water. Radon is associated with igneous and metamorphic rock that contains uranium, which releases the gas as it decays. The gas can waft from basements into houses. It can also be released from water faucets or showers. In a N.C. study, two-thirds of 400 wells had levels above the proposed federal drinking-water standard, Fong said. Want to know more? See www.epa.gov/iaq/radonor www.epa.gov/ogwdw000/ radon/fact.html. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Beryllium report attacked in court Rocky Mountain News: Local Ex-Rocky Flats workers say firm's medical director misrepresented the cause of chronic disease in 1983 By Ann Imse, News Staff Writer The medical director of the nation's only beryllium producer misrepresented in a scientific publication the cause of chronic beryllium disease suffered by 11 neighbors of a company factory, according to evidence presented in Jefferson County District Court on Monday. Former Rocky Flats workers are suing Brush Wellman Inc. of Cleveland, Ohio, claiming it conspired with the government to hide the dangers of beryllium used in manufacturing nuclear weapons. On Monday, their attorneys presented a scientific publication authored in 1983 by Dr. Otto Preuss, medical director of Brush Wellman. Preuss reported that all neighbors of the company factory in Lorain, Ohio, who became ill had been in contact with the beryllium-contaminated clothing of workers. In fact, only one of the 11 sick neighbors had washed clothing, according to testimony from Merril Eisenbud, the industrial hygienist who conducted the study 50 years ago. Testimony from Eisenbud read to the jury said he calculated the neighbors had been exposed by air to only about 0.1 to 1 microgram per cubic meter of air, substantially less than the 2 micrograms still set as the maximum safe exposure today. Eisenbud also testified that he and a colleague created the 2-microgram standard merely to help the designer of a new beryllium machine shop in 1949. Although they had given it weeks of thought, the two men settled on 2 micrograms instead of 5 micrograms during a taxi ride to the machine-shop site on Long Island. "I never thought I'd be defending it 50 years later," said Eisenbud. Asked if there was an "epidemiological basis" for the 2-microgram standard, Eisenbud, an engineer by training, answered, "No." About 50 people are suing Brush Wellman. The hearing is focusing on four workers to decide whether Brush Wellman is liable before the court goes into the details of the other workers' exposure and illness. Attorneys for Brush Wellman won admissions from Eisenbud that in the early 1980s, he did think the 2-microgram standard protected workers because the number of cases had dropped off dramatically. But Eisenbud said he then reviewed the case registry and found too many victims in whom the exposure could have been less, including about a dozen secretaries. Then the number of cases jumped again, perhaps due to more sophisticated diagnosis, he said. Eisenbud also testified that Brush Wellman executives were very cooperative in researching the effect of beryllium exposure during his original studies in the 1940s. Plaintiffs presented an internal Brush Wellman memo from 1981 stating that more industries would use beryllium if not for its toxicity. The memo from R.A. Foos goes on to say the company had been fighting for three to five years to fend off a "gross, detrimental and unreasonable standard" for exposure. That proposal from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration was 0.1 micrograms per cubic meter. The workers' attorneys provided additional evidence that Defense and Energy department officials shut down that OSHA attempt. They presented a Brush Wellman letter detailing a deal in which "DOE and DOD would exert their best efforts to have OSHA reconsider its proposed unrealistic beryllium standard." Brush Wellman agreed not to quit the business abruptly and leave Rocky Flats without a critical ingredient for nuclear weapons. June 12, 2001 2001 © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 2 Meetings scheduled for exposed workers Meetings scheduled for exposed workers Daily Southtown: Serving Chicago area's Southland June 12, 2001*_ _By Rex Robinson__* Staff writer*_ Two meetings to explain how former government workers and relatives of people who worked in atomic weapons manufacturing and research during the Cold War can be compensated for radiation-related illnesses are scheduled for July. The meetings will be held by the U.S. Department of Labor July 18-19 at the Willowbrook Holiday Inn, 7800 Kingery Highway, Hinsdale. Both meetings will begin at 7 p.m. Previous meetings for workers and their families affected by uranium, beryllium and silica contamination at the plants were hosted by the U.S. Department of Energy. But it is the Department of Labor that will run the compensation program, said Chris Close, a spokesman for U.S. Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Hinsdale). "These meetings will be the first chance for people to talk to someone from the Department of Labor, someone familiar with the program," Close said. Under a law signed in December, people doing DOE work who were exposed to dangerous materials and developed related illnesses would be given a payment $150,000 and free medical care for the rest of their lives. Family members of workers who have died from work-related illnesses also are eligible for the $150,000. Thousands who worked with beryllium at the Argonne National Laboratory near Lemont in the 1940s could be eligible for the benefits. Other affected sites include the Blockson/Olin plant south of Joliet and the William E. Pratt Co., which was at Cass and Henderson streets in Joliet. It is still unclear how soon former workers or their surviving family members will receive the payment. The meetings next month are one step before the department sets its final compensation regulations, Close said. The draft regulations for the compensation plan were released on May 25. Congress has 90 days from that date to adopt the final regulations, he said. "The Congressional mandate was to get this going as soon as possible," he said. The purpose of the July meetings is not to determine whether someone is eligible for compensation, but to guide people through the application process. Former workers or their surviving family members with questions about the program or who want a claim form can call (866) 888-3322. A Web site will be set up soon to handle claims through the Internet, Close said. For now, updated information is available at the U.S. Department of Labor Web site, www.dol.gov. While claims can be filed immediately, processing is not scheduled to begin until July 31. *Rex Robinson may be reached at rrobinson@dailysouthtown.com or (708) 633-5964.* ***************************************************************** 3 Woman speaks out over Maralinga nuclear test claims ABC News - A Perth woman says she was at a meeting in which a former member of the British Air Force claimed people with disabilities were taken to Maralinga during nuclear tests in the 1950s. The former director of the State Government's Disability Services, Robert Jackson, has revealed one of his employees made the allegation a decade ago. Dr Jackson, a researcher at Perth's Edith Cowan University, is attempting to locate the former employee to substantiate the claims. A women, who wishes to remain anonymous, says she was at a training session for people with disabilities when the allegations were made by Allen Robinson, who she understood was an engineer in the British Air Force, not a pilot as previously reported. "Well his comments were that he was on the plane that took people out, took people who had disabilities out on to the site at Maralinga...it happened a long time ago so I can't remember the actual reaction of people, but it was...shock I guess, disbelief that people would be doing that," she said. © 1999 Australian Broadcasting Corporation ***************************************************************** 4 Claims disabled people used in Maralinga nuclear tests ABC News - A claim that disabled people were used as guinea pigs at the Maralinga nuclear tests in Australia in the 1950s has resurfaced, despite being rejected by a royal commission in the mid 1980s. A leading Australian researcher says a pilot told him he had flown a group of disabled people to Maralinga from Britain during the tests. Dr Robert Jackson is the director of the Centre for Disability Research and Development at Edith Cowan University in Perth. In the mid 1980s, about the time of the royal commission, he was told about the disabled people by a social support worker who claimed he had been employed as a pilot to fly the group to Maralinga from the UK. Dr Jackson found the man credible, but did not take the matter further because of the royal commission's findings. He has lost contact with the man and does not remember his name. But he says if anyone has information, they should come forward. "If, it isn't there and it's not the case that's fine, but if it is there, then I think we should know about it as a country," he said. © 1999 Australian Broadcasting Corporation ***************************************************************** 5 Settlement of whistle-blower lawsuit closer The Paducah Sun Paducah, Kentucky Tuesday, June 12, 2001 *Justice lawyers have been huddling with Lockheed-Martin officials about an out-of-court settlement.* By _Bill Bartleman_ bbartleman@paducahsun.com--*270.575.8650* Attorneys for three workers at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant and the U.S. Department of Justice are discussing how much Lockheed-Martin would have to pay to settle a whistle-blower suit that accuses Lockheed of filing false reports that earned it millions of dollars in operating bonuses. Joe Egan, the Washington attorney who represents the employees, said a settlement figure is being discussed as Justice attorneys talk with Lockheed-Martin about an out-of-court settlement. Most of the settlement would go back to the federal government, but up to 25 percent would go to those who filed the suit. Egan would not reveal a possible settlement figure, but said the potential cost for Lockheed is "in the hundreds of millions of dollars" if the case goes to court and the plaintiffs win. Lockheed-Martin, formerly Martin Marietta, operated the plant from the early 1980s until the early 1990s under contract with the U.S. Department of Energy, which owns the plant. Lockheed also operated it for about four years for the United States Enrichment Corp., which now operates the plant under lease from DOE. The suit claims Lockheed-Martin filed false and misleading reports about environmental conditions that earned the company multi-million-dollar performances bonuses paid by DOE. The potential for an out-of-court settlement is one reason government attorneys filed a motion Monday asking U.S. District Court Judge Joseph McKinley Jr. for a 60-day extension of the government's time to decide whether to join the litigation as a plaintiff. The deadline extension request was filed by Bill Campbell, assistant U.S. attorney for the Western District of Kentucky. Egan and Lockheed attorneys agreed to the extension, pushing it from Wednesday to Aug. 13, according to the motion. The deadline has been extended five times since the suit was filed in June 1999. A recommended course of action has been forwarded to Washington, but Campbell is not saying what it was. Other sources have said Campbell and the investigators found sufficient evidence to warrant government intervention. The motion requesting the extension also said DOE attorneys and top Justice officials need more time to review the findings and recommendations. "We are consenting to a 60-day extension of time that the Justice Department has requested ... because they have advanced good rationale to us," Egan said. "In a case like this, it is better to proceed with the victimized government agency thoroughly appraised of what is going on." Egan thinks something will be decided by August. The suit was filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council; Thomas Cochran, nuclear program director for the the council, and three plant workers — Charles Deuschele, Garland Jenkins and Ronald Fowler. Egan said the plaintiffs would receive 15 to 25 percent of any amount Lockheed-Martin pays back to the government, but said "no one is going to get rich" if there is a settlement. "They (the plant workers) have agreed to give a large portion of any recovered money they may receive to the Natural Resources Defense Council," Egan said, adding that the environmental watchdog group would use its proceeds for "arms control initiatives." He said none of the money would be used to fund additional lawsuits against DOE. The fact that negotiations are continuing with Lockheed-Martin is considered by some, including Egan, to be significant. "We always try working with potential defendants to settle a case short of litigation," Campbell said. "In this case, we all have an interest in seeing if the litigation can be brought to a close sooner, rather than later." He said attorneys for Lockheed-Martin "have expressed to me a continued desire to talk with us." ***************************************************************** 6 Technology:Cleanup of leakage continues Augusta Georgia: June 12, 2001 _By Brandon Haddock_ *Staff Writer* Savannah River Site workers continued Monday to clean up after Friday's leak of a radioactive liquid from a holding tank at the federal nuclear-weapons site. Engineers had not located the cause of the leak, said Dean Campbell, a spokesman for SRS contractor Westinghouse Savannah River Co. Westinghouse operates SRS for the U.S. Department of Energy. The leak occurred Friday night in a steel tank near the site's 2H evaporator, Mr. Campbell said. The 5,000-gallon tank held uranyl nitrate, a chemical containing radioactive uranium that was used to clean the evaporator, he said. Sometime between 8 and 8:45 p.m., the tank leaked about 1,200 gallons, Mr. Campbell said. The leak was contained by a stainless-steel box placed under the tank to catch such spills, he said. None of the chemical reached the soil, and no one received a dose of radiation from the incident, Mr. Campbell said. An Energy Department spokeswoman said the agency was pleased by Westinghouse's response to the incident. ''The safety systems did exactly what they were designed to do,'' Julie Petersen said. ''The Energy Department is satisfied with the deliberate manner in which Westinghouse responded, with the highest priority on the safety of the workers.'' But the leak drew concern from a local nuclear watchdog. ''This was a very serious situation that could have been a lot worse,'' said Don Moniak, an Aiken resident and community organizer for the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League. ''This shows how expensive safety is out there. To prevent something bad from happening, they have to have all these safeguards, and constant surveillance. ''It's just another argument against producing more liquid waste.'' Workers were scheduled to complete the removal of the uranyl nitrate from the tank and the box beneath Monday, Mr. Campbell said. The solution will be pumped to a waste tank at the site, he said. The leak occurred as the holding tank was being used to neutralize the uranyl nitrate with a caustic additive, Mr. Campbell said. It was the first time the tank had been used for the task, he said. The vessel was tested extensively with water beforehand, Mr. Campbell said. ''It did pass all our tests,'' he said. The 2H evaporator has been a headache for site officials since January 2000, when it was shut down because of a buildup of silicate, or fine bits of glass, inside the unit. SRS engineers since have toiled to restart the evaporator. SRS officials now hope to have the facility operating by August, Mr. Campbell said. Only one of the site's three evaporators - which reduce the volume of liquid waste by evaporating water from it - is operating at capacity. Mechanical problems have hampered another evaporator, the 3H, which runs for only about a week every two months, Mr. Campbell said. Some observers fear that the evaporators' problems could lead to a buildup of liquid waste, causing the site's 49 underground waste tanks to fill. ''If they can't get the evaporator back up to speed, it affects everything,'' Mr. Moniak said. ''This accident may not have hurt anybody, but it could be very costly if they can't get the evaporator back on line.'' Mr. Campbell acknowledged that space was at a premium in the waste tanks. ''It's tight,'' he said. ''We need to get the evaporator up and running, but it's not critical at this point. We still have room to operate.'' _Reach Brandon Haddock at (706) 823-3409 or bhaddock@augustachronicle.com._ All contents ©1996 - 2001 *The Augusta Chronicle*. All ***************************************************************** 7 *The weak joints of a nuclear weapons power * The Indian Express: Analysis EDITORIALS &ANALYSIS Tuesday, June 12, 2001 By Washington’s grace _Mani Shankar Aiyar_ The condition of the Prime Minister’s knees causes me no concern; it can always be fixed with a spot of NRI surgery. It is the state of the nation’s knees which must give us cause to pause. It is now one thousand days and more since the Vajpayee government made us a Nuclear Weapon Power. But we remain a nuclear power without a nuclear doctrine. The draft doctrine prepared by the National Security Council’s Advisory Board has not even been considered, let alone accepted. Vajpayee’s substitute for a nuclear weapons policy is three little words: ‘credible minimum deterrent’. He is unable to spell this out further because what might credibly be minimally deterrent to the Pakistanis would be no more than a laughable flea-bite for the Chinese; and what could credibly deter the Chinese would so overwhelm the Pakistanis that the sub-continent would find itself trapped on the nuclear escalator quicker than Dr Ranawat could replace a defective knee-cap. Which is why, impaled on the horns of this existential nuclear dilemma, the Vajpayee government has resolved to hand over the nuclear defence of our motherland to someone else’s National Defence Missiles system. Unable to convert its nuclear weapons into a coherent nuclear doctrine, the Vajpayee government has resigned itself to nuclear impotence True, as the apologists for our self-contradictory nuclear deterrence doctrine have so defensively insisted, the Vajpayee government has not actually, that is, in so many words, welcomed the American NMD. But have they condemned it? Or expressed any skepticism about it? While even the closest allies of the United States — NATO powers like the United Kingdom and France, for example — have viewed the proposed new nuclear order with a measure of alarm, and Russia has warned that it looks upon this updated version of Ronald Reagan’s Star Wars as a dangerously retrograde move, India, under its weak-kneed Prime Minister, has, it would appear, nothing of substance to say. Not even after the Chinese Foreign Office spokesman has pithily described the US NMD as ‘‘harming others without benefiting itself’’. Once upon a long time ago, India reacted with courage and conviction to a nuclear defence shield in outer space: ‘‘The ambition of creating impenetrable defences against nuclear weapons has merely escalated the arms race and complicated the processes of disarmament. This has happened in spite of the grave doubts expressed by leading scientists about its very feasibility. Even the attempt to build a partial shield against nuclear missiles increases the risk of nuclear war. History shows that there is no shield that has not been penetrated by a superior weapon, nor any weapon for which a superior shield has not been found. Societies get caught in a multiple helix of escalation in chasing this chimera, expending vast resources for an illusory security while increasing the risk of certain extinction.’’ Rajiv Gandhi at the United Nations, June 9, 2001, presenting his Action Plan for a Nuclear-Weapons-Free World Order. Would Atal Bihari Vajpayee have the guts to say as much to George W. Bush? ‘‘Atal to hoon, lekin saath saath Bihari bhi hoon!’’ A.B. Vajpayee in Lok Sabha, December 2000. Jaswant Singh’s ardent wooing of Strobe Talbott — which like all clandestine love affairs is best conducted under cover of total darkness — has resulted in the removal of most economic and technological sanctions but left untouched the most important political sanction of them all, the one and only UN Security Council resolution since Pakistan went to war with India in 1965 which rakes up Kashmir as an international issue. Our external affairs minister, it seems, has not dared even ask for its revocation. Meanwhile, Home Minister Advani spouts his nonsense about the Vajpayee government having ‘‘internationalised’’ the issue of cross-border terrorism. This has been on the international agenda for 30 years, ever since the PLO kidnapped eleven Israeli laureates of the Munich Olympic games. Advani has gone on to claim that J&K has been brought back to the bilateral table. The truth is that the post-Pokharan UN Security Council determination remains firmly in place as the whiplash in the hands of the arbiters of the international community to discipline us as and when needed. The bogus bravado and impetuous immaturity of the Vajpayee government has re-internationalised Kashmir, liquidating the diplomatic advantage Indira Gandhi secured for the nation at Shimla. And former President Bill Clinton has confirmed what one had suspected all along — that it was the Americans who stepped in as umpires in the Kargil conflict, significantly on America’s Independence Day not ours, and are now ensconced like Banquo’s ghost at the feast which Vajpayee is bilaterally preparing for that unrepentant cross-border terrorist and architect of Kargil, General Chief Executive Pervez Musharraf. And you still think India’s foreign policy is being crafted in South Block, not Foggy Bottom, Washington DC? Unable to convert its nuclear weapons into a coherent nuclear doctrine, the Vajpayee government has resigned itself to nuclear impotence. India’s nuclear defences are being placed under an American umbrella. That is why we have acquiesced in the NMD. An American umbrella is for those who accept a Pax Americana, a world order crafted by the Americans to serve American interests and legitimise American predominance. India under Indira entertained contrary ideas about a democratic world order in which the meek also counted. Therefore, Indira Gandhi sought a nuclear umbrella knowing there would be no umbrella. She was merely testing the Americans to show up how empty was their misplaced emphasis on nuclear non-proliferation. India under Vajpayee no longer seeks a place of honour, dignity and equality at the international table. It seeks co-option into someone else’s world order. The NMD is the escape hatch through which Vajpayee gets to retain his nuclear weapons in exchange for surrendering nuclear responsibility to the White House. We are now enmeshed in an American system of subsidiary alliances where in return for surrendering our sovereignty over defence and foreign policy, the guarantor leaves us unfettered in domestic matters. Lord William Bentinck would have applauded. The instant welcome extended by Jaswant Singh’s minions to the NMD-dominated world order signals the abandonment of the principles on which we based our policies of non-alignment. It is a return to 1857 — the House of Jhansi is dead, the House of Gwalior has triumphed.* * © 2001: Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. All rights ***************************************************************** 8 A-tests death squad claim The West AustralianJune 12, 2001 By Mark Mallabone CANBERRA SUSPICIONS have been revived that people with severe disabilities were used as human guinea pigs during British atomic tests at Maralinga in the 1950s. The control group apparently was flown from Britain and died after being exposed to radioactive fallout as part of an experiment on the effects of radiation on humans. The allegations were examined during the royal commission into British nuclear tests in Australia but dismissed as unsubstantiated in its final report, handed to Federal Parliament in December 1985. However, Bob Jackson, director of Edith Cowan University's centre for disability research and development, said yesterday he had spoken to a former pilot whose account tended to support the allegations. He was worried the royal commission had not heard the man's version of events. Dr Jackson said he came across the story in the late 1980s when he was regional director of the WA Disability Services Commission, where the former pilot was an officer. Dr Jackson was approached by the man after giving a presentation which included a 1984 report in The West Australian of claims of atomic testing on the disabled. The man told him he had flown a planeload of disabled people from Britain to the Maralinga test site. "We didn't fly them out again," the man said. Dr Jackson said he had no reason to disbelieve the man, whose name he could not remember. The allegations came after Dr Jackson relayed them to former servicemen fighting for compensation for radiation exposure at the British nuclear tests in South Australia and WA's Monte Bello islands. © 2000 West Australian Newspapers Limited ***************************************************************** 9 Fluor Hanford to take over DynCorp's duties This story was published Tue, Jun 12, 2001 _By John Stang_ _Herald staff writer_ Fluor Hanford plans to absorb the landlord duties of its subcontractor, DynCorp Tri-Cities Services Inc., in an effort to trim costs, Fluor told employees Monday. DynCorp's contract expires Sept. 30, and Fluor recently decided not to renew it. DynCorp was one of the original six major subcontractors when Fluor became the lead Hanford contractor on Oct. 1, 1996. The Department of Energy recently extended Fluor's five-year contract through Sept. 30, 2006. Earlier this year, Fluor and DynCorp failed to negotiate an extension of DynCorp's contract. The two companies disagreed on what cost-cutting measures DynCorp would have to take in an extended contract, said Dave Van Leuven, Fluor executive vice president. DynCorp President Bob Frix declined to comment. With Hanford's cleanup budget shrinking, DOE is pressuring Fluor to trim costs. Fluor can cut overhead and shift the savings to cleanup work by taking over DynCorp functions, the Monday memo said. DynCorp manages Hanford's roads, buildings, utilities, some equipment and its fire department -- supervising about 750 people. About 260 work for DynCorp, and the rest are union workers employed by Fluor. The memo said Fluor will try to "seamlessly" transfer DynCorp employees, functions and benefits to Fluor. Fluor officials said their relationship with DynCorp has been good, and the decision not to keep DynCorp was simple economics. DynCorp earned an average of 92 percent of its potential annual fees from Fluor and recently won a major federal safety award. When Fluor took over in 1996, it came with a corporate structure in which Fluor was the center of a network of six "inside-the-fence" subcontractors and six "outside-the-fence" new companies. The latter six held extensive Hanford contracts and were expected to build other businesses elsewhere. DynCorp was inside the fence. The 13-company network drew criticism for increasing Hanford's overhead costs because of the complications of coordinating so many firms. That criticism proved on target, and Fluor has reabsorbed much of what was split away. When fiscal 2002 begins Fluor will have reabsorbed three entire inside subcontractors and the majority of two more. The sixth major subcontractor split from Fluor to become a separate prime contractor, now CH2M Hill Hanford Group. Four of the six outside companies remain but are much more independent of Fluor, although they still do much Hanford work. Fluor reabsorbed a fifth company and turned the sixth -- Protection Technology Hanford -- into an inside-the-fence subcontractor. t 2001 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 10 Hanford claims program criticized This story was published Tue, Jun 12, 2001 _By Annette Cary_ _Herald staff writer_ Regulations for a federal program to compensate Hanford employees and other nuclear workers who became ill or died are deeply flawed and need immediate changes to provide the help workers and their families deserve, say labor and worker advocates. "They are just riddled with problems," said Richard Miller, policy analyst for the Government Accountability Project, or GAP. The Department of Labor plans to start enrolling workers, former workers and their survivors in the program as the regulations are now written at Richland meetings today and Wednesday. "The problem is in the details of the way DOL will run the program," said Randy Knowles, president of the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union Local 8-369. He represents more than 800 workers at Hanford. "The DOL interim final regulations do not offer a fair and equitable basis to assure that workers who are ill from exposure to radiation, beryllium and silica will actually receive their benefits as intended by Congress," he said. Labor officials and GAP, a worker watchdog group, are concerned that workers who are denied claims lack fair appeal methods, that diagnostic costs are not included and that survivors are largely excluded from compensation. The program would give $150,000 to workers or former workers who developed cancer from exposure to radiation or chronic lung disease from exposure to the metal beryllium. Their work history and exposures would be studied to determine whether the illness was likely caused by working at a nuclear site. They also could have related medical expenses paid starting July 31, if they have filed a claim by then. Some survivors also would be eligible for benefits, but Miller and Knowles believe the Department of Labor is too narrowly interpreting the new law and excluding many of the survivors. Had the department set up an advisory commission as requested in December, "all these issues would have become transparent" early in the process of developing regulations, Miller said. Now the department is taking comments on the interim regulations until Aug. 24, even though they take effect July 31. Labor officials said they would consider the PACE and GAP criticisms as part of the comments on the interim regulations. The interim regulations covering survivors, as based on the Federal Employee Compensation Act, would effectively limit payments to only those who were being supported by a Hanford worker at the time of the worker's death. Children over 18 when their parent died or widows who remarried before age 55 might not be eligible for the $150,000 payment. But the Federal Employee Compensation Act is meant to address survivors who are receiving monthly benefits intended to replace a parent's or spouse's wages, Miller said. Because the energy employee law offers a single lump sum payment, the restrictions on survivors should not apply, he said. "It seems pretty plain from our reading of the statue (the Labor Department) has all the latitude to include nondependent survivors," he said. Labor officials also are asking for a fair and formal appeal for those whose compensation claims are denied. As the interim regulations are written, federal officials who make the claim decisions also control the appeals process, Miller said. "They have proposed a very relaxed procedure," Miller said. The regulations say the hearing officer handling the appeals is not bound by rules of evidence and can end the hearing any time he decides all relevant evidence has been collected. "When DOL can make up the rules as you go, and there is no independence, the predicates for a kangaroo court are in place," Knowles said. That also hampers workers' ability to appeal the Labor Department's final decision to the courts, Miller said. In a judicial review, the courts would only consider whether the Labor Department had been arbitrary and capricious based on the information the Labor Department allowed in the initial appeal, he said. The regulations also slight the interests of the worker if the worker's doctor and the federal doctor disagree, Miller said. The Department of Labor could choose a third doctor to decide the dispute, with no input from the worker, he said. In addition, labor and worker advocate officials want the regulations to make clear that the government will cover the medical diagnostic costs to determine whether a worker is eligible for the program. No one should be denied the benefits because they cannot afford the necessary medical tests, Miller said. "We urge the secretary of labor to reconsider the direction being taken by her staff, and open a dialogue on improving these interim regulations before the Labor Department is locked into an approach that lacks public confidence," Miller said. At the meetings on the new compensation program, comments on the regulations will not be accepted. They meetings are intended to provide information on how to apply for the program and restrictions on the program. The meetings are at 1 and 7 p.m. today and Wednesday at the Red Lion, 802 George Washington Way, Richland. However, comments on the regulations can be mailed to Office of Workers Compensation Program, c/o Employment Standards Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave. N.W., Washington, D.C., 20210. _Copyright 2001 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 11 Official had doubts about beryllium_ _By Stacie Oulton Denver Post Writer_ Tuesday, June 12, 2001_ - The government official who set the safety standard on beryllium, the toxic metal that has sickened hundreds of workers at Rocky Flats, came to believe the standard might not protect workers. Merril Eisenbud said by the mid-1980s he began to doubt the standard he set in 1949 as an Atomic Energy Commission official, partly because he saw about a dozen cases of secretaries contracting chronic beryllium disease. Eisenbud's 1996 testimony was read Monday in a Jefferson County trial involving four Rocky Flats workers and their wives. The workers have chronic beryllium disease from handling the metal at the former nuclear weapons plant, and they are suing Cleveland-based Brush Wellman, the world's leading beryllium producer. They claim the company conspired with the federal government to cover up information showing that the standard failed to protect workers' health. Some 42 other workers and their spouses also have sued. Their cases hinge on the outcome of this trial, now in its second week. Eisenbud, who died in 1997, had said he began to change his mind when he started to review cases on the beryllium registry, a database of sick workers. Earlier testimony in the case showed that Brush Wellman did not send its cases to the nationwide registry. The lawsuit accuses Brush Wellman of censoring medical and scientific information. And evidence introduced in the case shows that the company withheld information about workers who were becoming sick despite exposure levels below the safety standard. All contents Copyright 2001 The Denver Post or other copyright ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************