***************************************************************** 02/19/01 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 9.46 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS 1 EPA probes Shattuck over N-waste 2 Midwest too dependent on coal, nuclear energy, advocates say 3 Greenpeace to block nuclear ships 4 Floating protest against plutonium 5 NUCLEAR-FREE TASMAN FLOTILLA DEPARTS ON MISSION TO BEAR WITNESS 6 Mass Rally Planned to Protest Taiwan Nuclear Power Plant 7 Anti-nuclear activists set sights on DPP 8 Editorial: A future betrayed 9 Challenge to Yucca readied 10 Rails Sabotaged Ahead of Nuclear Waste Shipments 11 Western Firms to Modernize Bulgaria Kozloduy Nuclear Plant 12 Nuclear Power: A Tainted Future? 13 US backs plan for Russia to import nuclear waste 14 Work proceeds on blueprint for Yucca repository 15 Capping of tailings site halted 16 PSC backs Southern on nuclear waste - 17 Change of lobbyist questioned NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS 1 USFK holds 50,000 rounds of depleted uranium ammunition, says GNP 2 International conference to focus on radiation 3 Uranium shell tests resume 4 Suit says INEEL contractors broke laws 5 Health-risks office steps up commitment to Oak Ridge issues 6 Council seeks legal guns to chase funds ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 EPA probes Shattuck over N-waste DenverPost.com - News: Colorado and Denver Mike Soraghan Denver Post Washington Bureau Feb. 19, 2001 - WASHINGTON - The Environmental Protection Agency's national ombudsman is delving into the Shattuck Chemical Co.'s handling of materials it received from the nation's nuclear weapons plants. And that inquiry might play into a ripening debate over where the waste stored at the Denver site will be sent, since rules for handling waste from weapons sites are more stringent than those for cleaning up the mine tailings more commonly associated with the site. Shattuck is the Superfund site in south Denver where the EPA originally decided to leave radioactive waste on-site. Dirt contaminated with radium, uranium and heavy metals was mixed with coal ash and concrete and entombed as a giant mound, alarming those living in the surrounding neighborhood of Overland Park. After an investigation by EPA ombudsman Robert Martin, the EPA reversed its decision and has agreed to move the waste offsite. The EPA is currently drafting plans for how to move the Shattuck waste. The design is to be done in May, and the removal is to begin this summer. But there is an ongoing debate over whether it should be taken to Envirocare, a facility in Utah licensed to handle radioactive waste, or a former mine on Colorado's Western Slope run by Umetco, a Union Carbide subsidiary. Umetco is able to accept "naturally occurring radioactive materials" such as mine tailings. It is well known that Shattuck was contaminated with mine tailings. But the material from nuclear weapons plants is a lesserknown part of the Shattuck saga. In documents on the Shattuck cleanup, EPA officials have said they did not know what kind of materials were being processed at Shattuck during the 1960s. But during that time, the owners of the site had a Radioactive Materials License from the Atomic Energy Commission to process natural and depleted uranium at the site. The owners of the plant got the license in 1955, and the processing continued until the plant closed in 1986. By then, the AEC had become the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The plant got depleted uranium from Department of Energy nuclear weapons plants in Paducah, Ky., and Oakridge, Tenn., according to testimony in ombudsman hearings in Denver in 1999. Depleted uranium is a byproduct of enriched uranium and has had the isotope used to make weapons removed. It is often used in armorpiercing bullets and has been discussed as a possible cause of "Gulf War syndrome," but scientists have not discovered any conclusive link to the ailments of veterans. Shattuck lawyer John Faught stressed that the uranium Shattuck received, "has nothing to do with nuclear armaments; it has to do with specialty products." During the 1999 hearings, two different accounts emerged as to how carefully Shattuck handled the uranium. John Taylor, who worked at the Shattuck plant in 1972 and 1973 as operator of the uranium site, said there was evidence that uranium had been burned in a device with an open chimney. He also said uranium was disposed of in pits that allowed it to dissipate into the ground and blow around the surrounding neighborhood. Former Shattuck vice president Tom Millensifer testified that waste from processing the depleted uranium from the plants was not hazardous or radioactive. He said the company briefly tried to process the uranium bullet shavings but quit after finding the process created too much smoke. Martin is questioning whether the original Shattuck cleanup followed Nuclear Regulatory Commission rules for cleaning up sites with licenses to handle radioactive materials. The EPA and Shattuck say the site was cleaned up according to NRC rules. In a letter to the EPA, Shattuck official Robert H. Oliver said buildings where uranium processing occurred were decontaminated under NRC guidelines in 1987, with the radioactive materials and residues sent to Nuclear Engineering Co., a licensed disposal facility in Beatty, Nev. Later, as part of the Superfund cleanup under the EPA, the buildings were demolished and the radiation-tainted building materials shipped to Nevada. "We think we followed the rules," said Barry Levene, director of the Superfund program for the EPA region including Colorado. "We don't understand what it is that he's interested in." But Hugh Kaufman, who investigated the Shattuck cleanup for Martin, said that leaves out what happened to the uranium that was left in pits on the site. "So the information we have is that it's still in the ground under that mound, so it hasn't been tested," Kaufman said. "We cannot decide what were going to do with the Shattuck waste until we get to the bottom of exactly what's there, and that work still has not been done." Kaufman said that if the site wasn't properly "decommissioned" under NRC rules, it could force the upcoming removal of waste from the Shattuck site to be much more detailed and expensive. Each batch would have to be "fingerprinted" and taken to a licensed facility. Copyright 2001 The Denver Post. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 2 Midwest too dependent on coal, nuclear energy, advocates say Local News By SETH SLABAUGH MUNCIE - Midwestern utilities have failed to take advantage of clean energy opportunities that could improve the economy, the environment and the reliability of the power supply, a recently released report claims. "A staggering 95 percent of the Midwest's electricity is produced by coal and nuclear plants - the two fuel sources with the worst environmental and public health impacts," reports the Environmental Law and Policy Center, a Chicago-based environmental and entrepreneurial public interest group. "These old power plants produce pollution that causes smog, acid rain and global warming, and they generate radioactive wastes and other toxic pollutants." The center last week released a report titled "Repowering the Midwest." The Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana and other Midwestern clean energy advocacy groups helped develop the report. The document calls for the generation of more electricity from the wind, the sun and the burning of agricultural crops. The Midwest is in a strong position to capitalize economically on the development and manufacturing of clean energy, according to the center. The region has enormous untapped biomass energy potential from both crop residues left over from farming and energy crops grown expressly for energy, the report says. "Although the Midwest is not usually considered an especially sunny region, solar power can provide economically valuable electricity because of the strong coincidence between its greatest availability on sunny summer days and the timing of peak power demands for air conditioning," the report says. "When it comes to wind power, six of the 10 states with the highest wind potential are in the Midwest." Although American Electric Power is investing in wind generation in Texas and buys and sells biomass energy to customers in West Virginia, the company hasn't gone far down the solar energy path. AEP is developing the 130-megawatt Trent Mesa wind power project in West Texas. The company expects the project's 87 wind turbines to generate enough electricity to supply about 30,000 homes. That's still a drop in the bucket compared to the company's 4.8 million customers in 11 states and total generating capacity of 38,000 megawatts. Green power "may be the right thing to do and become more economical in the future," but the decision to switch or not to switch to green power should be made by customers, not by the Citizens Action Coalition or by AEP, said John R. Sampson, AEP's Indiana president. "We think it's more important that the consumer or the marketplace make the decision," Sampson said in an interview. "Telephone customers, for example, today have options like caller ID and caller conferencing because they sell in the marketplace. Consumers are willing to pay more because it brings some value to their life. That's different than implementing an agenda because someone says we should do this." For the most part, renewable energy sources carry a bit higher price tag, said Pat Hemlepp, manager of media relations for AEP. "We agree with and support fuel diversity and renewable energy, but the consumers will determine what they are willing to pay," Hemlepp said. He also noted it would take either 70,000 acres of wind turbines or 13,000 acres of solar panels to replace just one of AEP's 1,300-megawatt, coal-fired power plants. In addition, only modest wind resources exist in Indiana and throughout most of AEP's service territory, the company says, citing government wind maps. Still, Hemlepp thinks the new report's goals for renewable energy in the Midwest are achievable. "If you look at Indiana, for example, this group projects wind and solar energy combined of 591 megawatts by the year 2020," Hemlepp said. (For a copy of "Repowering the Midwest: The Clean Energy Development Plan for the Heartland," call Mike Truppa at 312-673-6300, or download a copy at www.repowermidwest.org). All contents ©2001 Muncie Newspapers ***************************************************************** 3 Greenpeace to block nuclear ships BBC News | ASIA-PACIFIC | 18 February, 2001, 10:54 GMT Protesters say there's plutonium for several nuclear bombs A small flotilla of yachts has set sail from Australia and New Zealand to intercept two armed British merchant ships carrying cargos of uranium and plutonium from France to Japan. The environmental organisation Greenpeace says there will be no attempt to stop the freighters but that the yachts will form a symbolic chain in front of them in the Tasman Sea. Greenpeace says it wants to make clear its opposition to using the Tasman Sea and Pacific Ocean as a highway for nuclear cargo. The amount of Mox (plutonium and uranium oxides recycled from spent nuclear fuel) on board the ships is enough to make several nuclear bombs, according to environmentalists. "Plutonium is the most dangerous man-made substance and has to be stored safely for 24,000 years before it breaks down," said Greenpeace organiser Henk Haazen. "The nuclear threat continues to hang over the Pacific, New Zealand and Australian region," he added. Aboriginal protection The two British ships, the Pacific Pintail and the Pacific Teal, left the French port of Cherbourg a month ago. Each freighter is reported to be armed with three 30mm naval cannons and carries a force of armed civilians from the UK Atomic Energy Authority. The two vessels have been at the centre of protests before, when shipping Mox to Japan. On this occasion, three protest boats left Sydney Harbour on Sunday after an aboriginal ceremony intended to give the yachts and crew protection. They expect to rendezvous the four that sailed from Auckland near Australia's Norfolk island in about a week. According to Greenpeace, Japan's response to opposition from Pacific countries has been to begin negotiations with Russia to bring nuclear fuel cargos across the Arctic route. Search BBC News Online ***************************************************************** 4 Floating protest against plutonium news.com.au - Display Story Page 19feb01 SEVEN yachts left Sydney and Auckland yesterday to protest against the use of the Tasman Sea and Pacific Ocean as nuclear highways for plutonium ships. The yachts were expected to take a week to reach international waters between Lord Howe and Norfolk islands where two British-flagged ships carrying plutonium for Japan were due to transit in early March, organisers said. Henk Haazen, skipper of Greenpeace's Tiama, said the flotilla was trying to draw attention to plutonium shipments worldwide. There are 39 people on board the seven yachts, aged 12 to 70. Three yachts sailed from Sydney, while four left from Auckland. The crews do not plan to stop or obstruct the passage of the ships. ***************************************************************** 5 NUCLEAR-FREE TASMAN FLOTILLA DEPARTS ON MISSION TO BEAR WITNESS TO PLUTONIUM SHIPS 18 February 2001 A flotilla of seven yachts from Australia and New Zealand left port today to sail to the north-west Tasman Sea where they will protest the use of the Tasman and the Pacific Ocean as a nuclear highway for plutonium ships. The Nuclear-Free Tasman Flotilla, is made up of three yachts departing from Australia: "Tiama", "Fand" and "Antarctica", and four yachts departing from New Zealand: "Ranui", "Nanu", "Secret Affair" and "Siome". They expect to take a week to travel to a zone of international waters between Lord Howe and Norfolk Island where two British-flagged ships carrying a cargo of plutonium for Japan are expected to transit in early March. Flotilla spokesman, Tony Atkinson, said the mission of those sailing was to draw world attention to the use of the Tasman Sea and the South Pacific as a nuclear highway. In Sydney, the yachts and their crew were farewelled by family and friends and an Aboriginal dance troupe while in Opua in New Zealand, the local community turned out to witness a blessing of the yachts and crew. "We are trying to stop these shipments from taking place worldwide and to break the nuclear cycle that the world is locked into," said Henk Haazen, skipper of Tiama. "Plutonium is the most dangerous man-made substance and needs to be stored safely for 24,000 years before it breaks down. How can we load our children's futures with such a liability?" Opposition to the plutonium shipments is equally strong in Japan. In Niigata prefecture, people living next to the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, where the plutonium is headed, are seeking a referendum on Japan's plutonium MOX program. In the past week, members of the Niigata prefecture legislature, have written to the Nuclear-Free Tasman Flotilla offering their support and solidarity. Altogether, there are 42 people aboard the seven yachts in the flotilla. They range in age from 12 to 68 and represent countries including Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Canada, Russia, Japan, New Zealand, France and Poland. Among the crew are a retired architect, a doctor, a helicopter pilot, a tree planter, a lawyer, a vet, a film-maker and a high school student. Once the yachts arrive at their destination point - 650 nautical miles north-east of Sydney and 650 nautical miles north-west of Auckland - they plan to form a symbolic chain across the 75 miles of international waters where the plutonium ships are likely to pass. They do not plan to stop or obstruct the passage of the ships. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT: For more information: In Australia: Elisabeth Mealey on (02) 9263 0325 or 0403-443190 or Rupert Posner 0419-179529. In New Zealand: Athena Lambrinidou 021-1443457 The flotilla website will be updated daily: www.nuclearfree.co.nz ***************************************************************** 6 Mass Rally Planned to Protest Taiwan Nuclear Power Plant 2001.02.19¡@2:14am TAIPEI, Feb 18 (AFP) - At least 100,000 people will take to Taipei's streets next Saturday to protest a government decision to restart work on a controversial nuclear power plant project, organisers said Sunday. "Hopefully more than 100,000 people will respond to our appeal and join in the march," said Pan Han-chiang, deputy secretary-general of the non-profit Environmental Protection Union. "Our goal is to overshadow the January 12 rally, during which tens of thousands of people were involved," he told AFP. The demonstrators are scheduled to march through the bustling areas and gather on the square of the Presidential Office before dispersing. "Turning Taiwan into a nuclear-free zone is our appeal," he told AFP, adding that the protestors want to press for a referendum on the fate of the partly-built nuclear plant. The protest plan came after the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government last week backed away from its previous stance and reinstated the 5.6 billion-US-dollar nuclear power plant project. The DPP on October 27 scrapped the project without consulting parliament, as required by Taiwan's constitution, plunging the island into months of political crisis. The DPP had listed the scrapping of the project on its party platform and ironically the DPP plans to participate in the march. But there were unconfirmed news reports the DPP would try to "manipulate" the march, fearing the demonstration would be used against the party in the parliamentary elections in December. The nuclear power plant project was pushed through parliament by a KMT government in 1996, despite years of objections. China Times Inter@ctive Main Page (in Big-5 Chinese) ***************************************************************** 7 Anti-nuclear activists set sights on DPP The Taipei Times Online: 2001-02-19 February 19th, 2001 PROTEST: Organizers of a parade to press for a referendum to decide the fate of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant are taking aim at the DPP, even offering to trade anti-nuclear T-shirts for A-Bian hats By Joyce Huang STAFF REPORTER Anti-government sentiment is spreading among anti-nuclear activists, who are organizing a demonstration on Feb. 24 to urge that a referendum be held to let the public decide the fate of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant (®Ö¥|). "During the parade, we will also ... ask supporters to trade their A-bian caps for our [anti-nuclear] T-shirts," said Kao Cheng-yen (°ª¦¨ª¢), who is planning to lead the parade. Kao said the willingness of President Chen Shui-bian (³¯¤ô«ó) and other DPP politicians to make compromises over the nuclear plant issue was not acceptable. Kao added that if Chen's administration would not respond properly to their appeal, the Nuclear Free Country Action Alliance («D®Ö°ê®a¦æ°ÊÁp·ù) would probably burn all the collected caps to further demonstrate their opposition to Chen. Speaking in a much softer tone, another leader organizing the demonstration, Hsu Shin-shen (®}ÄÉ¥Í), said the theme of the demonstration would tackle the entire pro-nuclear lobby. "We will not target Chen alone, as lawmakers of the opposition alliance have done. What we are opposed to is the government's decision to continue the plant's construction," Hsu said, adding that Chen had joined them at many anti-nuclear rallies before he became president. But the lyrics of one of the theme songs to be sung at the parade -- revealed for the first time yesterday -- seem to run counter to that assertion. "Chen bluffed people into believing that he would scrap the plant if he was elected president," the song says. The demonstration is scheduled to take place on Saturday from 2pm until midnight. Former DPP Chairman Lin Yi-hsiung (ªL¸q¶¯), Chang Chun-hung (±i«T§») and other DPP members have promised to take part in the parade. With such a significant DPP presence, president of the Taipei Society (¼áªÀ) Chiu Hei-yuan (£®ü·½), warned party members to to try to manipulate the event. Reports by the local media have speculated that the DPP might try to control the parade's theme. "This will be a parade initiated by the private sector. The DPP can only participate in it as a civil force, not as the ruling party overseeing our activities," Chiu said. Chiu also asked the DPP to clarify media speculation that the party's recent initiative to propose a referendum law was just lip service. Former KMT and now independent lawmaker Eugene Jao (»¯¥Ã²M), said that some politicians who had supported the ideal of a nuclear-free country, yet had endorsed the plant's construction, had set a bad example. He said that people should demonstrate their opposition in action. When asked who should be eligible to vote if a plebiscite were held, Kao said that a referendum law should define this, but he suggested the vote should be cast by all citizens in northern Taiwan since their lives would be impacted most by the plant. Chin Heng-wei (ª÷«íÞm), editor in chief of *Contemporary Monthly* magazine, however, argued that the Constitution empowers all citizens of Taipei County with the right to veto the policy according to the spirit of autonomy in local governments. The DPP yesterday formally expressed its support of the demonstration and has placed newspaper ads, to begin running today, encouraging all anti-nuclear supporters to join the rally. The party also argues that because their political ideals had met a setback, winning more legislative seats was the only answer to maintain political stability and fulfill these ideals, the ads said. This story has been viewed 627 times. URL=[http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2001/02/19/story/0000074273] Copyright © 1999-2001 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 Editorial: A future betrayed The Taipei Times Online: 2001-02-19 February 19th, 2001 What is the cost of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant (®Ö¥|) fiasco? We do not mean the NT$1.4 billion in increased construction costs. We mean how serious is the blow to this government's credibility and effectiveness? In a nutshell, the answer is: devastating. And anybody who cares about the development of liberal democracy, the rule of law and civil society in this country has to be chagrined that Taiwan's first real chance to step out of the mire of corruption which has been the country's experience of KMT government for the past 50 years should be damaged so badly by the ineptitude with which policy on the power plant has been conducted. What is that damage? First, Premier Chang Chun-hsiung (±i«T¶¯) has no credibility left. He was originally expected to be a good premier, given his long experience in the legislature, where, of course, the DPP is at its weakest. Now we have seen that this experience counts for nothing. Chang might have saved his reputation had he been able to maintain some independence from President Chen Shui-bian (³¯¤ô«ó) -- as, constitutionally, he is supposed to do -- and protect the government from his folly. Instead Chang was quite willing to become Chen's compliant tool. The problem is that Chen was a bungling craftsman and the tool is now broken. Who might replace Chang, God alone knows. There would be few takers, we suspect, for a job best described as: "Whipping boy, to be beaten by the legislature for the president's incompetence." Chen himself has now to cope with two problems. First, rank and file DPP supporters are extremely bitter towards him for his awful handling of the power plant issue, for example forcing the premier to announce the plant's cancellation without first having an extensive anti-nuclear PR campaign to sway those Taiwanese more worried about power shortages than nuclear safety. Secondly, Chen's impression on voters in general has been appalling. It is not just that they have seen him implement a policy without adequate preparation, cause unprecedented political chaos and then reverse himself within a four-month period. They have also seen him betray the DPP and betray Chang. Who can voters trust? Not Chen. Of course the president might say that, given his party's weakness in the legislature, he had no option but to resume the plant's construction. To which the only reasonable comment can be an accusatory "you should have thought of that before you started." The irony is that at last the DPP is working with environmental NGOs to organize anti-nuclear rallies, while the Control Yuan is to consider the legality of the plants environmental impact assessment. These are all sensible moves but have been started a year too late. Given the weakness of the premier, the lack of direction of the Cabinet and the incompetent and dishonorable behavior of the president, things look bad for the DPP. It is now impossible for the party to win a legislative majority in the December elections. This means that the current gridlock between the government and the legislature will continue for the rest of Chen's term as president. And that term will be the only term a throughly fed-up public is likely to give him. So in 2004 we can probably expect either President James Soong (§º·¡·ì) or President Ma Ying-jeou (°¨­^¤E); nothing to look forward to there. Perhaps we feel so angry over this debacle if only because a year ago we held out so much hope that the political transition would lead the way to a better society, one where criminals, for example, go to jail rather than get elected to the legislature. Maybe we were naive to think that things could get better, but so were many others in Taiwan. There seems no chance of that now for a long time to come. This story has been viewed 573 times. URL=[http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2001/02/19/story/0000074317] Copyright © 1999-2001 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 Challenge to Yucca readied Las Vegas SUN February 19, 2001 By Cy Ryan SUN CAPITAL BUREAU CARSON CITY -- The state probably has enough money initially to challenge the federal government if Yucca Mountain is approved as the nation's nuclear waste dump, the head of Nevada's Nuclear Projects Office said today. Robert Loux, the director of the office, told the state Senate Finance Committee that his office and the state attorney general's office "probably have adequate resources" to launch a battle against designation of Yucca Mountain. Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is the only site being studied to store 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste from nuclear power plants and defense waste. The Energy Department is expected to make a recommendation to President Bush later this year or possibly early next year Loux was questioned by Sen. Ray Rawson, R-Las Vegas, about what groundwork should be laid if the site is recommended. Rawson was worried that the Legislature may not be in session and able to act when the decision is announced. Loux said a resolution is being prepared for the Legislature saying it disapproves of any plan to accept the nuclear dump. He added that the finances to fight a dump are adequate only for the "short run." Gov. Kenny Guinn has proposed a $5 million special appropriation for his office to conduct an advertising program in other states to warn them about the dangers of transporting nuclear waste through their urban areas to Yucca Mountain. Deputy State Budget Director Don Hataway told the committee that the entire $5 million may be needed for a "full legal challenge" to keep the materials from being shipped to Nevada. In a later appearance before the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, Loux said the special $5 million appropriation proposed by the governor will be used for education. It will be used for rallies, press conferences and other programs to get the word out about the dangers of transporting the waste through urban areas and along major highways, Loux said. Sen. Lawrence Jacobsen, R-Minden, who chairs the legislative committee on nuclear waste, said his committee has not agreed on a recommendation to make to the Legislature. "It is difficult to get the committee to agree on what stand to take," he said. Jacobsen said he has visited Yucca Mountain 15 times and the committee has inspected other sites. For instance, he said, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, N.M., was opposed by residents in the past who feared the burial of transuranic waste. But the public now accepts it, he said, and New Mexico gets $16 million a year from the federal government for roads and other programs. Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno, said, however, that Nevada should receive $100 million for just allowing the federal government to dig at Yucca Mountain. Loux said the Department of Energy is now concentrating most of its research on the reliability of the casks that the waste would be stored in. Loux said state researchers believe the casks will last less than 400 years underground. The Energy Department may have to look for a new type of metal, he said. The budget for Loux's office calls for $4.1 million in each of the coming two years. The program includes a $2.5 million federal appropriation each year, plus about $1 million from the state general fund and money from the state Transportation Department. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 10 Rails Sabotaged Ahead of Nuclear Waste Shipments [Frankfurter Allgemeine] FRANKFURT. Police in the Lower Saxony city of Lüneburg on Sunday morning found a section of tracks had been sawed away from a rail line that is to be used next month for controversial radioactive waste shipments. The damage was discovered before it caused any harm. Germany and France agreed last month to resume cross-border shipments of waste from German nuclear power plants, suspended three years ago when some containers were found to be leading radiation. Before the suspension, the rail transports back and forth between Germanyy and a French reprocessing facility were a focal point for German anti-nuclear protesters, who often clashed with police. An agreement to resume the transports was part of the government's effort to win final consent from the power industry to close Germany's 19 nuclear plants over the next three decades. During its time in opposition, Alliance 90_The Greens, the junior partner in Germany's governing coalition, opposed the shipments. But German Environment Minister Jürgen Trittin, a Green, now says that in view of the planned atomic energy phaseout, party members should allow the shipments to proceed. (*AP* ) Feb. 18, 2001 © Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 2000 All ***************************************************************** 11 Western Firms to Modernize Bulgaria Kozloduy Nuclear Plant Central Europe Online - SOFIA, Feb 17, 2001 -- (Reuters) A consortium of European firms signed a $235.5 million deal with Bulgaria's nuclear power plant at Kozloduy to modernize its two 1,000-megawatt reactors, a senior government official said on Friday. Bulgaria's State Energy Agency chairman Ivan Shilyashki told Reuters there were two upgrading projects, one worth 199.5 million euro ($182.5 million) and another $53 million. Both would be performed by Germany's Siemens AG , France's Framatome and Russia's Atomenergoexport. On Wednesday another deal, worth $76 million, was signed with U.S. Westinghouse Electric Company also to upgrade the two reactors. Funds for the projects were granted last year when the European Commission signed a 212.5 million euro loan, Russia's Export-Import Bank Rosexim provided a $80 million loan and U.S.Citibank extended $77 million. The Kozloduy plant, which has also four 440-megawatt reactors, provides almost half of the country's electricity. Bulgaria, which is in talks on joining the European Union, had agreed to close the two oldest 440-megawatt reactors by 2003, earlier than initially planned. A final decision on the closure of the other two 440-megawatt units is due to be taken by the end of 2002 but Sofia hopes to upgrade them and run them to the end of their projected life. (C)2001 Copyright Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 12 Nuclear Power: A Tainted Future? Feb. 19, 2001. Page 12 By Charles Digges and Barnaby Thompson Staff Writers A MOX fuel accident in a VVER-1000 would be much more devastating than the Chernobyl disaster was. A little more than six years ago, Norwegian environmental activist Tomas Nilsen was standing on the Russian-Finnish border, trying to halt the passage of a cargo train loaded with Finnish nuclear waste into Russia. The train, as he described it in a telephone interview from the Oslo offices of the environmental group Bellona, differed little in appearance from a standard, rundown cargo train — except for the heavy presence of armed Finnish military guards who were along for the ride. Nilsen's group — positioned on the Finnish side — was arrested almost immediately. After the train trundled through customs, his colleagues on the Russian side said the guard gave way to a much, much smaller group. "While we could get nowhere near the train in Finland, the security in Russia was far more lax." As a result of the outcry surrounding the existence of such shipments, the Finnish parliament passed a law forbidding the export of its nuclear waste to foreign countries for disposal ever again. The State Duma also outlawed such imports shortly after. But an aggressive campaign by Nuclear Power Minister Yevgeny Adamov to repeal that law — amid popular, though little governmental, protest — looks set to succeed later this month. Adamov has recast waste imports as a money spinner that would net Russia's beleaguered nuclear sector $21 billion over the next 10 years. He has also said such a sum could be used to revamp old reactors, build new ones, and clean up contaminated areas. But some experts have speculated this money will be used for other purposes — from the development of a highly controversial plutonium-based civilian nuclear economy, to military applications that could eventually be brought to bear on Chechen rebels. In short, the host of dangers to the country that could be caused by a few waste imports is almost immeasurable, according to authorities both outside and within the Russian nuclear industry. Trains of Waste Gosatomnadzor, the state nuclear regulatory body, has opposed the waste-import bill ever since its inception. The agency's opposition, however, has meant as little to the Nuclear Power Ministry as the outcry of the general public, characterized by the ministry as too ill informed to understand the technical aspects of the nuclear industry "The Nuclear Power Ministry has furnished us with hardly any information whatsoever," said one Gosatomnadzor official charged with reviewing the import bill. "We have asked for documents time and time again," said the official, who requested anonymity, in a recent telephone interview. "They have sent us next to nothing, and what they do send is entirely unreasonable. They have no idea what routes the waste will follow, or how it will be transported — they have, in short, no sense of what is involved." Comments posted on the Bellona web sitefrom Gosatomnadzor's head, Yury Vishnevsky, were even more dispirited. In his view, any of the proceeds garnered from the imports would be "either eaten up or stolen." Nevertheless, the regulatory agency did prepare a small number of vaguely worded amendments, published on its own web site that will be submitted with the import law for the final reading. But the amendments clearly boil down to a set of simple customs regulations. To whit: Russia has the right to turn back any shipment Gosatomnadzor inspectors deem to be too dangerous to be transported, or which pose a threat to Russia's environment. According to Igor Kudrik, a nuclear-industry expert at Bellona, the agency's status has been gutted in a war of economics vs. safety. Nilsen said the most pressing dangers in transporting nuclear waste are derailments or collisions. Any mishap would require large-scale and extremely expensive cleanup operations "All soil in the affected area would have to be dug up and disposed of as nuclear waste," said Nilsen. "These trains will also be traveling through some of the most populated areas of Russia, so a spill could displace thousands of people." The Plutonium Factor If what some experts foresee in Adamov's import plans hold true, the price the Nuclear Power Ministry plans to charge for importing, and storing or reprocessing spent fuel — which yields plutonium, uranium and liquid waste — could be one small part of an ambitious whole: the creation of a plutonium-based energy economy. Experts say this has been a preoccupation of the Russian nuclear industry since the 1950s. All that the country needs for this is the money to develop a generation of special reactors called breeders — which, in brief, produce more plutonium than is fed to them — and the facilities to fabricate a special mixed-oxide fuel, or MOX. Under an agreement with the U.S. Energy Department, or DOE, Russia will be getting a MOX-fabrication plant as part of a very different plan that is meant to reduce the amount of surplus weapons-grade plutonium Russia now holds. If the MOX fuel is burned in a retrofitted VVER-1000 reactor — Russia has seven of these — the plutonium is gradually rendered inert. A roughly similar program will be followed in the United States. If, however, MOX is run through a breeder, the plutonium becomes purer. Russia now has one breeder reactor that, at today's rates, cost $918 million to build. If Adamov's $21 billion waste-import plan reaches fruition, Russia would have the resources to build several breeders, plus a MOX plant to feed them with. Worldwide Dangers The public-relations image of MOX fuel took a hammering in 1999, when a shipment of the material to Japan — now the world's foremost purchaser of MOX — from Britain raised an international outcry. The supplier, the Sellafield nuclear power station operated by British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., was found to have falsified quality-control data on the fuel, and although two armed ships eventually delivered the tainted MOX to Japan, the British and Japanese governments agreed to send the fuel back to Britain. At present, it is still sitting in Japan — ironically, Japan became interested in MOX after an accident at its Monju prototype fast-breeder reactor following a sodium coolant leak in 1995. Taking surplus weapons-grade plutonium and burning it as MOX in Russia's VVER-1000 reactors is central to the U.S.-Russia agreement. But according to Edwin Lyman, science director of the Washington-based Nuclear Control Institute, those reactors are not up to the job. "VVER-1000 reactors have problems processing the uranium fuel they were intended to use," he said in a recent telephone interview. For a variety of technical reasons, burning MOX in such a reactor is much more difficult to control. "It is a documented fact that Russia observes some of the worst standards of up-keep on its reactors imaginable," said Richard Rosenthal, NCI's executive director. He added that any accident resulting from MOX use in a VVER-1000 would increase the risk of cancer in the affected area by 25 percent more than what the Chernobyl disaster caused. "Putting plutonium into a VVER-1000 is a terrible idea." While the DOE may shrug off such dangers, there is one aspect of the deal with Russia that is strangely missing: As of yet, no one is accepting liability should something go wrong. According to the DOE's Laura Holgate, who brokered the plan, these questions will be addressed at a meeting of the Group of Seven leading industrial nations and Russia this summer in Genoa, Italy. But it has been a major sticking point so far. The Terrorist Threat Other factors worrying observers of Adamov's import plan involve the vulnerability to terrorists of a train laden with nuclear waste. Though much of the waste shipped is virtually useless for the purposes of building a large nuclear device, Lyman underscored that "one can make a so-called ‘dirty' nuclear bomb out of spent fuel." Such fears have been a preoccupation of Western nuclear disposition organizations since the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. The derailment of a train carrying nuclear fuel from Germany to Britain in 1997 highlights the danger of transportation. "It takes a ball of plutonium the size of an orange to make a bomb more powerful than the one that destroyed Nagasaki," said Rosenthal. He added that trains carrying any of the nuclear material, be it spent fuel or MOX, would have to be guarded with "military force." It is a familiar stance. For a few years beginning in 1992, the Western press was full of reports of the possible smuggling of fissile and other radioactive — but not necessarily weapons-usable — material. One notable report was an investigation carried out by the "Frontline" program of the U.S. Public Broadcasting Service in November 1996, which detailed some of the biggest scares to that date. oOn Nov. 23, 1995, a reporter for NTV television claimed to have received a tip-off from Chechen rebel leader Shamil Basayev and uncovered a package containing cesium-137 buried under some leaves in Izmailovsky Park in northeast Moscow. oOn Dec. 14, 1994, 2.7 kilograms of uranium-235 was seized by police in Prague. According to the "Frontline" investigation, the supplier of the material, an Eduard Baranov from Obninsk, had been involved in a number of similar smuggling incidents of "loose nuke" material. Another "Frontline" report in 1999 revealed how U.S. agents were offered a chance to buy small nuclear devices from two Lithuanians, who allegedly had links to a mysterious scientific institute in St. Petersburg, as well as to then-Defense Minister Pavel Grachev. But a DOE source who requested anonymity said that for all the fear that Russia's nuclear arsenal would slowly fall into the hands of the highest rogue state bidder, "not one bomb has been lost." The source added that the MOX would be transported in the U.S. program via the same transportation infrastructure that kept nuclear arms on the move. "I would assume that the Russians have a similar infrastructure," the source said. But Bellona's Nilsen pointed out that such internal infrastructures are hard to locate because they run on secret schedules. "This will not be so with international shipments," he said. "Protesters can get scheduling information and protest, pointing out those ships or trains that contain waste." Military Uses Another theory as to why Russia wants to import spent nuclear fuel was put forward by Moscow-based defense analyst Pavel Felgenhauer, in a column he wrote for The Moscow Times last month. "In April 1999, the Security Council [President Vladimir Putin was the secretary of the Security Council at that time] ordered the Nuclear Power Ministry to speed up the development of a new generation of nuclear weapons, including so-called ‘penetrators,'" Felgenhauer wrote. "These weapons are designed to burrow down tens of meters underground before exploding. The Security Council also ordered the development of a new generation of very low-yield tactical, battlefield nuclear weapons. "Immediately after Putin announced the Security Council decision, Adamov began to clamor for foreign nuclear waste and a bill was introduced in the Duma." This theory was confirmed by Paul Beaver, a spokesman for Jane's, the highly respected defense, aerospace and transportation information group, in a recent interview from London. "The British have a penetrator called Broach, which is being looked at by the French and the Americans," he said. "[But] it's one piece of technology the Russians are short of." "In order to build a penetrator, you need depleted uranium, which means you need spent nuclear fuel. The Russians also need this for their anti-tank weapons — and it's also used in cruise missiles and guided bombs. "One of the reasons they are so interested is because of the problems they have had hitting targets effectively in Chechnya." If so, Felgenhauer noted, the irony is rich. All the West's financial help — selling spent fuel and helping Russia with the MOX deal — will be used to build nuclear weapons that could be used against it. TheMoscowTimes.com" ***************************************************************** 13 US backs plan for Russia to import nuclear waste Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Special report: Russia Paul Brown, environment correspondent Monday February 19, 2001 The Guardian Environmentalists are due to protest in Moscow today against a change in Russian law to allow the importation of nuclear waste. The protest comes as a leaked document outlines US-backed plans for shipping spent nuclear fuel from eight Taiwanese reactors to Russia for disposal. The lower house of parliament, the duma, is due to debate the second reading of a bill to end Russia's long-standing ban on the importation of nuclear waste. Minatom, the state nuclear company sponsoring the bill, believes it can earn £15bn by importing waste from overseas. The advanced stage of the plans became apparent at the weekend when a US energy department document was leaked to the anti-nuclear organisation Ecodefence in Moscow. The report, "Foreign Spent Fuel Storage and Geologic Disposal in Russia", produced by the department and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, outlines the plan for shipping Taiwanese nuclear waste to Russia. The US involvement in the scheme stems from the control Washington exercises over nuclear proliferation. Spent fuel can be reprocessed and used for nuclear weapons, so, from the building of the first reactors in Taiwan, the US has insisted on controlling the disposal route for the nuclear waste if any of the material originated in America, as much of it does. This has proved an embarrassment to Washington, since until now no country has been willing to take another's spent nuclear fuel, least of all America. But the Russians have long seen a business opportunity in the vast empty spaces of its eastern provinces. In December 1998 the Russian nuclear minister, Yevgeny Adamov, wrote to the then US energy secretary, Bill Richardson, asking if the US would be interested in sending some of its high-level waste to Russia for storage or reprocessing. At the time Mr Richardson replied that the US was not interested. Information was eaked to the press that Minatom was holding talks with Germany and Switzerland regarding shipments of radioactive waste to Russia, but nothing appeared to come of this. To drum up support in Russia, Minatom said that provinces prepared to accept waste would get a share of the money. The energy department report concerns the transportation of 7,500 tonnes of spent fuel from eight Taiwanese reactors. The fuel will be shipped by sea to the Russian far eastern ports of Vanino and Vladivostok and then by rail to Krasnoyarsk in Siberia. It says the spent fuel must leave Taiwan for Russia in 2007, and will be stored until 2020, when a repository built near the Mayak nuclear reprocessing plant will start to operate. Outlining the US's role as the main negotiator, the report says: "As a minimum, the US would have to enter into agreements with Taiwan and Russia that provide for successful implementation of the programme. "This will involve many complex issues and interested government agencies as well as non-governmental organisations. Due to the unique aspects of the relationship between Taiwan and the US, the coordination of technical activities in this programme requires careful management." This provoked a strong reaction from Vladimir Slivyak, co-chairman of Ecodefence, which released the document. "The US energy department and the American nuclear industry are looking to set up an international radioactive toilet in Russia," he said. "In polls 93,5% of Russians are strongly opposed to the nuclear waste import proposed by the Russian nuclear industry. "It's not just a fight against nuclear waste import, but a fight for establishing democracy and strong civil society in Russia." Environmental activists and the liberal party Yabloko are organising today's protest outside parliament. The duma gave a first reading to the bill on December 21. The second reading is due on Thursday. The Russian nuclear industry could earn an estimated $20bn (£13bn) over the next 10 years if the ban is lifted and it is allowed to import 20,000 tonnes of spent nuclear fuel from abroad, officials said. But environmentalists claim that adding more to the 14,000 tonnes of Russian nuclear waste already stored near its nuclear reactors could bring an ecological disaster Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001 ***************************************************************** 14 Work proceeds on blueprint for Yucca repository VOCABULARY Below are terms used by Yucca Mountain Project engineers: Atom: The fundamental building block of elements. Spent fuel: Ceramic pellets containing nuclear material left from the splitting of uranium atoms to produce heat for commercial power reactors. Half-life: The time it takes for half the atoms in a radioactive substance to decay into a more stable state or different energy level. A 30-year half-life means that half the radioactive atoms will decay after 30 years. After roughly 1,000 years, the radioactive matter will be decreased by a factor of 10 billion. Drifts: Small tunnels for entombing nuclear waste packages off a larger main tunnel. Repository: A system of tunnels and drifts with barriers inside a mountain for entombing high-level nuclear waste including spent fuel from commercial and naval reactors and waste from defense activities that has been turned into glass logs. Radiation: The release of energy waves or fast-moving particles from a radioactive substance. -- REVIEW-JOURNAL Controlling water and heat important to keeping nuclear waste safeguarded By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL Scientists are in the final stages of designing a system of tunnels with the best possible chance of safely entombing high-level nuclear waste inside Yucca Mountain. They say they are taking a Darwinian approach to the task, using a technique they call "design evolution." Charles Darwin, the 19th century naturalist, looked into the past to see how species evolved as conditions changed. To develop their repository design, Yucca Mountain Project scientists are looking far into the future to anticipate how geological conditions could change. Of key importance will be taking into account surface water that could trickle down through cracks in the volcanic-rock ridge, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, potentially damaging waste canisters through corrosion. They must also calculate how far apart packages of the decaying, radioactive waste must be spaced so the repository can operate at a cool enough temperature so as not to trigger unpredictable water movement in the rock. The scientists are trying to convince an independent, presidentially appointed panel of experts that 77,000 tons of some of the most highly radioactive waste on Earth can be safely contained in the mountain by keeping it cool enough and dry enough for at least 10,000 years. That will be done, they say, in a maze of tunnels up to 100 miles long, 1,000 feet beneath the crest of the flattop ridge. The conceptual design will be part of a report that the Energy secretary will review to determine whether the site is safe for storing the waste. Geologists consulting for the state of Nevada have been critical of the mountain's natural setting, asserting that hot ground water from beneath the repository could shoot upward, loading the waste caverns with thermal water laced with radioactive materials. Federal scientists disagree and say the evidence from minerals inside the mountain means the greatest threat from water is in it migrating downward from the surface of the ridge. To prevent a disastrous situation, the federal team must guess correctly what mix of metals surrounding the ceramic nuclear fuel pellets will withstand corrosion the longest, even though rainfall and climate conditions or earthquakes and volcanic activity can't be forecast. They envision using titanium shields, designed to deflect any water that might descend through the mountain. Scientists expect that more than one-third of an inch of rainwater each year will trickle from the ridge downward through the mountain. The double-walled waste cylinders will be made of stainless steel and a nickel-base superalloy. At several inches thick, those metals will surround the tough, zirconium rods that encase the fuel pellets. Some decisions, such as how long the repository should remain open to ventilate intense heat that the waste will transmit to the rock after closure, will probably be left to future generations. Once the repository's doors are closed, peak temperatures could be reached as soon as five years later. But much of the waste is expected to simmer for at least 300 years and possibly more than 1,000 years as radiation from longer-lived nuclear materials continues its assault on the surroundings. Last month, the 11-member panel of Clinton appointees, known as the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, expressed concern that the designs presented so far by the Department of Energy could create problems. One problem could occur if the waste heats the rock to a temperature of 300 degrees Fahrenheit, causing water to move inside the mountain. Water boils at 205 degrees at the repository's elevation. The panel, which makes recommendations to Congress and the Energy secretary on the technical aspects of the proposed repository, offered a suggestion to the designers. "We asked DOE to look at a cooler design to compare with the hot design," explained one engineer on the board's staff, Carl Di Bella. "The point we've made a number of times in the past is (that) the technical basis that underpins the hot design is weak. It would be a very good idea to look at a cooler design," he said in a telephone interview last week. A "cooler" design -- one that lets decaying waste heat up surrounding rock walls to roughly 180 degrees, or 25 degrees less than water's boiling point -- would give the panel more confidence that water inside the mountain won't rapidly corrode waste canisters and carry off potentially deadly radioactive materials. Some materials left from the splitting of uranium atoms in reactor fuel will remain radioactive for thousands to tens of thousands of years. One radioactive byproduct, neptunium-237, has a half-life of more than 2 million years. "The more heat, the more you mobilize the small amount of water that is in the mountain," Di Bella explained, noting that water could collect in the repository area or drip down on top of the waste packages. He said the hope for the hot design is that the heat would drive the water further away from waste canisters, where it would condense on cooler surfaces. However, he said, the water could find its way back as time passes. Yucca Mountain Project nuclear engineer Dan Kane said Energy Department scientists are drawing up plans that he expects will satisfy the panel's concerns. "We have studied -- among other things -- a hot repository design, a moderate temperature design and a cool design," Kane said. "The board is saying, `Make sure you complete a cool design before you move forward.' "This is a natural part of design evolution," he said. To develop an acceptable "cool" design, engineers will have to figure out how far apart to dig the parallel tunnels -- or drifts -- where waste packages will be placed. "That we haven't figured out yet," Kane said. The space between the tunnels, called the pillar rock, which is supposed to drain moisture away from the canisters, varies from 33 yards in the "hot" design to 89 yards in the "moderate" design. While spacing for the "cool" design is unknown, Kane said it probably will not be significantly different from the moderate design. "All these numbers are preliminary," he noted. To put the sealed waste canisters in the drifts, engineers foresee using small locomotives "with shielding to protect the operator," to move them to the entrance of the isolation tunnels. Once there, the locomotive decouples and moves away while remotely controlled doors open, and the waste package atop a pallet is drawn into the drift. Then, operators move a framework over a railed track to lift the waste off of its deck and move it to its final location. Besides spacing of the waste packages, there are other factors that will play roles in dissipating heat in Yucca Mountain. Scientists must decide whether sandlike backfill should be used to cushion the waste packages from any rock that might shake loose from the ceiling. Di Bella said adjustments to where the waste is placed inside the drifts can be made. "You can put the waste packages inside the drifts closer together or farther apart. Or, you can put more or less waste in each package," he said. Like a hot oven with its door open, ventilating the heat by keeping the repository open is an important aspect of the repository's design, he said. "As long as you leave the repository open, you can ventilate it," he said, noting that fans could be used to blow the heat away in an emergency. The current thought, however, is to ventilate it naturally as much as possible by drilling strategically placed shafts into the ridge to serve as chimneys. If the site is found to be suitable for safely containing waste -- based in part on a recommendation from the Energy secretary expected this year or next -- and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission deems the design fit for licensing, plans call for the first spent fuel rods to be entombed in 2010 with closure of the repository in 2060. But keeping the repository open longer will allow it to operate at cooler temperatures until the waste decays. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 15 Capping of tailings site halted [deseretnews.com] February 18, 2001 Trustee for Atlas says wildlife agency won't let it continue the job By Donna Kemp Spangler Deseret News staff writer The trustee for the bankrupt Atlas Corp. has packed its bags and gone home. PricewaterhouseCoopers had been working to put a soil cap over the 130-acre pile so the radioactive dust wouldn't blow into nearby communities. But Keith Eastin, financial director for PricewaterhouseCoopers, said he has suspended all operations in light of a letter he received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The FWS said in the Feb. 8 letter that it was withdrawing a "biological opinion" issued in 1998 that had permitted PricewaterhouseCoopers to do work within the critical habitat of endangered fish in the Colorado River. "We can't do anything," said Eastin. "And I don't understand why (FWS) is doing this now." Things have changed since the opinion was issued, FWS officials said, and the trustee is overreacting. For instance, Congress has passed legislation that would transfer ownership of the 13 million tons of radioactive waste to the U.S. Department of Energy and remove the contaminated tailings from the banks of the Colorado River. But until then, PricewaterhouseCoopers should continue with its reclamation efforts, such as preventing erosion and reducing the dust, the FWS says. The tailings are allowing about 19,000 gallons of contaminated water to leak each day into the Colorado River and releasing radioactive radon gas into the air. And Henry Maddux, field supervisor for the FWS's Salt Lake office, said maintenance work can still be done without harming the endangered Colorado pikeminnow and razorback sucker. "We're not going to put our fish in front of human safety," said Maddux. "I think they are overreacting by taking their ball and going home." Grand County Council Chairwoman Kimberly Schappert agreed. "What they were doing was not the intent of the legislation," Schappert said. "It was never the intent to be capped. . . . When Keith Eastin says (FWS) is shutting them down, that's baloney." Eastin asked the federal government for permission to pursue a long-term remedy that calls for draining the pile and capping it with materials to prevent precipitation from leaching additional contaminants into the river. FWS granted the trustee a permit that exempted it from provisions of the Endangered Species Act. The Grand County Council and the environmental group Grand Canyon Trust sued the FWS over its decision. FWS officials repeatedly warned PricewaterhouseCoopers of the need to revisit the issue, but the trustee "ignored us," Maddux said. Eastin responded that his company has spent $700,000 on studies that suggest the contamination is less-threatening than what government studies had shown. Regardless, Schappert believes PricewaterhouseCoopers has left the site in a bigger mess. "They've done a lot of dirt moving that didn't need to be done," she said. "We're now left with a pile of dirt that will blow this spring and kick up airborne contaminants and erosion from the wind and water." *E-mail: donna@desnews.com* © 2001 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 16 PSC backs Southern on nuclear waste - 2001-02-19 - Atlanta Business Chronicle Erin Moriarty Staff Writer The Georgia Public Service Commission is speaking out on behalf of Southern Co. in the national dilemma over storing mounting levels of nuclear waste. Georgia's PSC is urging the U.S. Congress to support additional funding for the federal Nuclear Waste Fund, which would help power plants dispose of their high-level nuclear waste. When the U.S. Department of Energy created the fund in 1982, it promised to use the money to create a permanent facility for the nation's nuclear waste by 1998 -- but the department has failed to deliver on that promise and is unlikely to do so before 2010. Billions of dollars from the fund have dissipated over the years as a result of costly research projects investigating where and how to build a national storage site. Georgia Public Service Commission Chairman Lauren "Bubba" McDonald said adequate federal funding -- in addition to what ratepayers have contributed -- is essential in order to create a national storage facility by 2010. The government's chosen site for a national storage facility, Yucca Mountain, Nev., has faced fierce opposition and has been tied up for a decade in research as well as political, legal and environmental battles. The project also is technically daunting because some parts of nuclear waste are so hazardous they will have to be kept in isolation for at least 10,000 years. Meanwhile, Atlanta-based Southern and other utilities are running out of places to store the highly toxic waste produced by their nuclear plants. Southern Co. operates three nuclear power plants and generates 20 percent of its electricity from nuclear energy. There are about 41,000 metric tons of nuclear waste from power plants -- or spent nuclear fuel, as it is called -- in the United States, and the amount is expected to reach 64,400 metric tons by the end of the decade, according to a study by NAC International Inc. McDonald said funding for the Nuclear Waste Fund is "a matter critical to the electricity situation in Georgia and the nation." McDonald sent a letter in early February about the problem to Georgia's U.S. senators and representatives. He also testified before Congress on behalf of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners. "We have been frustrated by the delay in the program and almost equally perplexed by the inability of the Department of Energy to obtain the necessary appropriations to move the program forward," McDonald testified on Sept. 28. The Nuclear Waste Fund was established by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. It established a fee for nuclear utilities (and their customers) of one-tenth of a cent for every kilowatt hour of electricity generated from nuclear energy. In return, the government promised to begin taking care of the utilities' nuclear waste by 1998. Since the government has failed to do so, many companies, such as Southern Co. subsidiaries Alabama Power and Georgia Power, have begun pursuing legal action against the government for breach of contract. "We agree with Commissioner McDonald that the federal government must live up to its obligation to promptly and safely dispose of used fuel from the nation's nuclear plants," said Mike Tyndall, spokesperson for Georgia Power. Nuclear utilities also are seeking other solutions, such as storing 40,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel on an Indian reservation in Utah. That project is being organized by Private Fuel Storage LLC, which is a consortium of nuclear utilities, including Southern Co. [Please see the story "Nuclear cemetery plan ignites fight" online at http://atlanta.bcentral.com/atlanta/stories/2001/01/29/story1.html] In addition, some have begun storing their spent nuclear fuel in temporary dry storage casks -- special containers made of steel and concrete that can be set up outdoors at nuclear power plants. Southern Co.'s Plant Hatch already has spent a total of $20 million on dry storage, said Rick Kimble, spokesperson for Southern Nuclear Operating Co., a subsidiary of Southern Co. The PSC is concerned that Georgians are essentially paying for the government's failure to remove the nuclear waste. McDonald said Georgia ratepayers have contributed $534.2 million in payments to the Nuclear Waste Fund, while spending millions on temporary storage. Environmental concerns Environmental groups agree that the nation's growing nuclear waste is a serious problem, but most disagree with the push for a national storage facility. "This is a mounting problem that is accumulating to a very severe state," said Rita Kilpatrick, executive director of Georgians for Clean Energy. However, Kilpatrick believes the PSC's support for a national storage facility is misdirected. "Our view of it is that if the commission is putting all of its eggs in a high-level centralized storage facility that isn't necessarily going anywhere then they're essentially making the statement that it's OK for Georgia to start accumulating this stuff," Kilpatrick said. Kilpatrick said it would make more sense for the state to investigate alternative energy options and work on local policies that would reduce Georgia's dependency on nuclear power. Glenn Carroll, an officer of Georgians Against Nuclear Energy, is opposed to a national storage facility, but she believes that dry cask storage, or keeping the waste in storage containers on-site, is a viable option if it is done safely. "Transporting it hundreds or thousands of miles and putting it in a mountain in a state that has no nuclear power ... or shipping it across the country to two poor Indian families [on a reservation in Utah, as is proposed by Private Fuel Storage] is irresponsible," Carroll said. "Dry cask storage would buy us time to get real about the nuclear waste problem." Long-term storage The Nuclear Waste Fund is now worth more than $10 billion by some estimates, but has not yet been used to help utilities dispose of nuclear waste. So far, the government has spent more than a decade and $3.6 billion investigating the possibility of building a permanent nuclear waste storage facility in Yucca Mountain, Nev. The project has faced heavy opposition and some scientific studies have shown that the area could be susceptible to an earthquake or volcano. An earthquake could force groundwater into the waste storage area and carry potentially deadly radioactive contaminants into the environment, scientists say. Even if the government decides to proceed with the Yucca Mountain project, the earliest it might open would be 2010 because of ongoing battles. In the meantime, utilities must deal with increasing levels of nuclear waste. "The utilities in a way are victims -- along with the public -- of the failed nuclear promise," Carroll said. "The federal government promised that they would pick up the nuclear waste, but that promise has been broken to them." *Reach Moriarty at emoriarty@bizjournals.com. * [Get Copyright Clearance] Copyright 2001 American City Business Journals Inc. Click for permission to reprint (PRC# ***************************************************************** 17 Change of lobbyist questioned Las Vegas SUN February 19, 2001 Commissioner wants discussion before anti-nuke rep hired By Mary Manning A controversial contract to hire a Washington, D.C., firm to lobby against high-level nuclear waste from burial in Nevada is raising some heat before the item comes before the Clark County Commission on Tuesday. Commissioner Mary Kincaid requested that the item to hire Cassidy and Associates be yanked off the consent agenda and discussed separately. The consent agenda allows several routine items to be approved at once without discussion. Kincaid said she questioned the contract after reading the item for the first time on Friday. "I asked the staff why we were changing firms," Kincaid said. "They didn't have an answer. I have a lot of questions." Commissioner Erin Kenny had asked that the Cassidy contract be placed on the consent agenda. The agreement would end on March 31, 2002. Cassidy would replace Alcalde and Fay of Virginia, which has represented the county at $36,000 a year in its fight to stop 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste from burial at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "The Cassidy group has been extremely successful for Southern Nevada interests," Kenny said. Cassidy had been hired by UNLV and secured $13.5 million for the university, she said. The University Medical Center got $1.5 million in nuclear medicine and other grants through Cassidy, Kenny said. The Health District just hired the firm to look for more federal money for programs such as immunization. The agenda item will keep Commission Chairman Dario Herrera on the sidelines because of a possible conflict of interest, he said. Herrera said on Friday that he would not discuss or vote on the Cassidy contract, because he once considered working for the firm. "I am not going to participate in that discussion to avoid a potential conflict of interest," Herrera said. "There is no way I am even going to create the appearance of a potential conflict." County staff had not briefed him on the Cassidy matter, Herrera said. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 USFK holds 50,000 rounds of depleted uranium ammunition, says GNP lawmaker http://www.koreaherald.com An opposition lawmaker has claimed that the U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) has some 50,000 rounds of depleted uranium ammunition. Rep. Kim Won-wung of the Grand National Party (GNP) said that in 1982 the USFK had begun bringing depleted uranium shells for 105mm and 120mm anti-tank artillery pieces into the country, and that this has been confirmed by the USFK. But he refused to elaborate on the source of his information about the depleted uranium ammunition. In 1997 when civic groups raised suspicions of the U.S. troops in the country holding depleted uranium ammunition, the USFK said it has no such shells nor has it used them. But when an accidental firing of depleted uranium shells occurred in the U.S. Forces in Japan in the same year, the U.S. government announced that it would move all the depleted uranium ammunition in Japan to South Korea in a bid to solve a diplomatic row with Japan over the accidental firing, Kim claimed. Used in the Gulf War in 1991 and again in the NATO air raid on Yugoslavia in 1999, the depleted uranium ammunition causes breast cancer, leukemia and other diseases, and for this reason, the United Nations imposed an official ban the use of this ammunition, he said. He called for another revision of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), for the recently revised SOFA provision against South Korea's say regarding U.S. military facilities and ammunition in the country which runs counter to the current Atomic Power Law provision banning imports of uranium and other dangerous substances (C) Copyright 2000 Digital Korea Herald. All rights reserved.