***************************************************************** 06/27/01 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 9.160 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS 1 San Onofre blast released no radiation, spokesman says 2 To Escape Global Warming, UK Turns to Nuclear Power 3 Citizens' coalition sues Bangor over Trident II missile upgrade 4 Closure of Taiwanese Nuclear Plants to Cost 10 Bln US Dollars: Report 5 NRC Assigns New Sr. Resident Inspector to TMI Nuclear Plant 6 Disclosure of nuclear waste routes is sought 7 DOE's ground water prognosis in question 8 Leader: Energising policy 9 Contaminated uranium threat widens - 6/26/2001 - ENN.com 10 NRC Seeks Comments on Preliminary Assessment of Nuclear Industry 11 Judge dismisses claim that Bruce Power waste dump bad for environment 12 Nuke plant security worries state 13 Charles Barton: Nuclear's suddenly brighter future 14 Solving Asia's Nuclear-Waste Dilemma - Pacific Forum Program - 15 Nuclear agency still struggling with management issues 16 Labour worries over nuclear reaction 17 Goshutes' Water Problems Deepen N-Waste Concerns NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS 1 Who's to blame at Rocky Flats 2 Beryllium witness wants gag order reversed 3 Sick OR workers begin claims process 4 Expert: Paducah workers at high risk Messenger 5 Pantex panel may change focus 6 Worrisome radioactivity levels discovered in Chestermere Lake 7 Manufacturer 'let off the hook,' Flats union rep says 8 Hospital stores 1000 body parts 9 Chestermere won't glow in dark 10 Mound project transfer questioned 11 Sick-worker comp plan is faulted 12 Appropriations Committee OKs funding for local DOE projects 13 Board, DOE at odds over scope of advice 14 DOE challenge could defang Pantex watchdogs 15 Jury Rules for Beryllium Supplier 16 Layoff buyouts have their own silver lining 17 Meetings to explain added benefits for test site workers **************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 San Onofre blast released no radiation, spokesman says SignOn San Diego Metro -- But motorists on I-5 weren't so sure By Bruce Lieberman UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER June 26, 2001 SAN ONOFRE -- Charlene Engel was driving with a few friends up Interstate 5 Sunday when she saw flames and smoke shoot suddenly skyward from the nuclear power plant. Pieces of silvery material were fluttering through the air and drifting toward the freeway. Traffic began speeding up. "Everybody sort of saw it and thought, 'Oh my God, have we just been irradiated or what?' " said Engel, a Rancho Bernardo artist. + Explosion hits at San Onofre In fact, the explosion of a transformer was far outside the twin reactors at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, and posed no radiation danger, Ray Golden, a plant spokesman, said yesterday. But Engel and her friends, who were heading to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art for a Winslow Homer exhibit, didn't know that. "You don't actually know how things are hooked up, so you don't want to hang around," Engel said. "We moved north pretty quickly." Santee resident Richard Carrico, whose niece was driving him to Dana Point, said the fireball rose about 50 feet. "My God, I thought she was going to faint," said Carrico, 93. No one was injured in the explosion, which occurred at 11:03 a.m. and was followed by a fire that lasted about 40 minutes. The transformer was destroyed, but no other equipment at the plant was damaged and the twin reactors continued to operate at full power without interruption, Golden said. Yesterday, San Onofre investigators were still trying to figure out why the transformer failed. They should have some answers, and a new transformer installed, in about a week. The transformer was one of 54 in the plant's switching yard used to reduce the voltage of a sample of outgoing electricity. The so-called "potential transformers" step down the current sample to 115 volts so instruments can test the amperage and wattage. Electricity leaves San Onofre at 238,000 volts in transmission lines. The explosion scattered shards of ceramic and aluminum debris, and 90 gallons of burning insulation oil, hundreds of feet, Golden said. Pieces of the transformer, some as large as one foot square, landed on Old Highway 101. Plant operators feared debris would land on I-5, but the California Highway Patrol did not report any there, a dispatcher said. The CHP received several 911 calls from drivers reporting a fireball. The last time a potential transformer exploded at the plant's switching yard was in 1994, Golden said. Plant workers discovered that corrosion caused by ocean air rusted the transformer's carbon-steel casing, allowing water to enter and contaminate the insulation oil. After that, the plant replaced four transformers and repaired three. All are periodically washed down with high-pressure fire hoses to prevent corrosion, Golden said. He would not speculate on the cause of the latest explosion, or whether it could lead to the replacement of other transformers. "If the root cause shows that it needs to be repaired or replaced, it will," he said. Although Sunday's explosion did not shut down the plant or release any radiation, it was the latest in a string of mishaps this year. On Feb. 2, a faulty circuit breaker ignited a fire and cut off lubricating oil to Unit 3's turbine generators, causing about $45 million in damage and shutting the reactor down for four months. On May 30, a portable crane dropped 40 feet to the ground when a sling on a large gantry crane failed. On June 6, workers inadvertently overfilled a 300-gallon steel bin with hydrazine, a toxic chemical used to purify water in the plant's cooling systems, spilling about 20 gallons. Golden said the four accidents this year do not indicate that the plant is unsafe. "We perform hundreds, if not thousands, of work activities a day," he said. © Copyright 2001 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 2 To Escape Global Warming, UK Turns to Nuclear Power Environment News Service: LONDON, England, June 26, 2001 (ENS) - UK Prime Minister Tony Blair yesterday threatened an explosive row over possible new nuclear power capacity as he launched the country's first comprehensive energy review for 20 years. Blair told Parliament, "The aim of the review will be to set out the objectives of energy policy and to develop a strategy that ensures current policy commitments are consistent with longer term goals. The findings will also inform the government’s response to last year’s report from the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution Energy - the changing climate." [Blair] Prime Minister Tony Blair (Photo courtesy UK government) The review is aimed at juggling long term British energy security with the need to continue cutting greenhouse gas emissions against a picture of dwindling domestic oil and gas production. The United Kingdom has been a big net petroleum exporter, but is set to become a net importer again within the next decade. Blair's Labour government pledged not to build any more nuclear stations in the run-up to its 1997 election victory, but did not repeat the promise before its landslide re-election earlier this month. One part of the longer term solution, the government has now signalled, might be to resume a nuclear power generation program stalled since 1987. Nuclear power production raises issues of safe disposal of the spent nuclear fuel and also operations safety issues, but nuclear power does not produce the greenhouse gases linked to global warming. Nuclear generation currently produces 25 percent of UK electricity. On current trends, this could fall to three percent by 2020, with gas supplying half of energy needs, coal six percent and renewables four percent. Britain's environmental movement reacted sharply to the suggestion of a renewed nuclear program yesterday, calling for major support of renewables instead. NGOs warned that Brian Wilson, the energy minister who will lead the review, is "pro-nuclear." Leaked documents published in the UK Telegraph newspaper today show that massive increases in radioactive discharges into the Irish Sea are planned from the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant in Cumbria. Documents leaked to Greenpeace show discharges of many radioactive substances are predicted to double, and some to increase four-fold. Across Europe, Finland is the only other country considering building more nuclear plants. Most countries with existing nuclear capacity are seeking to phase out the industry. Germany signed an agreement with its nuclear industry earlier this month that begins the phase out in 2005. envdaily@ends.co.uk} © Environment News Service ***************************************************************** 3 Citizens' coalition sues Bangor over Trident II missile upgrade Tuesday, June 26, 2001 By ELIZABETH MURTAUGH THE ASSOCIATED PRESS A citizens' coalition is suing Naval Submarine Base Bangor over its plan to bring more powerful nuclear missiles to Hood Canal, saying the Navy did not consider potential threats to the environment in planning the upgrade. The groups contend the Navy underestimated the Trident II D-5's risk of accidental detonation, citing a 1990 review by a U.S. Armed Services panel on nuclear weapons safety. The Trident II D-5 has the explosive power of roughly 3.7 million pounds of TNT -- nearly twice as powerful as the Trident I C-4 missiles currently in Bangor subs, says the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court here. Bangor spokesman Lt. Kevin Stephens said the complaint is "completely without merit." "Trident II D-5 missiles are safely used every day ... have been for years," Stephens said. The Navy has 60 days to respond to the lawsuit filed Friday. Though Navy lawyers declined to comment on the case Tuesday, Stephens said the Navy "is fully compliant with any and all applicable environmental regulations. "We have been and always will be environmental stewards of the Pacific Northwest." The lawsuit contends the Navy hasn't prepared an environmental assessment of the Trident D-5 since a 1989 review of a missile upgrade program, which plaintiffs say did not address potential problems with loading and unloading the missiles. "It's out of date," said Dave Marr, the Seattle attorney who filed the lawsuit for a coalition of environmental groups, peace organizations and individuals. "There's a lot of new information since then ... and even then they didn't look at the explosive danger of these weapons themselves." But plans to upgrade Bangor's submarine fleet with Trident D-5 missiles have been in place for decades, Stephens said. While the more technologically advanced missiles were developed, less powerful Trident I C-4 missiles have loaded in Bangor's subs. Last year, the Navy announced plans to transfer two Trident submarines carrying the Trident II D-5 missiles from Kings Bay, Ga., where they are now based, to Washington state in October 2002. The proposed move is part of the Navy's efforts to shuffle and shrink its ballistic missile sub fleet, officials said. The lawsuit names the U.S. Navy and Capt. Duane Baker Jr., commander of the base, and Capt. Bruce Gustin III, commander of Bangor's strategic weapons facility, Mann said. The case has been assigned to Judge Franklin Burgess in Tacoma, Mann said. No trial date has been set. [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 Send comments to newmedia@seattle-pi.com ©1999-2001 Seattle Post-Intelligencer ***************************************************************** 4 Closure of Taiwanese Nuclear Plants to Cost 10 Bln US Dollars: Report ENGLISH NEWS 2001.06.26 02:53AM Taiwan time updated TAIPEI, June 25 (AFP) - Taiwan's plans to close three nuclear power plantsahead of schedule may cost around 10 billion US dollars, it was reportedMonday. The three power plants would be respectively shut down in 2001, 2004, and2007, or seven years earlier than planned, according to an economic ministryreport, the Commercial Times said. "The cost of the plans may run up to 350 billion Taiwan dollars (10.14billion US)," an unnamed official was quoted as saying. The plans would be implemented only if the state-run Taiwan Power Company(Taipower)'s output capacity was 15 percent higher than peak demands. Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government and the oppositionparties agreed early this year to build a nuclear free zone in the wake of arow over the construction of the island's fourth nuclear power plant. The DPP government on October 27 last year scrapped the partly built5.6-billion-US-dollar power plant without consulting parliament, as required byTaiwan's constitution, plunging the island into months of political crisis. The DPP, which had listed the scrapping of the project on its partyplatform, reinstated the project in February. The DPP opposed nuclear power on grounds of safety and difficulty indisposing of the nuclear waste. Since the first nuclear power plant started in 1987, the three nuclearpower plants have generated 180,000 drums of low-radiation waste. To solve the pressing problem, Taipower plans to build a disposal site onthe remote Wuchiu islet off the mainland, where up to 160,000 barrels oflow-radiation waste could be stored. The plan was strongly opposed by hundreds of Wuchiu residents and Beijing. Meanwhile Taipower forged an agreement with North Korea in early 1997 todispose of 60,000 barrels of low-radiation nuclear waste, with a provision toincrease the volume to 200,000 barrels. Taipower planned to begin shipping the waste to North Korea in 1998 but wasforced to halt the scheme under pressure from South Korea and internationalconservationists. China Times Inter@ctive Main Page (in Big-5 Chinese) Contact us¡Gservice@it.chinatimes.com.tw

***************************************************************** 5 NRC Assigns New Sr. Resident Inspector to TMI Nuclear Plant Press Release - Region I - 2001- 43 - UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 No. I-01-043 June 27, 2001 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610)337-5330/ e-mail: dps@nrc.gov Neil A. Sheehan (610)337-5331/e-mail: nas@nrc.gov Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in King of Prussia, Pa., have assigned Daniel Orr as the Senior Resident Inspector at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant. He joins Resident Inspector Craig Smith at the Middletown, Pa., plant. Orr joined the NRC as a reactor engineer in the Region I office in February 1997. He was then assigned as a resident inspector at the Hope Creek nuclear plant in New Jersey. Prior to joining the Agency, Orr worked as a senior reactor operator at the Dresden nuclear plant in Illinois. He also served in the United States Navy as a submarine officer. Orr earned a bachelor's of science degree in electronic engineering from California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo. Each U.S. commercial nuclear power plant has at least two NRC resident inspectors. They serve as the agency's eyes and ears at the facility, conducting regular inspections, monitoring significant work projects and interfacing with plant workers and the public. The Three Mile Island resident inspectors can be reached at 717/948-1165. ***************************************************************** 6 Disclosure of nuclear waste routes is sought Today: June 27, 2001 at 10:05:58 PDT LAS VEGAS SUN U.S. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., plans to insert an amendment to the House Energy and Water Appropriations bill today to force the Energy Department to publish nationwide high-level nuclear waste transportation routes. Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is the only site under study by the DOE to bury 77,000 tons of commercial reactor spent fuel and defense waste from across the country. In addition to disclosing the routes, Berkley's amendment would mandate the DOE perform an environmental analysis of each route. Titled the "Nuclear Waste Transportation Right to Know Amendment," the measure is designed to raise public awareness of the dangers of transporting the deadly radioactive waste and to bring the issue home to every congressional district in the country, Berkley's spokesman Michael O'Donovan said. The appropriations bill has historically supplied millions of dollars for public works projects in Southern Nevada, including flood control and funds for Lake Mead water quality and the Las Vegas Wash, but has also been the vehicle for DOE's study money of Yucca Mountain. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 7 DOE's ground water prognosis in question Today: June 27, 2001 at 11:19:50 PDT Study says radiation exposure could occur sooner than expected By Mary Manning LAS VEGAS SUN New research shows that the Energy Department's calculations on the direction and the speed of ground water at a proposed high-level nuclear waste repository could be wrong, a state scientist says. If the state study -- still in progress -- is correct, radiation from 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste buried in a proposed repository at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, could escape and expose people sooner than 10,000 years, the life span set for the repository by federal law, hydrologist Linda Lehman, who conducted the research, said. That could make Yucca Mountain unable to meet new Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for the amount of radiation that can escape the repository through ground water, said Lehman, a former Nuclear Regulatory Commission scientist who works for the state. Lehman told an international independent review panel last week that the state used U.S. Geological Survey information on ground water temperatures over the past 15 years in its effort to verify DOE computer models on flow. The DOE did not include that information in its projections. The DOE, which has spent $7 billion and 20 years studying the dump site, plans to include the state's ground water model in its final calculations as it prepares to recommend whether Yucca Mountain is suitable for a repository, said Robert Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects and Lehman's boss. It was unclear how the state's new conclusions might affect the DOE's recommendation, Loux said. Yucca Mountain is the only site under study as a U.S. nuclear waste repository. Nevada opposes the repository, estimated to cost $58 billion to complete. It would accept waste in 2010 at the earliest, if the site is found scientifically suitable. Preliminary results of hundreds of computer models run by the state indicate the ground water flows southwest toward California along fractures and earthquake faults, Lehman told the scientists meeting in Las Vegas. The ground water would contain more radiation and escape the repository sooner than DOE's estimates if it runs along the faults and fractures, she said. Lehman said she plans to publish her results in time for an international high-level nuclear waste conference in February. DOE and USGS scientists have predicted that the ground water from Yucca Mountain flows east toward the Nevada Test Site, where more than 1,000 above- and below-ground nuclear weapons exploded from 1951 to 1992, then south toward the farming community of Amargosa Valley. The state expanded its ground water study to include Amargosa Valley and the Death Valley region during the past two years, Lehman said. Hydrologist Ghislain de Marsily of Paris, a member of the international panel, questioned DOE officials after Lehman's presentation. Why, de Marsily said, did the United States choose only one site -- Yucca Mountain -- to study as the world's first high-level nuclear waste repository? In 1987 Congress chose Yucca Mountain as the only site to study, DOE policy adviser Abraham Van Luik said. Two other sites, one in Hanford, Wash., the other in Deaf Smith County, Texas, were withdrawn at the time, Van Luik said. The USGS at first suggested burying the highly radioactive wastes from spent commercial reactors and weapons activities deeper than 1,000 feet below the water table at Yucca Mountain, but then moved the repository site at least 600 feet above the water table, he said. In addition to burying the wastes in relatively dry layers of volcanic ash, Van Luik said, the DOE plans to slow water from reaching the buried wastes by installing $7 billion worth of titanium drip shields and encasing the radioactive materials in containers that can last for up to 1 million years. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 8 Leader: Energising policy Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Switch off before switching on Special report: Britain's nuclear industry Leader Wednesday June 27, 2001 The Guardian Because Brian Wilson glows - he is an advocate of nuclear power - some have already written off the Cabinet Office review of energy policy he is about to chair. That response is premature. Like a zombie, the nuclear lobby may have risen from the grave to blunder around the corridors of power in Washington and now, perhaps, London; but a half-life will need to elapse before any new piles are switched on. By 2020, it is projected 3% of national energy needs will be met from nuclear sources, against 9% now. Even if pro-nuclear forces ambushed the Wilson review - and managed, somehow, to revolutionise the industry's economics - that decline is unlikely to be reversed. The process of decommissioning existing reactors would have to be stopped and, in the face of tremendous local and national opposition, new construction began - before any of the questions of principle and practice about the long-term future of nuclear material have been settled. A more immediate anxiety is that this exercise may be too narrow. It looks like the focus is energy supply: where will the oil and gas which will account for 85-90% of projected needs in two decades come from, the North Sea having given out? Renewable energy sources, wind and solar power especially, appear as also-rans - as if the United Kingdom could never aspire to the huge expansion in wind now being planned by the Germans. It could. Besides, it is demand rather than supply that should be at the heart of the review. Increased energy consumption, especially for transport, must not be treated as some unstoppable force of nature. Terms of reference need widening. During Labour's first term it produced a defence review much praised because it was "joined-up" and linked the need for armed forces to the changing contours of foreign policy. Now, at a similar stage of Labour's second term, here is a grand opportunity to think about energy use in the round. That implicates not just car use, congestion charges, incentives for recycling and the unimplemented agenda for sustainability set out by John Prescott at environment four years ago. Even though energy use is growing at a slower rate than GDP, cutting it could harm expectations of material improvement. So, this review must range over sacred turf, the Treasury's included, and trample on such cherished public aspirations as cheaper petrol. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001 ***************************************************************** 9 Contaminated uranium threat widens - 6/26/2001 - ENN.com Tuesday, June 26, 2001 By Associated Press From 1952 until 1999, when the shipments ended because of the contamination threat, vast quantities of recycled uranium were shipped worldwide. New government studies, reviewed by USA Today and reported in Monday's editions, found that the recycling program yielded 250,000 tons of tainted uranium, or about twice as much as earlier estimated. The highly radioactive material was handled at about 10 times the number of sites previously revealed and reportedly reached more than 100 federal plants, private manufacturers and universities. "This stuff circulated much more widely than we'd thought," said Robert Alvarez, an official at the Energy Department when the new studies were started in 1999. USA Today said the latest studies suggest that thousands more workers than expected might have unwittingly faced radiation risks beyond those associated with normal uranium. That exposure could significantly increase their odds of developing cancer and other diseases. Copyright 2001, Associated Press ***************************************************************** 10 NRC Seeks Comments on Preliminary Assessment of Nuclear Industry Consolidation on Agency's Regulatory Oversight Press Release 2001 - 075 - 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. 01-075 June 27, 2001 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking public comments as part of a preliminary assessment of the potential impacts of the nuclear power industry's ongoing consolidation on the agency's regulatory oversight functions. Specifically, the NRC's effort is designed to identify industry consolidation effects that may warrant changes to the agency's regulations, policies, processes, guidance and organizational structure. The NRC staff has identified about two dozen regulatory oversight areas that could be impacted by industry consolidation, and has completed preliminary assessments of them. The staff is seeking comments and suggestions from the industry and members of the public on the identified issues and preliminary impact assessments that have been published, in their entirety, in today's issue of the Federal Register and on the NRC's web site, at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/REACTOR/CONSOLIMPACT/index.html. The comment period ends on August 27. Written comments may be mailed to Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001. Comments may also be provided by accessing http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/wwwforms.html. Following an evaluation of the comments received, a public workshop will be held in late October at NRC headquarters in Rockville, Maryland, to discuss the regulatory oversight areas considered, the preliminary impact assessments, and the comments received. A notice about the workshop will be issued at a later date. ***************************************************************** 11 Judge dismisses claim that Bruce Power waste dump bad for environment Thursday, Jun. 28, 2001 June 26, 2001 Judge dismisses claim that Bruce Power waste dump bad for environment TORONTO (CP) -- A plan to store highly radioactive waste at a massive dump near the shores of Lake Huron can proceed, a federal Appeal Court ruled Tuesday as it dismissed efforts by a group of citizens to hold a public review of the project.  Residents demanded a detailed, independent environmental review of a dump planned for the Bruce Nuclear Power Development in Kincardine, Ont., about 230 kilometres northwest of Toronto.  They argued that an assessment used by then federal environment minister Christine Stewart to approve the project in April 1999 wasn't enough for what they believe would be the world's largest nuclear waste dump. The tribunal unanimously disagreed.  "I do not believe the minister or any of the agencies advising her was required to conduct any further analysis," Judge Edgar Sexton wrote in a 31-page ruling on behalf of the Appeal Court.  A report from a federal environmental assessment agency provided Stewart with a "rational basis for concluding that no significant adverse radiological effects were likely to be caused by the project," Sexton wrote.  Under federal environmental assessment laws, Stewart could have ordered the project to go through a more detailed independent environmental review, which is what the ratepayers' association wanted.  The residents group said not enough was known about the cumulative impacts of radiation already leaking from the Bruce Nuclear's generating stations to risk adding to it.  The appeal, launched by the Iverhuron and District Ratepayers' Association, named the federal environment minister, the federal fisheries minister, the Atomic Energy Control Board and Ontario Power as defendants.  The Appeal Court wasn't considering whether the environmental assessment was correct, but rather whether the report provided Stewart with a rational basis for her decision.  Stewart also relied on the similar findings of an Ontario Power environmental assessment.  The new facility would be capable of storing up to 700,000 bundles of highly radioactive, used nuclear fuel in above-ground concrete silos.  The judge cited evidence provided by the Atomic Energy Control Board that found the highest levels of radiation that would reach anyone near the site would be negligible -- amounting to less than 20 times the dosage of a roundtrip airline flight to Vancouver from Toronto. 2001, Canoe Limited Partnership. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 12 Nuke plant security worries state [The Concord Monitor online edition] / Tuesday, June 26, 2001 VERNON, Vt. - The state is "uncomfortable" with a federal policy that allowed the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. to give a temporary worker with a criminal record access to sensitive areas. Vermont Yankee officials told the Nuclear Regulatory Commission last week that a painter had been granted unescorted access during a planned refueling shutdown. After the man stopped working at the reactor, the corporation did a full background check and discovered a criminal conviction that would have disqualified him from that section of the plant "We have been on record before as not being comfortable with NRC policy related to background checks for outage workers," said Vermont's Nuclear Engineer William Sherman. "Our discomfort comes from an incident involving a man named Carl Drega." Drega, of Columbia, N.H., was killed by police in Bloomfield in 1997 after a rampage in Colebrook, N.H., during which he killed two New Hampshire state troopers, a newspaper editor and a judge. He had worked at Vermont Yankee. There have been a number of similar cases across the region. "We did some investigation and understood the NRC's policy, which is that they allow kind of a partial check of records but they don't do a full background check (for temporary unescorted access," Sherman said. "They don't get it done until (the temporary employees) leave." In the case of the unescorted painter, Yankee had followed NRC policy to the letter. Officials say there wasn't any adverse effect on public safety. Sherman concurred. A full background check, under current policy, involves a psychological exam, credit report, criminal history going back at least five years, and numerous other character investigations. Greg Smith, the NRC's Region 1 senior security specialist, said the checks were designed to weed out "untrustworthy" applicants. All of the 700 Yankee employees with unrestricted access are continually observed by their supervisors for signs of "aberrant behavior." © and New Hampshire Patriot P.O. Box 1177, Concord NH 03302 603-224-5301 ***************************************************************** 13 Charles Barton: Nuclear's suddenly brighter future Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 1:38 p.m. on Wednesday, June 27, 2001 The February and March issues of Nuclear News, published by the American Nuclear Society, were like a breath of fresh air to me. After experiencing years of frustration from fruitless efforts to get my views on the need for new nuclear power plants to people outside of Oak Ridge, it was indeed refreshing to read indications that people in the United States at levels from the president on down to ordinary citizens are at least willing to talk about future construction of this type of power plant. As the editor-in-chief of Nuclear News said (February issue) we are living in interesting times. He also said that the issue of energy has the attention of the American public because the electricity shortage in California threatens the quality of life and jobs of its residents. Since there have been no new orders for nuclear power plants in the United States since 1978, the tunnel has been long. In this column I will summarize some of the hopeful signs of better days for U.S. nuclear power. In an earlier column in The Oak Ridger (March 15), I quoted figures showing that in 1999 the cost of producing electricity was cheaper for nuclear reactors than for coal-burning plants and much cheaper than for plants using oil or natural gas. This was the first year since 1987 that the nuclear cost was lower than that of coal. This was due in part to the increasing efficiency of nuclear power plants. The average capacity factor, the fraction of the year that nuclear plants were in operation, was 87.2 percent which resulted in record amounts of electricity generation for that year. Preliminary figures for last year show that further increases in plant efficiency were achieved with some reactors operating more than 90 percent of the time. Wall street analysts were told during a briefing by the Nuclear Energy Institute on Feb. 2 that 393,000 megawatts (Mwe) of new electricity generating capacity will be needed by the year 2020. This projection was accompanied by the statement that new nuclear plant orders are possible within the next five years. This raises the question: What kind of plants are likely to be ordered? During recent years U.S. manufacturers of nuclear power plants have developed advanced types of reactors. Two advanced boiling water reactors have been put into operation in Japan. The February issue of Nuclear News features an interview with Corbin McNeill, an executive officer of Exelon Corp. which has invested $7.5 million in a project to develop the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor in association with Eskom, South Africa's state-owned utility. The PBMR is a high-temperature, helium-cooled reactor using a direct-cycle gas turbine. A great deal of work on reactors of this type has been performed in the United States, in Europe and elsewhere. A gas-cooled reactor (Fort St. Vrain) was operated for 10 years in Colorado. China is pursuing the concept at a leisurely pace. Exelon's management is interested in the possibility of producing 110-Mwe reactor modules as an alternative to the 1,000 plus-Mwe water cooled reactors. Advantages of reactors of this type are that they have higher thermal efficiency (40-42 percent vs 28-30 percent); they can be produced more rapidly (18-36 months vs. five years or more); safer to operate (loss of coolant accidents would result in very slow increase in containment pressure versus instantaneous increase in water-cooled reactors). The estimated cost of one of these reactors is $120 million. A combination of 10 of these modules, which would be in the capacity range of most water-cooled reactors, would be $1.2 billion compared to $2.0 billion or more for plants presently being constructed (according to McNeill). The South African design-feasibility study is expected to be completed this year and a decision on the construction of a prototype reactor will be made at that time. McNeill expressed his opinion that it is unlikely that another light water reactor will be built in this country. Other indications of a shift of interest in nuclear power plants include the results of a recent opinion poll showing that a majority of U.S. citizens favor new nuclear plants and the introduction in Congress of two bills that are favorable to the industry. Also, the value of presently operating plants has shown a sharp increase and the prospect for their relicensing for another 20 years of operation is much better than it was last year. Viva la change! Charles J. Barton is a resident of Oak Ridge. All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 14 Solving Asia's Nuclear-Waste Dilemma - Pacific Forum Program - Center For Strategic &International Studies CSIS 1800 K Street, NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006 #24 June 15, 2001 by Brad Glosserman Nuclear energy is news again. It has always been an issue for some people - environmental activists and energy industry groups - but nuclear power has largely faded from public consciousness, despite periodic incidents that highlighted fears of a catastrophic mishap at a nuclear power plant. The luxury of indifference is about to end, however. New political and economic pressures will force countries to make some hard choices about nuclear energy. The contradictions between government policy and public sentiment are going to become more salient in the decades ahead. Those contradictions were made plain in two recent developments on opposite ends of the globe. Last month, the U.S. administration of President George W. Bush announced the findings of its energy task force. That panel, headed by Vice President Dick Cheney, called for a higher profile for nuclear energy in U.S. power generation. The prospect of rising energy prices, increasing dependence on foreign energy sources and the embarrassment created by the rolling blackouts in California prompted the panel to reverse long-standing national policy that put a low priority on nuclear power. A few weeks later, Japanese voters in the village of Kariwa rejected Tokyo Electric Power Co. plans - and those of the Tokyo government - to use MOX fuel, a mixture of plutonium and uranium, in nuclear reactors. Although the referendum was nonbinding, it sent a clear signal of public unease about nuclear energy and the use of recycled fuel in nuclear power generation. To its credit, TEPCO acknowledged that message and suspended its plan to go ahead with MOX use -- at least temporarily. Antinuclear activists may rejoice at their victory, but the fight is only beginning. The shift in the U.S. outlook is the result of shifts far more fundamental and far-reaching than the Bush victory in last year's presidential election. Those forces will be felt around the world. The first factor is the growing recognition that energy is a national-security issue. For Japan, this is old news. The government has always rooted energy policy in a national-security framework. But more countries will frame energy issues in those terms as their energy requirements grow, the supply-demand balance shifts and prices adjust accordingly. Economic pressures are inescapable. Juxtapose two simple facts: Global primary energy use is conservatively expected to double or triple by 2050, yet known oil reserves are half depleted. Just as important are environmental concerns, and global warming in particular. Nuclear energy is one of the cleanest energy sources (at least when it comes to greenhouse gases). As governments and publics get serious about cutting those emissions they are going to have to reconsider the nuclear option. A final dimension consists of local economic considerations. For certain parts of the nuclear-energy equation - in particular, the storage problem - financial benefits will tilt the balance in decision-making. Quite simply, communities pressed to find new sources of income will be more inclined to look favorably on the idea of hosting a nuclear facility, especially given the construction costs and the compensation that frequently accompanies such decisions. While many countries will have to reconsider the nuclear option, most will do so from the medium- to long-term perspective. East Asian governments must address pressing questions in the nuclear-energy equation now. The most important of these concern the back end of the fuel cycle. In lay terms, the problem is simple: What do we do with the spent fuel that has already accumulated? A half century of nuclear development has left a considerable legacy. It is estimated that world accumulation of spent fuel will reach 341,095 tons by 2010; Asia's share is 50,610 tons. That is enough material to cover a road 10 meters wide and 300 km long to a depth of one meter. That mountain of radioactive waste will accumulate even if no additional nuclear capacity is installed in Northeast Asia; it is the product of plants already under construction or which were well in to the planning stage. Were that not sobering enough, there is the fact that that waste will contain 450 tons of plutonium. Dealing with that waste is, argues Ron Smith, director of defense and strategic studies at the University of Waikato, New Zealand and who has been studying the back-end problem for several years, "the Achilles heel of the nuclear question." At a recent conference of nuclear experts*, Smith outlined the options. One is recycling it as nuclear fuel, which is the purpose of the MOX program. Unfortunately, MOX is harder to handle than conventional nuclear fuels. Those safety concerns, and the memory of the accident at the Tokaimura nuclear facility in 1999 that claimed two lives, prompted Kariwa citizens to vote down the MOX option in last month's referendum. If the waste is not going to be used, then it has to be stored. Every nuclear plant has to have storage facilities for spent fuel and other wastes. Most of those are temporary facilities, however. Moreover, storage facilities throughout Northeast Asia are reaching capacity. Thus the search for long-term storage facilities is taking on a new urgency. Finding them is proving to be problematic. Security tops the list of concerns. Waste is dangerous and will remain dangerous for a long period of time. Storage has to be protected against unwanted intrusion or theft - over a period that could last tens of thousands of years. At the same time, however, there has to be access to those wastes since scientists could devise uses for them or "technical solutions" to the waste problem that we cannot now envision. If so, the material has to be available for recycling. Then there is the problem of public acceptance. In addition to cramping Japan's plans to proceed with the MOX program, public opposition has stymied plans in the United States and Australia to develop permanent storage sites. Finland recently approved legislation to build a long-term facility, but it is only for domestic waste. Last week the Lower House of the Russian Parliament passed legislation that would permit the import and storage of 20,000 tons of foreign produced waste for a fee ($20,000 per kg), but it too has been controversial and those plans may yet be derailed. Smith has proposed that Asia Pacific governments jointly establish international facilities to manage and dispose of back-end products of civilian nuclear activity. Since the storage problem will first hit in the region, a local facility makes a lot of sense. In addition, history has burdened countries of this region with mutual suspicions that color perspectives of their respective nuclear energy programs. Development of a regional storage facility could serve as a confidence-building measure since its operations would have to be transparent and procedures standardized if all countries in the region would be able to use it. Ideas like this have been tossed around for a while - and invariably dismissed. Smith believes the facility would provide interim storage on an internationally monitored basis for about 100 years. Critical to the success of any such program will be the way it is presented to the public. It is especially important that proponents take the initiative: An international facility should be seen as an opportunity to create jobs, to deal with a pressing nuclear waste problem and to pursue cooperation and confidence building on a matter that is critical to the region's future. If the negative perception of nuclear power continues to be the chief obstacle to any initiative, then framing the project in those terms should help balance the nuclear equation. *Meeting of the Confidence Building and Security Measures Working Group of the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific (CSCAP), Misawa, Japan, May 20-23, 2001. This CSCAP Working Group helps to promote transparency and confidence building for nuclear non-proliferation, among other areas. The parallel efforts of the Nuclear Energy Experts Group are focused on developing a web site in cooperation with the Sandia Labs Cooperative Monitoring Center to increase transparency of Asia-Pacific nuclear programs. The web site is located at []. Brad Glosserman is Director of Research at Pacific Forum CSIS, a Honolulu-based think tank, and a Contributing Editor to The Japan Times. Pacific Forum 1001 Bishop Street Pauahi Tower, Suite 1150 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 ph: 808-521-6745 | fax: 808-599-8690 | email: © 2001 The Center for Strategic & International Studies ***************************************************************** 15 Nuclear agency still struggling with management issues Government Executive Magazine - 6/27/01 June 27, 2001 Tanya N. Ballard tballard@govexec.com The National Nuclear Security Administration continues to struggle with management problems, an agency expert said Tuesday. In 1999, Congress created the NNSA in response to allegations that inadequate security at the Energy Department and nuclear weapons laboratories contributed to the theft of nuclear secrets. Congress authorized the agency in the fiscal 2000 Defense Authorization Act to establish up to 300 scientific, engineering and technical positions, and set appropriate pay levels for those jobs. The new agency is solely responsible for nuclear weapons research and production. On Tuesday, members of the House Armed Services Committee listened as John Foster, chair of the Panel to Assess the Reliability, Safety and Security of the United States Nuclear Stockpile, testified that agency management problems remain unresolved. “Some of the more fundamental management problems still remain to be addressed,” said Foster. “Resolving these problems will greatly reduce inefficiency and improve morale in the weapons program.” According to Foster, roles and responsibilities need to be more clearly defined at NNSA, while positions need increased authority and accountability. Also, Energy Department rules should be eliminated from the new agency’s management practices, he said. “We hire competent, highly intelligent people to provide leadership at NNSA and to manage our labs and plants,” Foster said. “We need to make it possible for them to manage effectively.” In April, NNSA officials drafted a proposal to recruit and retain more employees. The proposed policy included a pay-for-performance feature and pay-banding for the 300 scientific, engineering and technical positions. ***************************************************************** 16 Labour worries over nuclear reaction The Times WEDNESDAY JUNE 27 2001 BY CARL MORTISHED Our correspondent reports on the dilemma facing the Government as it assesses the UK’s energy policy TONY BLAIR faces a stark choice in the first comprehensive review of energy policy for more than two decades. Should he put public health and safety at risk in order to protect Britain from a California-style energy crisis? The future of the nation’s gas industry is now on trial. Wait a minute . . . don’t you mean the nuclear industry? No, the gas industry, which kills between 30 and 40 people every year, most of whom are members of the public. Recent statistics from the Health and Safety Executive show 35 fatalities in the domestic gas industry — of which nine related to explosions and 26 to carbon monoxide poisoning — 13 fewer than the previous year. Compared with that toll of death and misery, our nuclear power stations are a safe haven. The last serious accident occurred in 1957 when a fire at the Windscale plant caused a release of strontium 90. There were no direct fatalities, although studies suggest some 30 cancer deaths could be attributable to radioactive fallout. Offshore, oil and gas workers run big risks with up to three fatalities expected every year, and that ignores the horrific statistical leap of the 1988 Piper Alpha explosion which claimed 167 lives. This is a highly dangerous industry. Such worries are unlikely to feature in the review conducted by Downing Street’s Performance and Innovation Unit. The examination will focus, not on the actual safety risks of oil and gas, but on the perception of risk in the nuclear industry, an industry that was, thanks to the efforts of Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, widely thought to be facing extinction. It is an industry that has served us well, generating between 20 per cent and 30 per cent of electricity demand annually from an ageing portfolio of reactors owned by British Energy and British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL). By 2020 planned closures will have reduced nuclear’s contribution to just 3 per cent. Meanwhile, North Sea gas output will be in gentle decline and gas suppliers will be scrambling to secure contracts abroad. There are few really big suppliers. Norway is the safe option, but the largest known reserves are in Russia and the Government has become aware that a future built on gas could become a future made in Moscow. Renewables are a red herring. Meeting the Government’s target of 10 per cent of electricity output within a decade would involve superhuman effort — a new windmill every day — and, presumably, extraordinary powers to ride roughshod over the planning process. The problem and the solution would seem to be clear. Unfortunately, the effect of years of public humiliation and derision is that Britain may lack a domestic nuclear option. Successive British governments have, by default, delegated the formation of energy policy to unaccountable pressure groups, many of which seem to have as their objective a bizarre world of shrinking energy consumption. California’s rolling blackouts have concentrated minds. Ministers now realise that nil growth in energy supply is not a scenario worth contemplating. The Government wants to show leadership. But is there a nuclear industry with the financial and managerial resources worth leading? Instead of a domestic solution, we may have to import the necessary capital and skills. Without big public investment, the revival of Britain’s nuclear industry could be made in the US and run by the French. Both BNFL and British Energy have lobbied hard to put the N-word back on the agenda, but BNFL is in a poor state to carry the flag for nuclear power. Tomorrow BNFL will reveal an operating loss for the year of £200 million, mainly because of its portfolio of antique Magnox power plants, two of which have been undergoing unplanned repairs and maintenance. Hugh Collum, BNFL’s chairman, would love to be rid of the 40-year-old power stations, shuffled by a previous government on to BNFL’s balance sheet. “We were sold a pup,” he declares. Shutting them down would accelerate huge decommissioning liabilities so they will be kept running as long as possible. The state-owned operator of the huge Sellafield site in Cumbria has other worries — uncertainty over a permit to operate its £400 million Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel plant, a potential source of profit. The MOX business was thrown back into the regulatory pot after workers falsified quality control certificates for fuel sent to Japan. BNFL insists it was never a safety issue and the Japanese Government has not cancelled its contracts for MOX fuel. However, the episode raised questions about the company’s management and a longer- term query about the proposed partial privatisation of BNFL. Collum admits that Britain’s nuclear industry has suffered from its years in a public relations wilderness. “We no longer have a nuclear degree in this country,” he notes. Sellafield offers sophisticated technical training to its employees, but if you want a high-level academic education in this business you must go to America, where ten or 12 universities offer degrees. The MOX scandal gave BNFL’s new chairman the opportunity to do a clean sweep and inject new managers and a new board. Who, then, should lead a nuclear revival? Brian Wilson, the new Energy Minister charged with the review, needs to find an answer if he concludes that some sort of revival is due. British Energy and BNFL have numerous sites that could each accommodate a second reactor. BNFL owns Westinghouse, the American equipment maker, which boasts a new model reactor, the AP-600, capable of generating power at a cost of 2.5p per kilowatt hour, roughly equal to the cost of power from new gas-fired stations. It also has an interest in the new “pebble-bed” reactor design being piloted in South Africa by Eskom and the US nuclear power company Exelon. Who will put money in these untested designs? Unless freed of its Magnox liabilities, BNFL’s balance sheet is too small to take on such risks. British Energy is interested too, but insists it will not commission new plant until a commercial case is proven. Inevitably, a nuclear revival will not happen without a financial carrot from the Government, and if BNFL is to be the vehicle, it will need wholesale financial restructuring. Public money for nuclear power is no vote winner, but the election has already been won. “Someone has to run nuclear power for this country,” says Collum. “It could be us or it could be Exelon or it could be EdF. The question is: does the Government want to take on the responsibility of providing nuclear energy?” Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided ***************************************************************** 17 Goshutes' Water Problems Deepen N-Waste Concerns The Salt Lake Tribune -- Wednesday, June 27, 2001 BY JUDY FAHYS The leader of the Skull Valley Goshutes, eager for a federal permit to store high-level nuclear waste on the reservation, is struggling with another federal agency's demand to clean up dangerous bacteria polluting the tribe's drinking water. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) remains poised to take the tribe to court because its community water system contains fecal bacteria, coliform bacteria and e. coli bacteria. The 30 reservation residents who rely on the water are at risk, as are patrons of the Pony Express convenience store on the reservation, said Elyana Sutin, an EPA enforcement officer. "We consider it a serious situation," she said. Goshute Chairman Leon Bear said the tribe has responded as fast as possible. "Our water situation is not a situation" any longer, he said. After two years of wrangling with the tribe about the water, the EPA issued a third warning to clean up the water by May 31. The agency decided to wait two more weeks after hearing that the Indian Health Service plans to disinfect the entire water system and upgrade the well house. In response to the agency's concerns, the tribe switched over its water system in April to an old, unused aquifer. The bacteria was discovered when supplies were coming from surface spring water from Indian Hickman Canyon, about 1.5 miles from the reservation, and the system is testing negative for bacteria now. Even though the source has been switched, the collection system still needs to be flushed and sterilized before it is considered safe, said EPA's Sutin. The agency has been providing bottled water to tribe members since December. Meanwhile, EPA officials continue to complain that the tribal chairman also has refused to help the agency address possible problems with removal of underground fuel tanks and water evaporation pools. Both were used by Alliant Techsystems until 1998 for rocket testing. Bear said he has heard nothing from EPA about the rocket waste and is working with Alliant and the agency on the underground tanks. Dianne Nielson, director of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, said she had not been aware of the EPA's questions about the underground tank and rocket-waste problems. But she was concerned about the polluted drinking water. "The issue is, if they cannot manage their drinking water, there's no reason to expect they are going to be able to manage high-level nuclear waste safely," she said. "It's a public issue." The Skull Valley Band of Goshutes has signed a contract with a consortium of utilities to store spent nuclear fuel in steel-and-concrete casks on the reservation, about 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is reviewing an application to license that facility and is expected to issue a final decision next year. State leaders and environmentalists are fighting the facility on health and environmental grounds, while the consortium, Private Fuel Storage (PFS), insists it would be safe on the reservation until it is moved to a permanent site, such as Yucca Mountain, Nev. Sue Martin, a spokeswoman for the consortium, doubted that the EPA concerns would be part of the NRC's deliberations because they are not relevant to the radioactive waste proposal. "The tribe is not in charge of the PFS facility," she said, adding that the consortium would own and operate the storage. fahys@sltrib.com © Copyright 2001, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Who's to blame at Rocky Flats Denver Post.com --> Wednesday, June 27, 2001 - GOLDEN - Rocky Flats workers and the companies that ran the former nuclear-weapons plant are to blame for the workers' debilitating lung disease, a Jefferson County jury found Tuesday in a nationally prominent lawsuit. The jury found that Brush Wellman Inc., which supplied beryllium to the plant, was not liable for the workers' illness and dismissed claims of a conspiracy between the federal government and Brush Wellman. The dust from the strong and lightweight metal can cause chronic beryllium disease, which can be fatal. The verdict left the wives of the Rocky Flats workers involved in the case in tears, and they and their husbands left the courthouse without commenting. Four workers and their wives had sued Brush, saying the company, with the help of the federal government, covered up information about beryllium's hazards. Others across the country who have the same lung disease were shocked by the verdict, news of which spread as quickly as e-mails could be sent. "That's awful news. That's terrible news. I'm stunned," said David Norgard, a Michigan resident who also is suing Brush Wellman. "Maybe it was the Republican county. ... They should have got it (moved to) Boulder County." Mike Matulin, a Tucson resident also suing Brush, said the verdict is another sign the government is "hand-in-hand" with the company, helping to provide the best resources to fight the beryllium suits. The lawyers for the workers said they will press on with their other cases, including the suits of 47 other Rocky Flats and Coors Brewery workers and their spouses who have sued Brush in Jefferson County. "I do believe that won't be the prevailing view," Al Stewart, the workers' attorney, said of Tuesday's verdict. Stewart said his clients "were sad, but they were proud they were here." Brush Wellman's attorney, Jeffery Ubersax, said the jury simply saw the case for what it was. "We are very grateful to the jury for its close attention to the facts. Their verdict confirms what we've been saying, namely that Brush Wellman has always provided adequate warnings," Ubersax said. "There was no conspiracy to hide anything from Brush Wellman's customers or users of its products." A company statement said the verdict "exonerates" Brush of the "totally unsupported "conspiracy' theory." Both sides downplayed any impact the Colorado case would have on others around the country. Brush, an Ohio company with plants in Arizona and Utah, faces more than 70 lawsuits involving nearly 200 plaintiffs. The next suit is to go to trial Aug. 6 in Knoxville, Tenn., involving workers at the nuclear weapons plant there. "It's one trial. It means the other plaintiffs will have their day in court," Stewart said. Stewart spent nearly two weeks laying out hundreds of pages of recently declassified federal documents and Brush's internal records that talked about needing to keep beryllium flowing to the defense industry regardless of the hazards to workers. But Brush's attorney countered with extensive evidence that conditions at Rocky Flats allowed workers to be exposed hundreds of times to high levels of beryllium dust. Dow Chemical Co. and Rockwell International, which ran the plant for the government, also failed to install proper ventilation and air sampling, despite repeated directions from the government to do so, he said. "We just took the evidence that we had and did what we thought was right," said Kim Hornecker, foreman for the six-member jury, which deliberated for about 24 hours over three days. Although the jury concluded that Brush had warned of the metal's hazards, it still assigned the company 9 percent of the liability for the workers' illness. But the 9 percent figure is meaningless and viewed as a "minor inconsistency" in the jury's verdict, said Jefferson County District Court Judge Frank Plaut. Despite the 9 percent figure, the workers will get no money from Brush, Stewart said. The jury found that the workers were 10 percent to 20 percent to blame for their sickness, based on the fact that workers assumed a risk by working at Rocky Flats, Stewart said. Most of the remaining liability lay with Dow and Rockwell for being negligent in providing a safe workplace, the jury said. But the workers can't sue Dow and Rockwell over the issue, Stewart said. Some of the four workers already have received workers' compensation from the two companies for their illness. They also have filed administrative claims with the federal government for similar compensation, Stewart said. The workers should be able to receive up to $150,000 each from the federal government as well as medical coverage for their illness under federal legislation passed last year, Stewart said. That legislation is intended to compensate nuclear-weapons workers who were exposed to several hazards. Denver Post correspondent Keith Coffman contributed to this ***************************************************************** 2 Beryllium witness wants gag order reversed Denver Post.com By Stacie Oulton Denver Post Staff Writer Wednesday, June 27, 2001 - GOLDEN - A Boston doctor who served as an expert witness in the high-profile beryllium lawsuit is asking the state Supreme Court to rule that a gag order in the case is unconstitutional. David Egilman, a Brown University professor, called the gag order a violation of his First Amendment rights because it forced him to shut down a private Web site. He accused the judge in the case of "selectively enforcing the gag order and attempting to ruin my reputation." Jefferson County District Court Judge Frank Plaut said he could not comment because he had not seen the petition Egilman filed Monday with the Supreme Court . Plaut issued the gag order before the trial began, barring participants from discussing the case and from publishing information about the case on the Internet. Egilman testified on behalf of four Rocky Flats workers suing an Ohio company for an illness they contracted at the former nuclear-weapons plant. But Plaut threw out his testimony to punish Egilman for violating the gag order. Plaut also said Egilman was not a credible witness. Egilman wrote disparaging statements during the trial about Plaut and others on his Web site, which was password-restricted. Egilman alleges that the site was broken into by attorneys representing Brush Wellman, the beryllium manufacturer being sued, and that he planted the statements to entice the lawyers to break in. The jury returned a verdict Tuesday against the workers and for the company. The Supreme Court could decide on Thursday whether it will hear Egilman's case. All contents Copyright 2001 The Denver Post or other copyright ***************************************************************** 3 Sick OR workers begin claims process [KnoxNews.com] June 27, 2001 By Frank Munger, News-Sentinel senior writer OAK RIDGE -- Jean Baxter was diagnosed with lung cancer last year, but she believes her health started to decline back in the 1970s -- when she worked in uranium operations at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant. The 75-year-old woman was among hundreds of former Oak Ridge workers who turned out Tuesday to begin a process they hope will lead to financial compensation for their illnesses. "I feel like I deserve it after all these years," Baxter said at an afternoon session at the American Museum of Science &Energy. After being hospitalized three times last month, "I have good days and bad," she said. Baxter said she's worried that her children may not be eligible to collect benefits, even though they're having to support her. She was accompanied by relatives who will help her file the claims forms associated with the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program, which was created by Congress last year and goes into effect July 31. The Department of Labor will process the claims, and officials urged sick workers or their survivors to file the forms as quickly as possible -- even if they don't have all of their background information yet in hand. If workers delay sending in their claims, the start of benefits could be delayed as well. Two more information meetings will be held today -- beginning at 1 p.m. and 7 p.m. -- to help workers or their survivors understand the program and how to file their claims for compensation. Also a toll-free line has been established to help answer questions: 1-866-888-3322. Workers at federal nuclear facilities who developed beryllium disease or radiation-induced cancer may be eligible for a $150,000 lump-sum, nontaxable payment and full medical expenses. Generally speaking, employees are eligible if they developed cancer at one of the Department of Energy sites and if the cancer is determined to be "at least as likely as not" related to that employment. The Department of Health and Human Services will establish guidelines for estimating radiation doses and the likelihood that the radiation caused a worker's cancer. In special groups, however, such as those people who worked at gaseous diffusion plants -- including K-25 in Oak Ridge -- for more than 250 days before 1992, the work will be presumed to have caused a cancer. The Department of Labor, in conjunction with DOE, will open an Oak Ridge "resource center" in the near future to handle claims and help workers gain the information they need. A spokeswoman said the office is expected to be in Jackson Plaza, but the lease is not yet final. The new federal program only covers radiation-induced cancer and beryllium disease for Oak Ridge workers, but employees who believe their illnesses are related to other toxic exposures at the plants may be eligible for state workers' compensation. The resource center personnel are supposed to help workers prepare for a medical panel set up to evaluate the eligibility for the state benefits. Vikki Hatfield of Roane County is working to get federal benefits for her 75-year-old father, Leon Meade, who recently was diagnosed with lung cancer but has been sick for more than 15 years. Meade, who worked at all three of the major Oak Ridge facilities (K-25, Y-12 and Oak Ridge National Laboratory) already qualifies for workers' compensation due to asbestosis. Hatfield has been an outspoken advocate for sick workers at the Oak Ridge facilities, not just her father, and she currently serves on a federal advisory board. After working for legislation passed last year creating the payment program, she said, "We're certainly thrilled that we're here today . . . but we're not where we want to be yet. This is just the beginning part." Harry Williams of the Coalition for a Healthy Environment, which worked for years to get help for sick workers, said it's shameful that the program is helping such a small percentage of those affected. He also said he has strong reservations about the rules for the program, including the appeals process. Ben Gaylor, a K-25 retiree who has helped coordinate a medical screening program for former workers, said, "There's nothing fair about it." Amid the complaints, many came to Tuesday's meetings looking for hope. Sylvia Dodson, whose father died of lung cancer in 1988 at age 64, would like to get compensation to help with expenses for her mother -- who now lives in assisted-living quarters in Athens. Her father retired in 1986 after working for more than 40 years at K-25, where he was involved in shipping and receiving uranium products. "He said he was exposed to every chemical imaginable," Dodson said. "He was a very, very dedicated worker. He only missed 3 days of work out of 40 years and 10 months on the job." Frank Munger can be reached at 865-482-9213 or twig1@knoxnews.infi.net. 2001 The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 4 Expert: Paducah workers at high risk Messenger -Inquirer: News 27 June 2001 Associated Press PADUCAH -- A radiation specialist says it is likely that career workers at Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant who worked around high radiation levels and then got cancer did so because of their jobs. "On the basis of internationally accepted radiation biology models and . . . risk assessment, the workers at (Paducah) were exposed to illegally excessive levels of radiation at the plant, and, if still living, have a significant and unacceptable probability of dying as a result," Michael Thorne said in an affidavit. The affidavit was filed to support a $10 billion lawsuit against the uranium plant's former operators. Thorne is an expert witness being paid by the plaintiffs. Critics say Thorne's conclusion is faulty in assessing blame. "Attorneys want to be able . . . to either predict or assign blame for a (person's) cancer, but you can't do that," said Joel Cehn, a California radiation safety consultant who is not involved in the case. "There's no way to know if an individual -- even if that individual was exposed to radiation, develops cancer -- was it caused by radiation? There is no way to know that." Thorne's affidavit filed this month said there is a significant likelihood -- greater than 50 percent to more than 90 percent -- that the workers who developed cancer after years of radiation exposure became ill because of their jobs. Bill McMurry, a Louisville attorney who represents the plaintiffs, called Thorne's conclusion "the linchpin to the issue of whether the workers sustained injury even though they don't have cancer or even though they don't have symptoms of radiation-related diseases." The lawsuit, filed in 1999 by current and former plant workers and survivors of workers who have died, contends that plant operators exposed the workers to high levels of radiation without telling them and that workers should be compensated for their increased risk of developing cancer. The trial is scheduled for July 2003. "We are not championing the cause of dead people who died from cancer, or even of people with cancer," McMurry said. "This is about those who live at risk of cancer . . . and suffer the emotional damage of living in fear." David Fuller, president of Local 3-550 of the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union that represents several hundred workers at the Paducah plant, said Thorne's study is one of the first on plant conditions that isn't tied to the Department of Energy, and as such its implications were disturbing. "I've not seen anything except what DOE has done and DOE can be conservative," Fuller said. " . . . I'm wondering if we have cancer in our future." Thorne, a former scientific secretary on the International Commission on Radiological Protection, said exposure levels he tracked at the plant were close to what the Energy Department found in a survey released last year. From the 1950s through the 1980s, Thorne said by telephone from his office in West Yorkshire, England, plant workers received radiation doses that exceeded the acceptable limit of 5 rem per year. In addition, some workers were likely to have been exposed at levels as high as 62.5 rem per year and perhaps higher, he said. Radiation exposure is measured in units called rem, or millirem. The 5-rem-per-year exposure limit is equal to 5,000 millirem. Experts say the average annual radiation dose in the United States is 360 millirem, from natural sources such as radon gas and cosmic radiation to man-made sources ranging from medical X-rays to bricks in houses. Cehn, the radiation safety consultant, whose expertise was offered by the Nuclear Energy Institute, said one in four Americans develops cancer. He said that makes the probability of developing the disease in the general population fairly high. Gail Rymer, a spokeswoman for Lockheed Martin Corp., one of the former Paducah plant operators being sued, said Thorne's study "runs contrary to known science." Tomm Sprick, a spokesman for defendant Union Carbide, now part of Dow Chemical, said Thorne's affidavit was "one of many documents that have been filed in this case, and our attorneys will be reviewing this latest filing within the context of the entire case." The Energy Department did not return a call seeking comment on Thorne's study. ©2000 Messenger-Inquirer webmaster@messenger-inquirer.com ***************************************************************** 5 Pantex panel may change focus The Dallas Morning News: Texas/Southwest Energy officials want to limit input 06/26/2001 Associated Press AMARILLO  The scope of a citizens board monitoring the Pantex Plant could be decided by a top Air Force general. The panel wants to continue making recommendations on plant operations, while Department of Energy officials are encouraging the Pantex Plant Citizens Advisory Board to stick to issues related to groundwater and environmental cleanup topics. Local Energy Department officials agreed in 1994 to establish the board, which includes Pantex proponents and critics. The Clinton administration created the Pantex board and others near America's weapons plants to give residents a forum after revelations that government scientists conducted about 800 radiation tests on humans, some of whom were not told of health risks. Over the years, the Pantex board has sent recommendations to the Energy Department on various issues, including plutonium storage, hazardous waste cleanups and groundwater concerns. But in May, department officials told Pantex board members that the board should restrict its focus to environmental matters. Dan Glenn, manager of the Energy Department's Amarillo-area office, said he has been unable to find a signed Pantex board charter that allows its members to provide recommendations on operational issues. "We're not trying to stifle the board. We're trying to help them succeed by focusing on really what the charter says they are to focus on," Mr. Glenn said. Walt Kelley, a city official who serves as the board's co-chair, co-signed a Pantex board letter last month to Gen. John Gordon, asking him to allow Pantex board members to continue making recommendations on Pantex operations. Gen. Gordon is the administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration. Mr. Kelley said he is concerned about changes in the board's mission. "What I have a problem with is that the board was formed under one set...of beliefs as to what the board would look at and did so for all these years, and now it's arbitrarily changed," he said. Pantex board co-chairwoman Paula Breeding, a frequent plant critic, said she, too, is worried about how the board will function. "We no longer will be allowed to know what is going on out there, which I think is very dangerous," she said. 2001 The Dallas Morning News ***************************************************************** 6 Worrisome radioactivity levels discovered in Chestermere Lake Tuesday 26 June 2001 Maria Canton Calgary Herald Higher-than-normal levels of radioactive material have been detected in Chestermere Lake, preliminary test results show. Core samples of sediment taken from the bottom of the popular lake east of Calgary are now undergoing a second barrage of tests to verify the recent findings. Those results should be available within 10 days. "The lab technicians said I should be concerned about the stronium and barium (found in the samples) because it's higher than guideline levels," said Jay White, an environmental consultant for the Town of Chestermere. "This has really caught everyone by surprise. I focus on testing for nutrients and bacteria and these heavy metal numbers and radioactive materials came out of left field." Stronium 90 is a radioactive material that damages the immune system and can lead to leukemia. Barium is a reactive element commonly used in hospitals for radiological examinations. High levels of lead, a heavy metal, were also detected. White received the results last Tuesday and while he is not revealing how much of the suspect elements are in the lake, he has notified Alberta Environment of his findings. Normally only surface water is tested, but with plans to clear years of sediment buildup from the lake's bottom -- a result of receiving 25 per cent of Calgary's storm water runoff -- White ordered a host of other tests. A proposal to dredge the lake was brought before Chestermere town council this spring. Chestermere Lake provides drinking water to Strathmore, Standard, Rockyford and Gleichen. "This could absolutely put those communities at a greater risk of having contaminated drinking water," he added. Dirty and polluted runoff from Calgary's streets and gutters has been a contentious issue with Chestermere, Strathmore and the Western Irrigation District for years. Longstanding legal action initiated by the three against Calgary finally went to trial in April of this year. © 2001 CanWest Interactive ***************************************************************** 7 Manufacturer 'let off the hook,' Flats union rep says Rocky Mountain News: Local By Berny Morson, News Staff Writer The head of the union that represents Rocky Flats workers said he was saddened by the verdict Tuesday that went against employees who were sickened by beryllium at the plant. "It's a shame that the manufacturer has been let off the hook and that nobody is liable," said Tony DeMaiori, the president of United Steel Workers' Rocky Flats local. DeMaiori was critical of Colorado's workers compensation system, which he said should have been quicker to compensate the beryllium victims. A better law might have made a suit unnecessary, he said. The workers developed the lung disease by breathing toxic dust. At least 119 workers have the disease, but many more could develop symptoms later in life. "This is killing them. They're carrying oxygen bottles," DeMaiori said. The beryllium workers will be among those compensated up to $150,000 for diseases developed at nuclear-weapons plants under a program that begins in July. Also covered are Rocky Flats workers who developed cancer through contact with plutonium. On July 19, the U.S. Department of Labor will hold meetings with workers to explain the program. Sessions are scheduled for 1 p.m. and 7 p.m. at the Double Tree, 8773 Yates Drive, Westminster, near the Sheridan Boulevard interchange on U.S. 36. The government will open an office by the end of July to help workers fill out the paperwork. Ray Malito, a 30-year Rocky Flats veteran, will head the office. The office will be at 8758 Wolff Court, Westminster, Suite 210, Westminster, also near the Sheridan Boulevard interchange. June 27, 2001 2001 © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 8 Hospital stores 1000 body parts news.com.au - [ 27jun01 ] By SUSIE O'BRIEN, COLIN JAMES and REBECCA HOLMES HUNDREDS of body parts taken from dead children have been kept for medical research without the permission of their parents, a South Australian State Government investigation has revealed. Human Services Minister Dean Brown said yesterday almost 1000 child and adult specimens – including 284 baby hearts – were being stored in a basement room at the Women's and Children's Hospital. Many of the organs and tissue samples had been removed from the bodies of children without the knowledge or consent of their parents between 1957 and 1990 for teaching and research purposes. Acknowledging that releasing details of the organs would upset some families, Mr Brown said he believed "it is important that past practices be revealed". "We have now identified at least one case where we know . . . someone thought their stillborn baby had been buried or cremated and all of the tissues and organs were with that baby, but we know that was not the case," he said. A special hotline had been established by the Department of Human Services for parents wanting to retrieve body parts for burial or cremation. The Government has already been contacted by 10 families wanting to know whether the body parts of their children are among those stored by the Women's and Children's Hospital. Families are being offered counselling and help already has been provided to seven families involved with the investigation of the organ removal. Stillbirth &Neonatal Death Support (SA) spokeswoman Pauline Allman said last night the information would raise "a lot of issues for a lot of people". "I feel for all the many parents out there who are wondering: Did this happen to my baby?" said Mrs Allman, whose son, Ben, died soon after birth in 1985. "I feel quite annoyed that it has taken so long for this information to come out." Mrs Allman said she had always been under the impression that it was "most unlikely" that babies' organs or tissues had been retained without consent in SA. The existence of the organs at the WCH was uncovered during an investigation into allegations that bodies of stillborn babies were taken to England and the US for secret tests after the British atomic explosions in SA during the 1950s. While no evidence could be found that bodies had been removed, the investigation confirmed bones from dead SA children were burnt and tested for a radioactive isotope, strontium 90, as part of a national program conducted between 1957 and 1978 to monitor fallout. Inquiries by The Advertiser have established that thousands of bones were collected by pathologists in Adelaide, Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne and Perth for strontium 90 testing at laboratories in the US, Britain and Melbourne. Mr Brown said the bones of dead South Australians aged up to 40 were tested for strontium 90, which can cause leukemias and other cancers after being ingested through the food chain, especially milk. The highest concentrations of strontium 90 were detected in the bones of stillborn babies in capital cities across Australia, including Adelaide, where some of the highest levels were found. Mr Brown said a national inquiry was under way into the strontium 90 program as part of an investigation ordered by federal Health Minister Michael Wooldridge into the unauthorised removal of children's body parts. Mr Brown said that, while the samples were generally taken in line with legal standards at the time, "by today's standards these practices are totally inappropriate and unacceptable". "Although consent was given in some cases, in other cases it clearly was not given," he said. "An autopsy did not require consent. And in other cases organs were taken for autopsy but the relatives did not understand, in fact, some of those organs are held for a longer period." The organs and tissue specimens stored in a basement at the hospital were from patients at the former Queen Victoria Hospital and the Adelaide Children's Hospital, which became the Women's and Children's Hospital in 1989. This had made it "almost impossible" to locate records which would determine how many of the 1000 samples had been retained without consent. Mr Brown said the Department of Human Services would follow families' wishes on what they would like done with the organs. The department also would review state legislation, help develop national standards on organ removal and produce a standard autopsy consent form to ensure a similar situation did not arise again. Laws regarding the retrieval and storage of tissues and organs were changed in 1990 to make it compulsory for consent to be obtained from patients or next-of-kin. Australian Nurses Federation state secretary Lee Thomas said the new information could "lead to some sort of public mistrust" of some hospital processes. Australian Medical Association SA president Michael Rice said it was a complex issue that "caused anguish worldwide". Royal Australian College of General Practitioners chairman David Tye said medical research was "absolutely critical". The Australian Daily Telegraph ***************************************************************** 9 Chestermere won't glow in dark Calgary Sun - NEWS Wednesday, June 27, 2001 By ETHAN BARON, CALGARY SUN Chestermere residents can stop worrying that they'll start glowing in the dark. A media report that sediments beneath the lake contained radioactive materials is false, scientists say. "In no way did we find anything radioactive," said Liz Dixon, environmental science program director at the University of Calgary. Her department studied core samples of sediments at the bottom of Chestermere Lake. The media report indicated the samples contained strontium-90, a radioactive isotope. But the form of strontium found was non-radioactive, Dixon said. Toxic barium, however, was present in the cores. "There's barium in the Rocky Mountains and it gets carried down and accumulates in sludges," Dixon said. "It's incredibly insoluble, so it doesn't get into ecosystems -- it stays in the sludge." Disturbing the sludge at the lake bottom could put the barium into the water, she said. "If the sludge gets stirred up, you suspend materials in the water column." "This is why Alberta Environment and the Town of Chestermere are considering leaving the sludge in place." Runoff from Calgary has contributed to sludge buildup in the lake, and town officials are looking at dredging it. Periodic water tests in the lake have identified no problems, said Chestermere's chief administrative officer Bob Jackman. "If there was anything serious it would've showed up at some point," Jackman said. Though the sludge contains heavy metals including strontium and barium, Alberta Environment testing of the lake's water has found the levels of heavy metals to be well within guidelines, said spokesman David Dear. Alberta Environment will take a keen interest in any plans to disturb the sediment. "With the presence of barium and strontium there, it's something we'd want to look at carefully and it's something that would have to be done under controlled conditions," Dear said. Previous story: Extent of diploma exam scam probed Next story: Gas plunge trivial CNEWS Headlines Copyright © 2001, CANOE Limited ***************************************************************** 10 Mound project transfer questioned [enquirer.com] Wednesday, June 27, 2001 Union says group lacks experience The Associated Press DAYTON — A union questions whether a community development group has the experience to take over the cleanup of the former Mound nuclear weapons plant. “Our No. 1 concern is the health and safety of our workers,” Mike Gibson, vice president of Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical &Energy Workers Local 5-4200, said Tuesday. The union represents workers who are cleaning up radioactive and hazardous waste at the plant in Miamisburg, about 10 miles south of Dayton. The plant formerly made triggers for nuclear weapons. The Miamisburg Mound Community Improvement Corp., which is turning the site into a business park, wants to take over cleanup from the U.S. Department of Energy. The DOE plans to finish the cleanup by 2006, but the development group fears that federal budget cuts could delay the work and slow development of the site. “My biggest concern about the proposal is what experience MMCIC can bring to the table to manage such a complicated nuclear cleanup,” Mr. Gibson said. ” Mr. Gibson also said the workers and environment must be monitored for exposure to radiation, and radioactive waste must be safely packaged and shipped. He acknowledged that one concern is the possible loss of jobs. Most of the 600 workers are involved in the cleanup. The development group's president, Michael Grauwelman, said the proposal is designed to accelerate the work by devoting more money to the actual cleanup. Although the funds still would come from the Energy Department budget, the development group could spend less money on administrative costs, he said. Mr. Grauwelman said the group would hire a private contractor. He said cleanup standards would remain the same and that the cleanup would be monitored by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency and the Ohio Department of Health. ***************************************************************** 11 Sick-worker comp plan is faulted The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News - 06/27/01 Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 12:48 p.m. on Wednesday, June 27, 2001 Harry Williams, president of Oak Ridge's Coalition for a Healthy Environment, voices dissatisfaction at a Tuesday meeting about a compensation plan for job-sickened nuclear workers. The meeting was held in the auditorium at the American Museum of Science and Energy. Marie Moffitt /Staff by Paul Parson Oak Ridger staff Another meeting on the compensation plan for job-sickened nuclear workers is scheduled for 7 tonight in the American Museum of Science and Energy's auditorium. Officials with two federal agencies kicked off a two-day set of meetings Tuesday afternoon to inform Oak Ridgers about a compensation plan for job-sickened nuclear workers that many consider flawed. The presentation was part of a series of meetings the Department of Labor and the Department of Energy are holding at various sites across the United States concerning the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. A crowd filled the 300-plus-seat auditorium for the 1 p.m. event Tuesday at the American Museum of Science and Energy. Some former workers shared brief "horror" stories concerning the conditions they worked in, which included not wearing protective clothing and exposure to unknown chemicals, while others voiced concern about the compensation program. The compensation program was passed in October 2000 and goes into effect on July 31. It provides a $150,000 lump-sum compensation, as well as related medical expenses, to workers who are seriously ill because they were exposed to beryllium, silica or radiation while working for DOE, its contractors or its subcontractors in the nuclear weapons industry. Diseases covered include cancer caused by radiation, chronic beryllium disease and chronic silicosis, while medical monitoring is provided for workers with beryllium sensitivity. The compensation plan also provides benefits to some survivors and $50,000 in lump-sum payments and medical expenses. However, many of those the plan is supposed to help said at Tuesday's meeting that the program is inadequate. Carol De Deo with the Department of Labor, left, and Kate Kimpan from the Department of Energy's Office of Worker Advocacy attended the meeting Tuesday to answer questions about the compensation plan for job-sickened nuclear workers Marie Moffitt /Staff "We're very disappointed in this," said Ben Gaylor, a retiree from the Oak Ridge K-25 Site who also works with the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union's Worker Health Protection Program. Harry Williams, president of Oak Ridge's Coalition for a Healthy Environment, also voiced dissatisfaction with the program. "This is a step in the right direction, but it's not where it needs to be," Williams said, adding that not everybody who applies is going to get benefits. The coalition has worked for many years to get help for sick DOE workers. Williams also addressed some problems with the interim regulations the Department of Labor recently issued for running the compensation program. He said those regulations are deeply flawed and need significant revisions before the Labor Department begins accepting claims on July 31 -- about a month before the Labor Department stops taking written comments on the interim regulations. According to Williams, some of the primary deficiencies in the regulations are as follows: * Survivors are largely excluded from eligibility for compensation. The only survivors who qualify are children under the age of 18 or full-time students under the age of 23 when their parent died; children 18 or older but incapable of self-support when their parent died; and spouses who were married to the eligible employee when the employee died. Ben Gaylor, a retiree from the Oak Ridge K-25 Site, asks a question during Tuesday's meeting. He also works with the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union's Worker Health Protection Program. Marie Moffitt/Staff The Labor Department's rules deny claimants the right to an independent administrative appeal. Williams said the officials who control the initial claim determinations also control the appeals process. * The rules deny a fair resolution to medical disagreements. Williams said the regulations fail to balance the interests of the claimant and the Labor Department when there is a conflict between the medical opinion of the employee's physician and the medical opinion of the department's doctor or consultant. * It is not clear whether the Labor Department's regulations will cover diagnostic costs to initially determine whether a claimant will qualify for compensation. He said no one should be denied benefits because they cannot afford the costs of medical diagnosis. Officials with the Department of Labor said they understand the speakers' concerns. "We are not kidding ourselves that we're not going to make mistakes," said Carol De Deo with the federal agency. "It's a brand-new program." Although the Department of Labor will administer compensation and medical benefits, three other departments share some responsibilities under the plan, including the Department of Health and Human Services, the Justice Department and DOE's Office of Worker Advocacy. Kate Kimpan, with DOE's Office of Worker Advocacy, said her agency's role is that of a "responsible employer." "DOE will be working to do outreach and claims assistance," she said. "DOE is charged with verifying worker employment. We will also help locate exposure and medical records." The Department of Labor has launched a toll-free number, 1-866-888-3322, that affected workers can call with questions about the compensation program. The toll-free number can also be used to request application forms. Department of Labor officials said a resource office where workers can file claims will open in Oak Ridge this summer. The tentative location is in Jackson Plaza. More information on the regulations is available at the DOE Office of Worker Advocacy Web site at http://tis.eh.doe.gov/advocacy/laws/laws.html All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 12 Appropriations Committee OKs funding for local DOE projects Oak Ridger Online --> Story last updated at 12:50 p.m. on Wednesday, June 27, 2001 by Paul Parson Oak Ridger staff Yet another hurdle has been passed in the process to approve fiscal year 2002 funding for the Department of Energy. U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-3rd District, confirmed this morning that the House Appropriations Committee has approved the 2002 energy and water appropriations bill, which includes money for DOE. As far as Oak Ridge is concerned, the bill contains this year's full funding requests for the Spallation Neutron Source project and a new Mouse House. Last week, the Appropriations Committee's Energy and Water Subcommittee approved the same version of the bill. Next up, the bill was to head to the House floor today for possible approval. So far, Wamp said the only threat to Oak Ridge money is a request to increase funding for renewable energy efforts by using money set aside for nuclear weapons work. "I'll be fighting that," the congressman said. Continuing approval for the funding bill is especially good news for the massive $1.4 billion SNS project, which is expected to receive the full funding request of $291 million. Once completed in 2006, SNS will be used for scientific and medical research in addition to the development of a variety of industrial materials. Six DOE laboratories, including Oak Ridge National Laboratory, are collaborating on design and construction of the SNS. ORNL will be responsible for operating the facility after it is completed. Another bright spot in the funding is the $11.405 million set aside for the construction of a new Mouse House. It's enough money to speed up the construction timetable from two years to one. The new Mouse House, or Laboratory for Comparative and Functional Genomics, will be located at ORNL. It will replace the current facility, which is more than 50 years old and is located at the Y-12 National Security Complex. Other highlights of the funding bill include $536 million appropriated for Y-12, which will be undergoing a modernization effort; an additional $20 million for cleanup work at the Oak Ridge K-25 site; and $1 million slated to go to Oak Ridge for DOE's nanotechnology research initiative, which could be used for a new nanoscience research facility. Nanoscience involves measuring objects in nanometers, 1 billionth of a meter. For comparison, the smallest features on current computer chips measure about 200 nanometers. And a human hair is 100,000 nanometers thick. Overall, the appropriations bill recommends $18.7 billion for DOE, which is $640.8 million over President Bush's request and $444.2 million above FY 2001. The bill contains $7,031.9 billion for cleanup-related activities, an increase of $699.2 million over the budget request and $253.4 million over last year. The recommendation reflects an effort to restore funding in order to maintain cleanup schedules and meet compliance agreements at sites throughout the country. All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 13 Board, DOE at odds over scope of advice Amarillo Globe-News: Local News: By Jim McBride A citizens board monitoring the Pantex Plant has asked a top general to settle a dispute with Energy Department officials over whether the board can continue providing recommendations on plant operations. Officials from DOE headquarters and the DOE's Amarillo Area Office want the Pantex Plant Citizens Advisory Board to focus on environmental issues. But Pantex board members want to continue providing advice and recommendations to DOE on operational matters. The board, funded by the DOE, has an official newsletter with a mission statement that board members have operated under for several years: "To provide informed recommendations and advice to the DOE concerning the health, safety, environmental and waste management aspects of all past, present and future Pantex activities, including associated costs and benefits." Local DOE officials agreed in 1994 to establish the board, which includes Pantex proponents and critics. At that time, nationwide public concerns about government secrecy were fueled by revelations that DOE's predecessor nuclear weapons agencies performed secret radiation experiments on U.S. civilians. President George Bush's Energy Secretary, Admiral James Watkins, earlier raised concerns about government secrecy in the weapons complex. "I believe the secrecy veil that we put over our department gave rise to questions in the minds of many in the American public that we were hiding things," Watkins said in 1992. "And in some cases, we were. Not so much intentionally, but that's the way it was run." In 1993, Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary revealed that government scientists conducted about 800 radiation tests on humans, some of whom were not told of health risks. The government eventually paid a $4.8 million settlement to victims of a secret program that injected unwitting patients with radioactive plutonium. A year later, the Clinton administration created the Pantex board and others near America's weapons plants to give citizens a public forum. Over the years, the Pantex board has sent recommendations to DOE on various issues, including plutonium storage, hazardous waste cleanups and groundwater concerns. But in May, DOE officials told Pantex board members that the board should restrict its focus to environmental matters. Dan Glenn, manager of the DOE's Amarillo Area Office, said he has encouraged the board to work on groundwater and environmental cleanup topics. "It has spent too much effort on attempting to evaluate plant operations. I feel their contribution will be much more productive in making recommendations on environmental issues," Glenn wrote in a statement. Glenn said he has been unable to find a signed Pantex board charter that allows its members to provide recommendations on operational issues. "We're not trying to stifle the board. We're trying to help them succeed by focusing on really what the charter says they are to focus on," Glenn said. "If anyone can find a signed one that extended that charter to operations I'd be happy to look at it, but no one's come to me to show it yet." Local landowners have credited Glenn with being more open about the plant and airing their groundwater concerns in public meetings. In an interview, Glenn said he is not ruling out discussing operational issues with the Pantex board and will brief members on Pantex's plutonium storage. "I am not ruling it out, but I am stopping sending my staff there to brief them on a monthly basis. That's not the best use of my staff's time," he said. Walt Kelley, a city official who serves as the board's co-chair, co-signed a Pantex board letter last month to Gen. John A. Gordon, asking him to allow Pantex board members to continue making recommendations on Pantex operations. Gordon is the administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration. Kelley said he is concerned about changes in the board's mission. "What I have a problem with is that the board was formed under one set ... of beliefs as to what the board would look at and did so for all these years, and now it's arbitrarily changed," he said. Pantex board Co-Chair Paula Breeding, a frequent plant critic, said she, too, is worried about how the board will function. "We no longer will be allowed to know what is going on out there, which I think is very dangerous," she said. Glenn said he will continue to work with the board and provide information. "We will share what we legally can share. Right now, I'm not getting information that can help me in my decision-making from the Citizens Advisory board," he said. www.amarillonet.com Amarillo Globe-News ***************************************************************** 14 DOE challenge could defang Pantex watchdogs 06/27/01 2001 Amarillo Globe-News By Beth Wilson Confusion over the scope and mission of the Pantex Plant Citizens Advisory Board could reduce the board's duties and leave board members without the role of questioning officials on plant operations. The mission was brought up at a Tuesday meeting during a discussion of the board's newsletter, which is usually printed with the mission statement; "To provide informed recommendations and advice to the DOE concerning the health, safety, environmental and waste management aspects of all past, present and future Pantex activities, including associated costs and benefits." Board members recently were told by Department of Energy officials that they should focus on environmental issues relating to the plant, and not include safety, health and other operations. The board's mission currently includes all three, but DOE officials said the mission statement is different from the one in the approved charter. Board member Janette Kelley discussed Tuesday a community newsletter that included the mission statement. Controversy over the mission statement ensued, and co-chairman Walt Kelley asked the board to table discussions on the newsletter until the mission situation could be resolved. It was tabled. Dan Glenn, manager of DOE's Amarillo Area Office, said a charter has yet to be found with a mission including all aspects the board covers. "Operations is not under the scope and intention of the board charter," he said. Glenn said the board is operating under a charter that includes all local boards of DOE plants, not a separate charter for the Pantex board. He said he expects information from DOE headquarters to resolve the issue within two weeks. Board member Rusty Donelson said confusion over the mission statement leaves the board with no guidance. "What mission statement are we operating under at this very meeting?" he asked. Walt Kelley said the local charter with the mission including operations can't be found. He said it was submitted but changed to match the blanket charter all local boards operate under, which limits boards to advising on environmental issues. Donelson said restricting of the board's mission would reduce the legitimacy of the board. "If not this board, then who is going to be allowed to ask questions in this community?" he asked. Glenn said he was unaware in April of the difference between the Pantex board's mission and other boards' missions. Questions from the board about operations caused him to look into the situation, he said. Walt Kelley said if the mission is restricted, the board has to reconsider its duties. "The DOE is paying the bill for a committee to provide advice - not ask questions," he said. "We have to make a decision; are we going to put up with it." www.amarillonet.com Amarillo Globe-News ***************************************************************** 15 Jury Rules for Beryllium Supplier June 26, 2001 GOLDEN, Colo. (AP) - The company that supplied beryllium to a former nuclear weapons plant was not responsible for the illness of four workers who said they were sickened from exposure to the metal, a jury decided Tuesday. The six-person jury ruled that Cleveland-based Brush Wellman was not negligent, and no damages were awarded to the plaintiffs. Jurors told attorneys they believed the former employees of the now-closed Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant assumed some risk with the job, said Al Stewart, attorney for the plaintiffs. The workers had asserted that Brush Wellman failed to warn them about the metal's effects. The Jefferson County District Court jury found that poor management at Rocky Flats was to blame. The plaintiffs have filed separate claims against the government; Rocky Flats operators; Dow Chemical; and Rockwell International. Brush Wellman attorney Jeffrey Ubersux said the jury's verdict confirms that "Brush Wellman had provided adequate warnings to the users of its products." Beryllium is a hard, gray metal that is extracted from ore, refined into a very fine powder and used in manufacturing nuclear weapons, cars, cell phones and other products. Chronic beryllium disease inflames and scars the lungs, making it difficult to breathe. Of the four workers in court Thursday, two were using oxygen tanks. The plaintiffs had no comment on Tuesday's verdict. Stewart said no decision has been made on whether his clients will appeal. -- On the Net: Brush Wellman: http://www.brushwellman.com Department of Energy: http://www.energy.gov Dow Chemical: http://www.dow.com All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 16 Layoff buyouts have their own silver lining IdahoStatesman.com Tuesday, June 26, 2001 Leaving INEEL wasn't too bad, former workers say By Jennifer Langston Post Register IDAHO FALLS -- Dwight Walker couldn't help but notice as a younger man that the people riding the yellow buses seemed to own all the snowmobiles, cabins and boats in town. So the cabinetmaker and former construction worker went to night school for 10 years, slaving toward the college diploma that would entitle him to the same comfortable Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory wages. Walker landed a job as a site technician and finished his degree in industrial technology. But with every promotion during his eight years there, he had less to do. He hated getting permission to switch two steps in a procedure that common sense told him were in the wrong order. He couldn't see why digging a 12-inch hole to plant a bush on the desert should require an excavation permit. When the INEEL offered employees incentives to leave six years ago, the project manager leaped at the chance to go back to doing something he loves. He figures he's probably the only cabinetmaker in the valley with a college degree. Walker now has a growing woodworking business that employs eight people. It has its heartaches, but at the end of a job, he can see what he accomplished. "The big problem is if you're used to working in the real world, the bureaucracy would drive you nuts," said the 47-year-old owner of Walker Custom Cabinets. "There is life after the INEEL. I'd pick up beer cans in the gutter before I'd go back." News that the INEEL once again plans to cut its work force has launched the community into economic uncertainty. There are worries about layoffs, lost wages, less disposable income to grease the wheels of an economy that's already slowing down. But for individuals who chose to leave during a similar round of cutbacks in 1995, there have been silver linings of all descriptions. Many say cutting the umbilical cord was one of the most rewarding decisions they ever made. It gave some the opportunity to go back to school and have the career they missed the first time around. It gave others the nudge they needed to start their own businesses. It gave older employees a chance to retire and enjoy the things they couldn't do before. They may be living on less money, but few say they're unhappy with the decision to leave. "The jobs that I had were pretty intense," said Ed Anderson, who worked at the site for 31 years in nuclear engineering and reactor safety. "I miss the technical challenges. I do not miss the BS that went along with the job." He was looking forward to retiring when Lockheed Martin offered employees early retirement incentives. At the age of 55, he moved to his property on the Salmon River, where he grows sweet cherries, peaches, apples and pears. While he was working, he and his wife spent almost all their weekends and vacations tending to the orchard. Now they have time for jet boating, rafting, kayaking, hunting, hiking, traveling and visiting relatives. For some of his friends, the loss of income has been hard. The average monthly salary of those who took early retirement back then was $5,300. The average retirement payment, which excludes personal investments and Social Security, is $962. Still, Anderson doesn't know many who went back to work. "I think we're generally a pretty happy lot that retired," he said. "The money, although I wish it were more, has been adequate. We've managed to do exactly what we planned." So far the cutbacks planned by Bechtel BWXT Idaho, like those six years ago, are entirely voluntary. It announced details this spring of an early retirement package, hoping to sway at least 400 people to leave their jobs. The company will likely offer younger employees a voluntary separation package, which may include cash payments or other incentives to quit. Layoffs may or may not be necessary after that. But he says he's glad he left when he did. Those who made the transition successfully said it's important to be realistic, do the math and make sure your investments or savings will carry you. Most said the company's separation offers didn't make a huge financial difference but were enough to convince them the time was right to make a change. src="http://www.idahostatesman.com ***************************************************************** 17 Meetings to explain added benefits for test site workers [Las Vegas Review-Journal] Wednesday, June 27, 2001 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal REVIEW-JOURNAL Two public meetings will be held this week to inform current and former Nevada Test Site workers and their families about eligibility for benefits under a new program to compensate them for job-related illnesses. The program -- Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act -- will be launched July 31 by the departments of Energy and Labor. It allows for downwinders and uranium workers to receive $50,000 more than what they received under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. The meetings will be 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. Thursday and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Friday at Texas Station. They will allow former employees and their families to ask questions about the program and how the claim process works. Information about the program can be found on the Internet at www.dol.gov. This story is located at: http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/Jun-27-Wed-2001/news/16401405.html ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************