***************************************************************** 05/31/01 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 9.136 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER CONTENTS 1 Nuclear waste could ride Ames rails 2 San Onofre turbine repairs nearly complete 3 Energy crisis: Nuclear scientists give power-saving tips 4 Bush Nuclear Plan Draws Criticism from Conservatives 5 Secretary Announces Strategic Review of Renewable Energy R Programs 6 Energy Department Awards Nuclear Energy R Grants 7 Leaky valve keeps nuclear plant off-line 8 Errors in DOE plan raise questions 9 REFERENDUM ON MOX FUEL TO BE HELD ON 27 MAY 2001 10 Nuclear plant vote delayed again 11 'Nuclear plant is terrorist threat' 12 Terrorist risk of BNFL plant 13 Sellafield Mox plant may be target for nuclear terrorists, ministers told 14 Sellafield 'could be terrorist target' warning 15 Editorial: There's no room for error 16 Greens In Euro Bid To Halt MOX 17 Copeland Again Urges Approval Of £462m Plant 18 Pebble Creates Ripples in Nuclear Industry 19 Nevada Nuke Dump Support Withdrawn 20 Letter to the editor: nuclear power 21 Utah should say no to N-power 22 'United front' rejects nuke bills 23 Nevada Senate OKs $4 million to fight Yucca Mountain dump 24 Promise of state money fuels Vegas fight against Yucca Mountain 25 Ex-energy official opposes Yucca plan 26 Berkley plans Yucca measure 27 Regulators find errors in report on Yucca Mountain nuclear dump 28 Daschle says Yucca Mountain a dead issue NUCLEAR WEAPONS CONTENTS 1 Contractor to donate $2 million to WSU 2 Senator Expects Guest-Worker Plan 3 Radioactive substance inside stolen equipment 4 Fiji veterans seeking compensation for nuclear test health 5 Pakistan plays down nuclear anniversary 6 ARAB STATES INTERESTED IN NUCLEAR COOPERATION ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POWER ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Nuclear waste could ride Ames rails Ames Tribune By: David Grebe, Staff Writer May 29, 2001 The U.S. Department of Energy is considering a plan that would ship nuclear waste along the Union Pacific railroad through Ames for almost 40 years. According to projections from the state of Nevada's Nuclear Waste Project, about 4,200 casks of spent nuclear fuel could ride the rails through Ames from various nuclear power plants in the East to Yucca Mountain in Nevada. "There are a number of routing alternatives and that would certainly be one of them," said Joe Strolin, an administrator with the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. The Department of Energy plans construction of a national storage site for used nuclear waste in Nevada at Yucca Mountain. There's also a temporary, privately run site at the Skull Valley Go-Shute Indian Reservation in Utah that could be approved by 2003 and likely would open a few years after that. But the storage site plans are not certain. Nevada officials are fighting the Yucca Mountain site. Activist groups also oppose the plans. "The utilities have kind of done an end-run around legislative action. We're very critical of that," said Lisa Gue, a Nuclear Waste policy analyst with the activist group Public Citizen. Gue said the Department of Energy proposes to store 40,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel - essentially all of spent fuel rods in the United States. "Nothing on that scale has never been done before," Gue said. One reason the issue may be coming into focus now is that the Department of Energy is planning to finish its review process for the Yucca Mountain facility within the next year - which will then take a convoluted path to Congress. Once the review process is done, a plan will be presented to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, and President Bush will have to decide whether or not Yucca Mountain is the appropriate site for a waste depository. If the president decides in favor, the issue goes before Congress. Congress doesn't have to vote on the measure unless Nevada chooses to reject the facility. Since Energy Department officials expect Nevada to reject the plan, Congress will likely face a vote on Yucca Mountain - and transportation issues could broaden the controversy to include 43 states. Interstates 35 and 80 are also possible shipment routes for the radioactive waste. A combination of both rail and truck transport is likely to be used, according to Allen Benson, director of Institutional Affairs for the U.S. Department of Energy. "There's no point on spending a lot of money on specific routes until you have a site. If a site is approved, we're going to spend a lot of money (on planning and infrastructure)," Benson said. Last spring, Iowa and Missouri engaged in a battle over whether a shipment of spent nuclear fuel would travel down Interstate 80 in Iowa or Interstate 70 in Missouri. Missouri won that battle, after intervention from then U.S. Sen. John Ashcroft, who argued that Interstate 70 has more traffic and more accidents than its northern counterpart. Public Citizen and other groups are urging communities to organize against the shipment of nuclear waste along roads and railways - something that's at least a few years off. *©Ames Tribune 2001* ***************************************************************** 2 San Onofre turbine repairs nearly complete - 5/31/01 - NCTimes.net PHIL DIEHL Staff Writer SAN ONOFRE ---- Workers have begun testing an idle nuclear reactor in preparation for a return to service at the San Onofre nuclear power plant, a spokesman said Wednesday. The Unit 3 reactor has been off the electricity grid since early January, first for refueling and maintenance, and then for repairs caused by a circuit breaker failure and subsequent fire on Feb. 3. Repairs of the turbines damaged Feb. 3 at San Onofre's Unit 3 reactor are nearly finished, a plant spokesman said Wednesday. The reactor is expected to resume production in mid- to late June. "We pretty much have finished the repairs," San Onofre spokesman Ray Golden said Wednesday. "We are into the heat-up and testing stage." Southern California Edison Co. still forecasts a return to service in mid to late June, Golden said. Systems are being aligned, pressurized and filled with fluids for the first time in months, he said, and testing can be time-consuming. The Feb. 3 breaker failure injured no one and released no radiation. But it stopped power to oil pumps lubricating the massive turbines that generate electricity from steam created by the reactor. Three low-pressure turbines, a high-pressure turbine, and a generator are assembled on a single shaft the length of a football field, and the entire assembly ground to a halt without oil. All the bearings had to be replaced and some rotating parts had to be resurfaced, a time-consuming and costly process. The temporary loss of the reactor contributed to the state's ongoing energy shortage. The 1,100-megawatt reactor provides enough electricity to supply about 1.1 million homes. A twin reactor is operating at full power. Another major project under way at San Onofre is the dismantling of the Unit 1 reactor, retired from service Nov. 30, 1992. That work began last year after many months of planning, and is expected to take several more years to complete. Workers now are cutting up the Unit 1 steel reactor vessel and taking apart the control room and parts of other buildings, Golden said. Next year construction is expected to start on a series of concrete storage modules to hold waste fuel taken from the underwater pools at the plant. San Onofre is running out of room for waste fuel, and the additional storage would allow the plant to continue to operate until its Nuclear Regulatory Commission license expires in 2022. Edison is allowed to build the storage facilities under its operating license from the commission. However, the commission still must approve a design for the canisters that will hold the fuel. The California Coastal Commission approved construction of the dry-storage facility at its meeting in March. Details of conditions the commission included with that approval are scheduled to be considered at the commission's June 12 meeting in Los Angeles. Contact staff writer Phil Diehl at (760) 901-4087 or pdiehl@nctimes.com. 5/31/01 ***************************************************************** 3 Energy crisis: Nuclear scientists give power-saving tips Interactive energy scorecard launched *May 29, 2001* By Dana Bartholomew Staff Writer LOS ANGELES -- The specter of summer blackouts in California may soon be a boon to pocketbooks. Conservation is the buzz of summer. But with the governor begging for energy reduction in order to reduce blackouts, how can Californians who have already cut out many of their comfort gizmos reduce even further? Try an energy tuneup courtesy of scientists whose forebears sparked the Nuclear Age -- and the atomic bomb. Researchers at the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory this week launched the nation's first interactive energy scorecard, at savepower.lbl.gov -- a Flash energy tuneup geared to slash power bills and coax conservation rebates from the state. The "20 Percent Solution" Web site can induce Californians, already the nation's most efficient users of electricity, to become even stingier. And residents of energy-rich Los Angeles, Burbank and Glendale can create extra juice for their blacked-out neighbors. "This is unique," said Allen Chen, spokesman for the University of California at Berkeley-based laboratory's environmental energy and technologies division. "We're not nearly trimming to the bone." Exhausted by talk of further conservation when you already tell the kids to kill the lights at every turn of the house? All the Lawrence Berkeley site requires is three point-and-clicks -- one of five regions throughout the state, such as South Coast or Desert; what size home or apartment you live in, such as a medium single-family home of 2,000 square feet; and whether or not you use an air conditioner. Bingo, your solution to cut your energy bill by 20 percent. And, depending on your budget and comfort level, you can do it with little to no cost. Too cheap to replace that power-sucking air conditioner (an 11 percent savings)? Try opening windows and running a fan instead (for a 15 percent whack). Weary of that noisy old fridge? Try a new Star-Energy model (2 percent). Tired of the tumble of the electric clothes dryer? Try unplugging it and line-drying the wash (a 3 percent savings). For that matter, try air-drying dinnerware (0.4 percent); unplugging unnecessary TVs and grouping the kids in front of one tube (0.4 percent); and unplugging the electric range in favor of microwaved TV dinners (0.4 percent); and replacing hot iridescent bulbs with fluorescent ones (4 percent). Energy-conscious devotees can even kill the hot tub (10 percent), or turn it tepid (5 percent). It's all in the name of 30 years of government energy research and effective conservation, and unlike any energy-saving tip Web site already offered by the likes of Southern California Edison and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, officials said. "This is the one (site) that really focuses on what you can do, with savings estimated for each recommendation," said lab energy researcher Rich Brown. The state's 20/20 Program is a voluntary measure designed to rebate customers 20 percent of their power bills for cutting energy use 20 percent this summer from last year. Residents in the city of Los Angeles, which opted out of deregulation and have been immune from its effects, are not under the state program. But a similar program known as Cash for Conservation may be implemented in Los Angeles this week for reductions of 10 percent. Department of Water and Power officials called the Lawrence Berkeley Web site a model for the state. "It's nicely done; the low-cost measures make sense," said DWP strategic planner Angelina Galetiva, manager of the city's Green L.A. programs. "Conservation doesn't mean sitting in the dark and drinking hot beer; it no longer means having to do without," she said. "It means going high-tech." *-- Dana Bartholomew can be reached at (818) 713-3730.* ON THE NET ***************************************************************** 4 Bush Nuclear Plan Draws Criticism from Conservatives By John Rossomando May 31, 2001 CNSNews.com The Bush administration's plan to promote nuclear power has drawn criticism from an unlikely source - the right. Groups such as the Cato Institute and the National Center for Policy Analysis have criticized administration plans as too costly. Cato scholars have charged that the construction of nuclear power plants would drain the economy. "I think this industry is so economically dead that no Bush defibrillators will revive it," said Jerry Taylor, director of Environment al Studies with Cato. "It will probably be a dead weight loss to the economy, with several billion dollars going to the nuclear power industry's research and development operations," he said. Cato said a sharp rise in the cost of electricity between 1978 and 1982 can be directly attributed to recouping the costs involved with building nuclear plants. The institute believes the $1 billion price tag associated with nuclear plan ts does not justify the use of tax dollars. "When gov ernment is picking favorites in the marketplace by providing tax breaks and using tax dollars to underwrite industry R and D, that's money the taxpayer no longer has," Taylor said. "I guess you could say, this is a waste of funds that could be used for better purposes." Taylor said the Bush administration's efforts to offer tax breaks to nuclear power producers shows that investors do not want nuclear power plants. "It seems to me that most investors in the energy marketplace, even given the c urrent run up in wholesale gas prices, still believe that gas fired generation is by far the best investment out there," he said. "In fact, over 95 percent of the power plants under construction today are gas-fired plants - investors obviously believe that these are better investments," Taylor added. The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) shares some of Cato's fears. "They said all along that by the time the productive life of these plants was over, we'd have a federally managed storage facility," said Sterling Burnett, the NCPA's environmental analyst. "Yucca Mountain is still not approved, West Texas is still not approved, and so these guys are having to store all of the waste on site," Burnett said. The industry counters that Cato is comparing apples to oranges when it compares the costs of nuclear power to other forms of energy. "In the industry we measure the capital costs of all power plants on a common basis so we can compare apple s to apples," said R ichard Myers, director of business policy for the Nuclear Energy Institute. The NEI believes new nuclear plants can be built fully competitive with new base load coal fired power plants. The industry also believes gas fired plants are equally competitive with nuclear. "I think Cato is just articulating yesterday's common wisdom, and doesn't reflect the electricity models of today," Myers said. "They seem to be stuck somewhere between 1955 and 1965." The indust ry maintains nuclear power alone pays for its costs in the costs of the electricity. "Every kilowatt hour of electricity produced at a U.S. nuclear power plant generates a tenth of a cent payment to the federal government, which works out to $700-$750 million per year, which is dedicated solely to the disposal system for the spent fuel," said Myers. The industry also points to the fact that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is funded solely from licensing fees from power plants. Americans still are haunt ed by memories of Three Mile Island or Chernobyl, and environmental groups have worked hard to remind them of the fallout from these disasters. The industry says it has improved its technology over the past several decades. "The improvement in output during the 1990s was equivalent to bringing 22 new 1,000 megawatt coal power plants online," Taylor said. The industry believes nuclear power offers an inexpensive competitive source of energy despite its critics. ***************************************************************** 5 Secretary Announces Strategic Review of Renewable Energy R Programs energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: May 30, 2001 [Print Friendly Version] Removing the so-called ‘Path 15 bottleneck’ is a big step in the right direction, and a big step forward for Californians.”* ---> WASHINGTON, DC -- Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham continued his implementation of the President’s National Energy Plan by directing the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy to undertake a strategic review of its renewable energy research and development programs. This is the third recommendation of the National Energy Plan to be implemented by the Secretary since the policy was announced last week. “The President’s National Energy Plan highlights the important contributions that can be made by renewable energy sources such as hydropower, wind, solar, geothermal and biomass. These energy sources constitute about 10 percent of our total energy production, with even greater potential for the future,” Secretary Abraham said. “A strategic review of DOE’s renewable programs will help us promote innovation and technology to increase renewable energy’s use in America and around the world. “I have directed that the review – in keeping with the priorities identified in the National Energy Plan – to also consider the promise of hydrogen, superconductivity, and other next-generation technologies. Hydrogen, for instance, when used to power fuel cells, emits no emissions other than pure water, which can then be recycled to make more hydrogen,” the Secretary added. The President’s energy policy recommended a review of current funding and historic performance of DOE’s renewable and alternative energy research and development programs. Secretary Abraham will propose appropriate funding of those research and development programs that are found to be performance-based and are modeled as public-private partnerships. The review will be undertaken concurrently with the energy efficiency R program review announced last week. Public input will be sought at the outset of the review. Secretary Abraham has set July 10 as the deadline for the initial phase of the review, with the final phase to be completed by September 1. Media Contact: Jill Schroeder, 202/586-4940 Release No. R-01-084 ***************************************************************** 6 Energy Department Awards Nuclear Energy R Grants energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: May 30, 2001 [Print Friendly Version] *Initiatives Promote Advanced Reactor Technologies and Prepare Tomorrow’s Nuclear Engineers* WASHINGTON, DC -- Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham today announced funding for 13 new research projects under the Nuclear Energy Research Initiative (NERI). The funding will be used to pursue Generation IV nuclear energy systems, higher performance fuels, advanced power conversion systems, proliferation-resistant nuclear reactor and fuel systems, and fundamental nuclear science research. Researchers are from eight universities, eight national laboratories, eight private sector organizations, and include collaborators from six overseas research organizations. Abraham also announced 19 new grants awarded to 14 universities for nuclear engineering research under the department’s Nuclear Engineering Education Research (NEER) initiative. This year’s projects include developing radioactive stents to prevent blockage of arteries (restenosis) following angioplasty, on-line monitoring and diagnostics for nuclear plant equipment and developing computational models to evaluate accelerator-driven systems. “These programs support the goal of making nuclear power a key element of our Nation’s energy policy,” said Secretary Abraham. “They are an investment in our energy future and in educating and preparing the next generation of nuclear engineers and scientists for tomorrow’s energy, medical, and environmental challenges.” The NERI program supports innovative, investigator-initiated research and development to advance next generation nuclear technologies. The department received 145 proposals and subjected each to a rigorous peer review, selecting 13 for funding this year. In addition to this new research, there are 54 projects currently underway; two NERI projects have been successfully completed -- modular construction techniques for nuclear plants and development of temperature-resistant fuel cladding. This year’s NERI awards range from approximately $200,000 to $900,000 each for the first year of funding and could total $16.6 million over three years. NEER sponsors investigator-initiated nuclear engineering research that is vital to attracting, educating and training the nation’s next generation nuclear scientists and engineers, and strengthening the Nation’s nuclear science and technology education infrastructure. This year’s projects were selected through a peer review process from 110 proposals received. Since the program resumed in 1998, DOE has funded over 70 NEER projects at U.S. universities. This year’s NEER awards range from about $60,000 to $160,000 for work authorized in the first year of funding and could total $5 million over three years. For further information on the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology's research and development initiatives, including abstracts on the NERIand NEERprojects, visit the web site at www.nuclear.gov. FY 2001 NERI Awards Title Lead Organization Testing of Passive Safety System Performance for Higher Power Advanced Reactor Oregon State University, Corvalis, OR Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Construction Cost Reductions Through the Use of Virtual Environments Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA Feasibility Study of Supercritical Light Water-Cooled Fast Reactors for Actinide Burning and Electric Power Production Idaho National Engineering &Environmental Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID Particle Bed Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor (PB-GCFR) Design Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL Supercritical Water Nuclear Steam Supply System: Innovations in Materials, Neutronics, and Thermal-Hydraulics University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI Miniature, Scintillation-Based, In-Core, Self-Powered Flux and Temperature Probe for HTGRs Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN On-Line NDE for Advanced Reactor Designs Ames Laboratory, Ames, IA High Performance Fuel Design for Next Generation PWRS Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge MA Reactor Physics and Criticality Benchmark Evaluations for Advanced Nuclear Fuel Framatome Technologies, Lynchburg, VA Random Grain Boundary Network Connectivity As a Predictive Tool for Intergranular Stress-Corrosion Cracking Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA Development and Validation of Temperature Dependent Thermal Neutron Scattering Laws For Applications and Safety in Generation IV Reactor Designs University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH Fundamental Understanding of Crack Growth in Structural Components of Generation IV Supercritical Light Water Reactors SRI International, Menlo Park, CA New Design Equations for Swelling and Irradiation Creep in Generation IV Reactors Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA FY 2001 NEER Awards Title Institution Development of Real-Time Measurement of Effective Dose for High Dose Neutron Fields Texas A University College Station, TX Investigation Into the Optimization of Multi-Source Strength Brachytherapy Treatment Procedures University of Wisconsin Madison, WI Determination of the Structure of Vitrified Hydroceramic/CBC Waste Form Glasses Manufactured from DOE Reprocessing Waste Penn State University University Park, PA Adaptive Neutron Transport Methods for Reactor Transient Analysis Purdue University Lafayette, IN Engineering Radioactive Stents for the Prevention of Restenosis University of Wisconsin Madison, WI Neutron Transport Methods for Accelerator-Driven Systems University of Missouri at Rolla Rolla, MO Determination of Unknown Neutron Cross Sections for the Production of Medical Isotopes Oregon State University Corvalis, OR Development of a Novel Tunable X-Ray Source for the RPI-Linac Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY Experimental Investigation on the Effects of Coolant Concentration on Subcooled Boiling and Crud Deposition on Reactor Cladding at Prototypical PWR Operating Conditions Kansas State University Manhattan, KS Novel Approaches to Adaptive Angular Approximations in Computational Transport Texas A University College Station, TX Radiation Transport Code Quality Control Using Analytical Benchmarks University of Arizonam Tucson, AZ Automated On-Line Monitoring and Diagnostics of the Integrated of Nuclear Plant Steam Generators and Heat Exchangers University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN Irradiation-Induced Precipitation and Dissolution of Intermetallics in Zr Alloys at High Burnup Studed Using Synchrotron Radiation Penn State University, University Park, PA Development of a Robust Tri-Carbide Fueled Reactor for Multimegawatt Space Power and Propulsion Applications University of Florida Gainesville, FL An Advanced Poison Material for Burnable Poison Rod Assemblies and Spent Fuel Shipping Container University of Florida Gainesville, FL Development of an Alpha/Beta/Gamma Phoswich-Based Radiation Detector for Nuclear Waste Stream Cleanup Processes University of Missouri at Columbia, Columbia, MO A Liquid Metal Bond for Improved Heat Transfer in LWR Fuel Rods University of California at Berkeley Berkeley, CA Nuclear-Coupled Thermal-Hydraulic Instabilities and their Effects on Dryout Purdue University West Lafayette, IN Characterization of Helium Bubble Formation and Microcracking in Borosilicate Glasses Using Small-Angle Scattering Technique University of Illinois Urbana, IL Media Contact: Hope Williams, 202/586-5806 Release No. R-01-083 ***************************************************************** 7 Leaky valve keeps nuclear plant off-line OrlandoSentinel.com: Central Florida News ASSOCIATED PRESS Posted May 31, 2001 CRYSTAL RIVER -- Florida Power's Crystal River nuclear plant has been kept off-line longer than expected because of a leaking valve inside the reactor building. The plant was shut down May 18 to allow plant workers to repair a malfunctioning valve in one of the pipes that supplies steam to turn a turbine generator, which produces electricity. But once that problem was corrected and the plant was restarted, operators discovered that a separate leak in a different valve had worsened, plant spokesman Mac Harris said. The second leak occurred at a large valve in a water line that provides cooling water to the reactor when the plant is shut down, Harris said. Although the leakage was within allowable limits, officials decided to shut the plant down again and fix it, rather than risk having to do it during the summer, when electricity demand is high. The plant should be producing power again shortly, Harris said. "We're in the final stages," he said. "We're getting ready to start the unit up this week." Harris said the shutdown has not affected Florida Power's 1.4 million customers. The Crystal River Energy Complex is one of the largest generating sites in the United States, with the nuclear plant and four coal-burning plants producing up to three gigawatts of electricity. *Copyright © 2001, * ***************************************************************** 8 Errors in DOE plan raise questions May 31, 2001 By Mary Manning LAS VEGAS SUN Errors found in the Energy Department's plan for a high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain have raised questions about the agency's ability to oversee the scientific work that will determine whether the dump is built. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which would have to license a repository before it could open, found mistakes and missing information in eight areas of the DOE's study of how it would perform over thousands of years. It is reviewing the DOE's scientific work to determine if its quality can be assured, NRC Nuclear Waste Division Chief William Reamer said. The Energy Department has to prove its work is scientifically valid, he said. Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is the only site being studied to store 77,000 tons of highly radioactive commercial and defense waste. DOE studies so far have shown no obstacles that can't be overcome to building a repository. "These errors could be indications that quality assurance measures were not properly implemented," Reamer said. If the NRC discovers quality assurance problems with DOE's scientific work, "might there be other errors?" Reamer asked. If the NRC finds more errors in the DOE's Yucca Mountain work, "one avenue the DOE could follow is to hire an independent reviewer," Reamer said. Normally the DOE would not have to hire a separate and independent company for scientific review, Reamer said. Until the DOE responds, it is unclear whether the NRC questions could delay the construction of a repository, he said. If it is found scientifically sound, Yucca Mountain could open by 2010. NRC staff discovered missing data, calculation errors, varying radiation exposures and potential chemical reactions between the buried nuclear wastes and the containers that would allow radiation to escape. The DOE is analyzing the NRC's findings. Those questions are expected to be answered in a series of meeting with the NRC staff in June. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 9 REFERENDUM ON MOX FUEL TO BE HELD ON 27 MAY 2001 cnic.jca.apc.org Citizens' Nuclear Information Center Majority Says "NO" to MOX Fuel at Kariwa Village Press Release 28 May, 2001 Majority voted no against the use of mixed plutonium-uranium oxide (MOX) fuel in a referendum held on 27 May 2001 at Kariwa Village, Niigata Prefecture, where Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant is located. The results were: Q "Should MOX fuel be used?" NO: 1,925 (53.4%) YES: 1,533 (42.5%) Defer: 131 (3.6%) Invalid:16 (0.4%) (Turnout 88.1%) CNIC calls upon the government and Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) to respect the opinion of local residents, and cancel the use of MOX fuel at Kashiwazaki-Kariwa 3. Moreover, the government and the utilities should put an end to the dangerous and uneconomical MOX fuelprogram. According to our research (International MOX Assessment), the safetymargin of a reactor decreases when MOX fuel is used, and that risks of accidents increase. Should the accident involve radioactive fallout, the damage can increase 4 to 10 times compared to accidents at a reactorusing uranium fuel. In addition, the manufacturing cost of MOX fuel including the reprocessing cost came to more than five times when simply compared with the manufacturing of uranium fuel, and even when it is taken into consideration that the plan is to load 1/3 of the reactor with MOX fuel, the cost still increases 2.4 ~ 2.9 times. Japan's original plan was to extract plutonium by reprocessing spentnuclear fuel, and use the plutonium in fast breeder reactors as fuel. However, the development of fast breeder reactor (FBR) came to a standstill following the sodium leak and fire at Monju prototype FBR in 1995. Despite this failure, the reprocessing of Japanese spent fuel in England and in France continued, and Japan is now heavily burdened by excess plutonium. As of the end of 1999, there were 27.6 tons of Japanese plutonium stored in England and France, and 5.3 tons stored domestically. MOX fuel program, which is a patch up plan for Japan'scollapsed nuclear policy, is now explained as the sole option for consuming such excess plutonium. Currently, all the reprocessing of the contracted amount of spent fuel has been completed in France. In England roughly 30% of the contracted amount has been reprocessed. In addition, MOX fuel is beingmanufactured in France for Japan at the moment. CNIC argues the following: 1) The best way to control excess plutonium is to stop extracting it. Specifically, reprocessing contracts for spent fuel which has not been treated should be changed to storage contracts. As for the plutonium that has already been extracted, it should be immobilized instead of making it into MOX fuel. 2) The construction of a domestic reprocessing plant in Rokkasho Village, Aomori Prefecture should be immediately stopped. With excessplutonium stored overseas and in Japan, there is no reason forconstructing a plant for further extraction of plutonium. In addition,the Tokai Reprocessing Plant should be immediately shut down. 3) Using plutonium as MOX fuel is not the sole option for managing excess plutonium. There are other options such as vitrification and"storage MOX" to immobilize plutonium. It has been pointed out in documents such as "THORP: The Case for Contract Renegotiation" (Mike Sadnicki et al. June 1999) and "Plutonium disposal, the third way" (Bulletin of Atomic Science May / June 2001, Allison Macfarlane et al) that immobilization is more economical than using plutonium as MOX fuel. The Kariwa Village Mayor, Kashiwazaki City Mayor, and the Niigata Governor should follow the result of the referendum and not agree to burning MOX fuel. Utilities should cancel their MOX fuel programreleased by the Federation of Electric Power Companies in 1997. Finally, the central government must take this result seriously, and put an immediate end to the risky and uneconomical nuclear fuel cycle programinvolving reprocessing and MOX fuel use. For further information, contact Gaia Hoerner at CNIC. (tel) 81-3-5330-9520, (fax) 81-3-5330-9530 (e-mail) cnic-jp@po.iijnet.or.jp, (URL) http://www.cnic.or.jp http://www.cnic.or.jp/* 3F Kotobuki Bldg., 1-58-15 Higashi-nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003 Japan Tel: 81-3-5330-9520; Fax: 81-3-5330-9530 http://www.cnic.or.jp/
cnic-jp@po.iijnet.or.jp (C) Citizens' Nuclear Information Center (CNIC) ***************************************************************** 10 Nuclear plant vote delayed again The Taipei Times Online: 2001-05-31 May 31st, 2001 POSTPONEMENT: A decision on a referendum for the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant has been held up until late July, following a Cabinet recommendation By Joyce Huang STAFF REPORTER A final decision to hold a non-legally binding consultative referendum on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant at the end of this year will be postponed until late July, Cabinet Secretary-General Chiou I-jen (ªô¸q¤¯) said yesterday. "The premier has agreed to allow the Cabinet's referendum evaluation team two more months to come up with the final decision in late July," Chiou, who is also head of the team; said at a press conference after the weekly Cabinet meeting yesterday morning. Chiou said that the team, established in late February, was supposed to make the decision in three months after it was esatablished. But in its first month, the team focused most of its energy on drafting a referendum law which is still being reviewed by the Legislature. In its second month, the team researched results from four previous referenda held in Taipei City, Taipei County, Ilan County and Kungliao township between 1995 and 1998. In May, the team held a substantial discussion on the costs of a referendum. According to Chiou, the team's researches further found that the referendum held in Taipei County had a turnout rate of 18 percent and was later rectified and disputed by the Control Yuan on the grounds that the county had illegally appropriated more than NT$50 million from subsidies for local governments to hold the referendum. Chiou said that if the consultative referendum was held by the Cabinet, the cost would definitely exceed NT$50 million. "If the cost of holding the referendum is lawfully appropriated to avoid being disputed by the Control Yuan, it would still be in accordance with the Constitution even though the referendum law has not yet been passed by the legislature," Chiou said. Disagreeing with Chiou, the DPP's mainstream faction yesterday said that it opposed holding a referendum that would not be legally binding. "Results of the referendum will only be cited as meaningless references. But, if the plant controversy is brought up again, it will attract another round of political instability," DPP legislator Wang Sing-nan (¤ý©¯¨k) said yesterday afternoon. DPP legislative whip Chou Po-lun (©P§B­Û), who had previously expressed his support of a year-end referendum, yesterday said that he would wait for the Cabinet's final decision. Chou is going to run in the legislative elections in the Taipei County's constituencies where the plant is located and is therefore said to be under great pressure. Chiou, nevertheless, said that if the legislature passed the referendum law before the referendum was held, it would further validate results and costs. Although the Ministry of the Interior had previously said that the referendum to decide the plant's fate was likely to be held in northern Taiwan, Chiou yesterday did not confirm the constituencies where the referendum will be held. He said that the Cabinet expected the vote's turnout rate to be over 40 percent so that the vote was of a consultative nature. Chiou also denied media speculation that high-ranking government officials including the president and the premier had decided to call off the vote. This story has been viewed 265 times. URL=[http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2001/05/31/story/0000088023] Copyright © 1999-2001 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 11 'Nuclear plant is terrorist threat' The Times THURSDAY MAY 31 2001 BY MARK HENDERSON, SCIENCE CORRESPONDENT A CRUDE atomic bomb could be made from nuclear fuel that is to be used at a new plant at Sellafield, according to a report submitted to the Government. Terrorists would need little more know-how than that used to make the Lockerbie bomb to construct a nuclear device using stolen MOX fuel pellets from the plant, the Oxford Research Group, an independent team of nuclear scientists, warned ministers. The MOX plant, which uses a modern hybrid fuel made up of plutonium dioxide and uranium dioxide, was completed in 1996, but its operator, British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL), is still waiting for government approval to start it running because of doubts about its economic viability. Frank Barnaby, a physicist with the Oxford group, believes that MOX fuel lends itself so well to bomb-making that it would be “sheer irresponsibility” to open the plant. In his report, which has been leaked to *New Scientist,* he detailed three simple ways in which the fuel elements could be separated. The chemistry is less sophisticated than that needed to make drugs such as Ecstasy. BNFL said, however, that the MOX fuel is subject to some of the tightest industrial security in Britain and is accompanied by armed guards when it is moved. “We are 100 per cent confident in the physical protection measures we have,” a spokesman told *New Scientist.* The company also pointed out that turning plutonium into MOX fuel and burning it in reactors could reduce the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation by cutting plutonium stockpiles. Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided ***************************************************************** 12 Terrorist risk of BNFL plant Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Theft of nuclear materials 'a terrifying possibility', report warns Special report: Britain's nuclear industry Stuart Millar, technology correspondent Thursday May 31, 2001 The Guardian Terrorists could easily build a crude atomic bomb with the nuclear fuel to be produced at a controversial new reprocessing plant at Sellafield, the government has been warned. A confidential report submitted to the Department of the Environment claims that it would be straightforward to convert the mixed plutonium and uranium oxide fuel (Mox) into the material to build a bomb. British Nuclear Fuel's Mox facility at its Cumbrian complex has been at the centre of controversy since it was first proposed. The plant was completed in 1996, but has yet to receive a licence to start production amid high-level doubts about its economic viability. BNFL is pressing ministers to allow it to start producing Mox. A fourth consultation exercise on the plant finished last week. But in the latest setback to BNFL's lobbying, the report, prepared by physicist Frank Barnaby, and commissioned by the Oxford Research Group, warns that it would be "sheer irresponsibility" for the government to allow the plant to open as the theft of Mox fuel pellets would then become a "terrifying possibility". In his report, published in the latest issue of New Scientist, Dr Barnaby says that if terrorists intent on mass destruction obtained Mox fuel they would need no more technical knowledge than that used to make the Lockerbie bomb to build an atomic device. Instructions on turning the components into a bomb are openly available in published literature or on the internet. Dr Barnaby, who worked in the atomic weapons laboratory at Aldermaston, Berkshire, in the 1950s before going on to head the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, goes on to outline three methods for chemically separating the plutonium dioxide from the uranium dioxide in Mox fuel. The chemistry expertise required, he said, would be less than that required for the illegal manufacture of designer drugs, or that employed by the Aum Shinrikyo cult in 1995 to prepare sarin nerve gas for release into the Tokyo subway. One method, involving lanthanium nitrate as a carrier, was used in 1941 by the atomic pioneer Glenn Seaborg at the University of Chicago. The other two - one of which is currently used at the University of Kiev in the Ukraine - depend on reactions with resins. If terrorists managed to separate just 35kg of plutonium oxide from the Mox fuel, they would have enough to build a primitive device, according to Dr Barnaby. Alternatively, they could use hydrofluoric acid to precipitate out the pure metal, just 13kg of which would create an explosion with equiva lent yield of 100 tonnes of TNT - 50 times the size of the Oklahoma City explosion - the largest terrorist bomb to date. "If they can get their hands on the Mox fuel, it is easy for them to separate the plutonium and build it into a bomb," Dr Barnaby told the Guardian last night. "If they get enough for a fission reaction, they will get a very big explosion. If they don't get enough they could mix it with an incendiary and create a toxic fireball which would pollute a very large area." He added that while security at Sellafield was tight, the chances of terrorists hijacking a Mox shipment in transit or after delivery to the client could not be ruled out. BNFL disputed the report's warnings. It denied that extracting the plutonium oxide from the Mox fuel rods was simple, and insisted it had comprehensive security in place to prevent terrorists getting hold of Mox or plutonium. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001 ***************************************************************** 13 Sellafield Mox plant may be target for nuclear terrorists, ministers told Independent News 04 June 2001 05:29 GMT+1 Home > News > UK > Science By Charles Arthur Technology Editor 31 May 2001 Opening the "mixed oxide" fuel plant at the British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) plant at Sellafield, Cumbria, would give terrorists the chance to make a crude atomic bomb, a confidential report sent to the Government suggests. By stealing pellets of the mixed-oxide (Mox) fuel, consisting of uranium and plutonium oxide, criminals with no more expertise than those who built the bomb that destroyed the Pan Am jumbo over Lockerbie in 1988 could make a device capable of mass destruction. The warning comes as the Government considers whether to allow BNFL to open the £460m Mox plant, which was completed in 1996 but has been unable to operate because it has not yet been licensed. A decision on the licence is expected after the election. Dr Frank Barnaby, a respected physicist who worked at the atomic weapons laboratory at Aldermaston in Berkshire in the 1950s, prepared the report, which was submitted earlier this month. He said yesterday: "[The report] assumes that that once the Mox pellets are made up that they are hijacked during transport, or stolen from the reactor where they are stored for months before being used. The point is that to secure a nuclear reactor site properly is expensive, and operators are likely to cut back on costs." The report ­ whose existence is revealed in today's *New Scientist *magazine ­ points out that there would be three ways to separate the oxides of plutonium and uranium making up the pellets of fuel that would be the output from the plant. One was first used in 1941 at the University of Chicago in early work on the first atomic weapons. The other two are more sophisticated, but one is currently used at the University of Kiev in the Ukraine. Dr Barnaby's report notes: "The chemistry is less sophisticated than that required to make illegal designer drugs. "They could produce two solid hemispheres of plutonium and use those to make a bomb. And the evidence is that the levels of security for Mox is less than it should be during transport and storage; though on the BNFL site it is considerably higher." BNFL said that security arrangements for Mox fuel were "mature, comprehensive and robust" both on-site and for transport. It also said that burning plutonium, as Mox fuel would do, could lower the threat of nuclear proliferation by cutting stockpiles of plutonium. The risk of Mox fuel falling into terrorists' hands was "minimal", BNFL said. But Mark Johnston, a nuclear campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said: "The Government has failed badly in its supervision of BFNL. The Mox plant should never have been built, and the Government would be wrong to license it. Mox fuel is not only a security risk, but economic folly." Also from the Science section 'Living metronome' the key to rhythm Physicist cracks the ice cream equation Nasa to test the 5,000mph surfboard that could lead to hypersonic travel Another giant unearthed in 'lost' valley of the dinosaurs Is there anybody out there? Contact us Using our Content © 2001 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd ***************************************************************** 14 Sellafield 'could be terrorist target' warning Irish Newspapers - Irish Independent Online -Sunday Independent Irish Independent > International News > Europe Issue Date : Mon June 4th 01 OPENING the "mixed oxide" fuel plant at the British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) plant at Sellafield, Cumbria, would give terrorists the chance to make a crude atomic bomb, a confidential report sent to the London government suggests. By stealing pellets of the mixed-oxide (Mox) fuel, consisting of uranium and plutonium oxide, criminals with no more expertise than those who built the bomb that destroyed the Pan Am jumbo over Lockerbie in 1988 could make a device capable of mass destruction. The warning comes as the Government considers whether to allow BNFL to open the stg£460m Mox plant, which was completed in 1996 but has been unable to operate because it has not yet been licensed. A decision on the licence is expected after the election. Dr Frank Barnaby, a respected physicist who worked at the atomic weapons laboratory at Aldermaston in in the 1950s, prepared the report. He said yesterday: "[The report] assumes that that once the Mox pellets are made up that they are hijacked during transport, or stolen from the reactor where they are stored for months before being used. The point is that to secure a nuclear reactor site properly is expensive, and operators are likely to cut back on costs." The report - whose existence is revealed in New Scientist magazine - points out that there would be three ways to separate the oxides of plutonium and uranium making up the pellets of fuel that would be the output from the plant. One was first used in 1941 at the University of Chicago in early work on the first atomic weapons. The other two are more sophisticated, but one is currently used at the University of Kiev in the Ukraine. Dr Barnaby's report notes: "The chemistry is less sophisticated than that required to make illegal designer drugs. "They could produce two solid hemispheres of plutonium and use those to make a bomb. And the evidence is that the levels of security for Mox is less than it should be during transport and storage; though on the BNFL site it is considerably higher." BNFL said that security arrangements for Mox fuel were "mature, comprehensive and robust" both on-site and for transport. It also said that burning plutonium could lower the threat of nuclear proliferation by cutting stockpiles of plutonium. The risk of Mox fuel falling into terrorists' hands was "minimal," BNFL said. * Independent News Service ***************************************************************** 15 Editorial: There's no room for error May 31, 2001 Precision in science isn't just important -- it's everything. For instance, in 1999 the $125 million Mars Climate Orbiter was lost in space because of a navigation error. The catastrophic failure was caused by an engineer who didn't convert English measurement units into metric before the mission was launched. It is this kind of mistake that makes the recent revelations about scientific miscalculations on the Yucca Mountain Project all that more disturbing. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which ultimately will decide whether to grant the Department of Energy a license to build a high-level nuclear waste repository at Nevada's Yucca Mountain, has discovered a number of errors in computer models and hand calculations by the DOE. While DOE officials assert that the errors shouldn't impact their assessment of how Yucca Mountain would stand up over time, the fact is they're troubling. In one example, the DOE mistakenly calculated the chemistry inside the waste packages. As the Sun's Mary Manning reported, if there is a higher acid content inside the buried containers than the DOE estimates, then the waste packages could deteriorate faster -- possibly within 1,000 years -- allowing radiation to escape the dumpsite. The stakes involving Yucca Mountain are extraordinary -- 77,000 tons of man's deadliest waste would be entombed in Nevada if the federal government were to give a green light to the project. The latest miscalculations by scientists, when joined together with the accumulating evidence about the danger of storing nuclear waste there, is even more reason why the federal government should abandon this project. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 16 Greens In Euro Bid To Halt MOX THE WHITEHAVEN NEWS Thursday, May 31, 2001 European law is being used by Green campaigners to try and halt any moves to allow Sellafield's Mox plant to operate. The government faces a high court challenge, immediately after the election, to British Nuclear Fuels' plans to start up the new plant to make plutonium fuel for reactors in Sweden, Germany and Japan. The government, which hopes to part privatise BNFL, is accused of using "voodoo economics" to justify the plant by Cumbrian anti-nuclear group CORE's Martin Forwood. Friends of the Earth, backed by Greenpeace, began the action, last week, after the latest public consultation on starting up the plant. Green groups believe that John Prescott, environment secretary, and Alan Milburn, health secretary, broke the law by restricting the scope of that consultation. They say that under European law a nuclear plant, that subjects the public to extra radioactivity, has to be justified on economic grounds before it can be licensed. This would be impossible in the case of Mox, unless its £462m construction costs were to be written off. ***************************************************************** 17 Copeland Again Urges Approval Of £462m Plant THE WHITEHAVEN NEWS Thursday, May 31, 2001 Copeland Council has told the government it strongly supports operation of the Mox plant and that anything other than a "yes" decision to licence it would be a massive blow for the area. The council has been asked for its views in the latest and fourth round of consultation over the £462million Mox plant. Closing date for responses was May 23. It says that Mox cannot be looked at in isolation and a decision to delay or not to proceed would seriously damage the site's future prospects. "The reprocessing business itself would become questionable without the Mox plant and in turn this would present potential problems regarding plutonium management,'' the council has told the Department of the Environment. "The consultation papers and recent announcements regarding future orders do clearly show economic validity for the business case,'' says the council and it warns of the potential socio-economic effects on the borough, where 60% of jobs are supported either directly or indirectly by Sellafield, if the plant is not licensed, Council leader, Robin Simpson, and councillors Geoff Blackwell (development and environment) and Henry Wormstrup (economic regeneration) have signed a letter supporting Mox, which was sent to Claire Herman of the government's policy team on radioactive waste. The councillors add: "The loss of reprocessing at Sellafield would be catastrophic for the community, requiring massive injection of support, a factor which has not been quantified in the economic and commercial justification, but should still be borne in mind. "The council is aware of growing confidence in the performance of the work-force and management at Sellafield. There is evidence that this is being reflected positively by customers of the company and in turn by increasing demand. "Because the environmental regulation aspects of the Mox plant have already been satisfied and now the economic case is equally robust, the council strongly supports operation of the plant. "More important from our view point is the direct effect on local people. Our council is committed to providing residents with the best possible services, opportunities and quality of life. Anything other than a decision to operate the plant would be a massive blow to this objective.'' Some 600 jobs are supported by the plant. When operational, BNFL estimates 1,800 jobs will be supported, 300 at the plant and the others indirectly. Many of these would not be new but are jobs that will be retained in the area. The licensing of Mox will allow recycling of fuel and reduction of UK plutonium stocks. Burning Mox fuel will produce energy without creating CO2 emissions. Very small additional aerial and liquid radioactive discharges may occur. ***************************************************************** 18 Pebble Creates Ripples in Nuclear Industry power generation technology, Power-Gen Conference Power Engineering - [Magazine of power generation, utility deregulation, and the official Power-Gen Conference. ] June 04, 2001 By John C. Zink, Ph.D., P.E., Contributing Editor The California energy crisis may have breathed new life into the U.S. nuclear power business. Even the popular press is recognizing nuclear energy as a serious choice for addressing the nation's expanding electricity needs. In response, energy policy makers mapped out a strategy for taking advantage of this opportunity. But just when industry leaders agreed on a plan for updating U.S nuclear technology, an outsider, South Africa's pebble bed reactor, intruded on their orderly process. Last year's Department of Energy (DOE) workshop of nuclear experts produced a plan to develop Generation IV nuclear power plant technology, with enhanced safety and economics, based on the many successes of the Generation I - III Light Water Reactors (LWRs). In early March senators Domenici and Craig introduced The Nuclear Energy Electricity Assurance Act of 2001, which authorizes DOE to increase spending on nuclear energy initiatives by $275 million. One of the most important of these initiatives is $50 million for work on the Generation IV LWR as proposed at the DOE workshop. While many feel this is a good start toward rejuvenating nuclear power in the U.S., there is another school of thought. Some industry insiders are convinced that the public will readily accept new nuclear plants only if these plants are radically different from past designs. While this group may be comfortable with the expected safety and economic performance of the proposed Generation IV plants, they feel the public will not share their confidence. Some of these nuclear industry heavyweights are backing the pebble bed reactor concept as an alternative to the DOE funded Generation IV design. I wrote about the pebble bed reactor's history and the concept's revival in a 1998 Power Engineering column. At that time Eskom, the big South African utility, had just announced a significant investment in developing this design, with a goal of having a pilot plant online by 2003. The Eskom plan calls for a 100 MW reactor module using helium coolant, which would also be the working fluid for a gas turbine (Brayton cycle) generator. Now, Exelon Corp., a major operator of nuclear power plants in the U.S., has bought a 12.5 percent interest in the South African project. Exelon is participating in a detailed feasibility study due for completion in June. Exelon will then decide whether or not to proceed with initial licensing activities leading to potential future construction of a pebble bed reactor plant in this country. On January 31 Exelon briefed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff on the company's plans and discussed the process the NRC might require in order to license such a plant for operation in the U.S. At least one NRC staff member has suggested that the Commission should wait until the first pebble bed plant has been built in South Africa, now expected to be in 2005, before approving the design for use here. One of the big reasons many feel the pebble bed reactor will achieve better public acceptance is that it relies on its inherent physical processes for most of its safety features. Instead of being fueled with long tubes of uranium cooled by flowing water, the pebble bed reactor would have baseball-size fuel pellets of uranium and graphite cooled by helium gas. This configuration has the advantage that, even if the gaseous coolant stopped flowing entirely, the fuel pebbles would not get hotter than about 2,900 F, or about 650 F below the temperature at which fuel damage would begin to occur. This eliminates the possibility of fuel melting, the most serious accident one can contemplate for a nuclear reactor, and the accident that provides the most horror scenarios for the anti-nukes to use in attacking the technology. (Who can forget "The China Syndrome," Hollywood's contribution to public understanding of nuclear reactor safety?) Eskom believes the pebble bed concept also has economic advantages. Because it lacks water coolant that could flash to steam with the attendant pressure surge inside the reactor, and because of the fuel's hardiness, a pebble bed plant should not require many of the expensive add-on safety features required of current LWRs. Its online refueling feature eliminates the need for periodic plant shutdowns for refueling, with the resulting loss of production, and allows for efficient use of the uranium fuel. Pebble bed plants should also require shorter construction times, which means lower interest expense during construction. Properly done, the Generation IV plant should have the same favorable safety characteristics as the pebble bed reactor. According to the schedules for the two prototype plants, however, the pebble bed will have about a 15-year head start. It is refreshing to once again see enough interest in nuclear technology that there is real competition between different reactor types. It is even more encouraging to see both governments and private industry willing to spend substantial sums on a nuclear future. *Power Engineering* May, 2001 ***************************************************************** 19 Nevada Nuke Dump Support Withdrawn May 30, 2001 LAS VEGAS (AP) - A former Department of Energy official who drafted a proposal to make Nevada's Yucca Mountain a nuclear waste disposal site is withdrawing his support for the project. W. Kenneth Davis, undersecretary from 1981 to 1983 during the Reagan administration, sent an unsolicited letter to the White House saying that the site won't be approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "In my opinion, (it) should be put in mothballs," Davis wrote in a three-page memorandum. Last week, President Bush called for a national nuclear waste repository as part of his energy plan. Since 1987, Yucca Mountain has been the only site studied to become the graveyard for the nation's 77,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive research waste. But Davis said that Yucca Mountain can't overcome Nevada's strong opposition to transporting and storing the waste 1,000 feet beneath a wind-swept ridge, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "At Yucca Mountain, you are going to run into a hailstorm of protest over shipping," he said in Wednesday's editions of the Las Vegas Sun. Gov. Kenny Guinn, all four members of Nevada's bipartisan congressional delegation and Las Vegas business and casino interests oppose the Yucca Mountain plan. The state Legislature is considering allocating $4 million for a public relations campaign and legal fight. Davis cited the potential for water and radiation to escape Yucca Mountain and said burying nuclear wastes in a permanent repository was never intended when he authored the policy. On the Net: Yucca Mountain Project: http://www.ymp.gov All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 20 Letter to the editor: nuclear power [tahoe.com] VIEWS Thursday, May 31, 2001 . Lou DeBottari's letter to the editor, which appeared in the Nevada Appeal on May 2, was clear, straightforward logic exhorting us to "think outside the box," rather than seizing upon the first and most obvious solution to our energy crisis; namely, the construction of more nuclear power plants. In a sense, we've created a monster, which we are still struggling to control. We have yet to find an acceptable way to dispose of the radioactive waste generated by our nuclear plants, and the plants themselves carry an inherent risk of malfunction with potentially disastrous results. Why would we proliferate an already deadly situation when we have yet to solve the problems of waste disposal and plant obsolescence? In our rush to alleviate the immediate and pressing need for more energy, we are also overlooking the fact that our present grid will not handle the additional power generated by new plants, whether they be nuclear or fossil-fueled. Another panic move is to start drilling wherever oil/gas may be present, possibly destroying or doing irreparable damage to our treasured-and-dwindling wilderness lands when, in fact, the additional production will literally be "a drop in the bucket." Even under the most optimistic conditions, our resources will be consumed in a relatively short time. Then what? Do we then initiate a do-or-die crash program to develop alternative energy sources? Fossil fuels - particularly oil - are a finite resource. The world's ever-accelerating voracious appetite for these resources will exhaust the supply in the not-too-distant future. That handwriting is on the wall! There are many options available. Some, such as wind-power, solar power, and geothermal power, are feasible with current technology but are limited by geography. Still, where they can be used, they should be used to reduce the burden on existing power plants. The energy crisis is in fact a global crisis; and it therefore seems appropriate that the efforts of scientists and engineers throughout the world be interconnected and coordinated to bring about more rapid development and perfection of developing technologies such as nuclear fusion (as opposed to fission). Nuclear fusion is a much cleaner, safer process, which generates waste of dramatically reduced potency. The technology suggested by Mr. DeBottari - the hydrogen fuel cell - offers the best possible combination of benefits; minimal pollution, elimination of the waste disposal problem and the elimination of the need for expansion of the existing grid system. The nation which developed the atom and hydrogen bombs and put men on the moon has the talent, the ability, the resources and the determination to meet this challenge, but it will take the same dedication, sweat and concerted effort we as a country mounted to accomplish the aforementioned "impossible" tasks. In short, Americans must urge their government, industries and institutions of learning to combine efforts in a common cause. To paraphrase a well-known statement, "We have met the task force, and they is us!" WARREN R. "RANDY' MORGAN Dayton *Copyright tahoe.com. Materials contained within this site may ***************************************************************** 21 Utah should say no to N-power [deseretnews.com] Thursday, May 31, 2001 By Winston C. Weeks Predictably, the Utah Republican establishment has given its blessing to the Cheney-Bush energy plan, trumpeting potential benefits to Utah's economy. But in one key area — reviving nuclear power — this plan is a prescription for disaster for the state and the nation that Utah's leaders should resist vigorously. The president proposes a massive additional subsidy initiative to build new nuclear power plants to address the worst "energy crisis" since the 1970s. Touting nukes as clean and green, new and improved, stopping just short of "too cheap to meter", Bush promotes construction of enough new reactors to create enough nuclear waste to guarantee that Utah and Nevada will be dumped on for decades. The nuclear industry and the president know that their expansion plans are doomed without a dump site for spent fuel rods. The industry wants to build 50 new nuclear power plants in the next 20 years, which means a 50 percent increase in nuclear waste that will need to be stored and buried. So it's no surprise Bush and his "nuk—u—lur" buddies want the waste problem "resolved" soon. However, even if both the Yucca Mountain, Nev., burial grounds and the Private Fuel Storage "temporary" storage pad in Utah open for business, the existing waste coupled with newly generated waste will exceed their combined capacity. It's widely publicized that Utah's governor says nuclear power plant waste will be stored in Utah over his dead body, that our boys in Congress back him up on that and that 84 percent of Utahns agree. It hasn't been reported that Bush used the Xcel Energy headquarters as a backdrop for his St. Paul energy policy press conference. Xcel, formerly Northern States Power, is the driving force behind Private Fuel Storage (PFS), the limited liability corporation that wants to park its spent fuel rods on Skull Valley Goshute land until the government rams it down Nevada's throat. It's largely ignored that Leavitt is lukewarm in opposing Yucca Mountain and that our Republicans in Congress wholeheartedly endorse it. It should be understood that Utah will be affected negatively even if the high level nuke waste goes directly to Nevada without stopping here. The transportation of spent fuel rods poses unacceptable risks, and the creation of more nuclear power means more low level nuclear waste will be landfilled here. Beyond the waste problem, there is an extensive menu of reasons nuclear power is bad policy. The nuclear energy cycle is anything but clean and green. Four Corners uranium miners, millers and transporters suffering from cancer and fighting for compensation can attest to that. Contrary to the president's claims that nuclear power is free of greenhouse gas emissions, mining and fabricating nuclear fuel is highly energy intensive, using four to five times more polluting fuels per kilowatt produced than wind power and other renewable. Radioactive emissions are routine; they do not require an accident. Nuclear power is not economically competitive. Studies have estimated that each kilowatt of nuclear power costs $3,000 to $4,000 to produce. New natural gas-fired plants cost $400 to $600 per kilowatt, wind turbines $1,000 per kilowatt. Public Citizen reported in 1998 that 42 of the 108 then operating nuclear power reactors are more expensive to operate and maintain than the cost of replacement power in their own regions. No utility company has ordered a new reactor for more than two decades because they can't compete in a deregulated energy environment, and 89 percent of 400 utility executives surveyed in 1996 said they would not consider doing so. Most of these execs recall the WHOOPS financial meltdown in Washington state and are well aware of the $28 billion bailout (disguised as deregulation) of California nuclear utilities' "stranded costs." The Cheney-Bush energy package calls for renewal of the Price-Anderson Act, which limits the liability of the nuclear industry in the event of an accident. Taxpayers would pick up the tab above $7 billion (a serious accident could result in more than $300 billion in damages). Without that public subsidy shielding their liability, not even the most pro-nuclear utility would dream of building or operating a new reactor. Limited liability should sound familiar to our PFS-watchers in Congress. Lastly, in spite of industry claims to the contrary, the risks of a catastrophic reactor accident are still quite real. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission testified in 1986 that there was a 45 percent chance of a meltdown at a U.S. reactor by 2006. In 1994, former NRC Chairman Ivan Selin stated that economic pressures give utilities "incentive to cut corners" with safety, increasing the potential for accidents. Utah's leadership may find reasons to back some portions of the administration's energy plan, but if they support the nuclear initiatives they may some day have to look in the mirror and ask "over whose dead bodies?" *Winston C. Weeks represents the Citizens Education Project, a Utah-based nonprofit group concerned with environmental and social justice issues.* © 2001 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 22 'United front' rejects nuke bills May 30, 2001 Critics say measures sent mixed signals on accepting dump By Cy Ryan SUN CAPITAL BUREAU CARSON CITY -- The Nevada Legislature will end this session in strong opposition to a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain. Two resolutions that favored contingency plans in case the Energy Department selected Nevada as the site are dead in the Senate Transportation Committee. Opponents of a dump said the resolutions implied Nevada was sending a mixed message to Washington, D.C., that it might accept the waste under certain conditions. Sen. Bill O'Donnell, R-Las Vegas, chairman of the transportation committee, said Tuesday a vote would not be taken on the two resolutions. O'Donnell had sponsored Senate Joint Resolution 4, which urged the governor to designate alternative routes outside of Las Vegas for the transportation of the material to Yucca Mountain. Sen. Ray Shaffer, D-North Las Vegas, had introduced Senate Joint Resolution 10, which urged Congress to implement certain safety precautions if Yucca Mountain is chosen. "I made my point," O'Donnell said. "Public perception now is there is a real likelihood that this thing will come to pass. Even our congressional delegation is taking notes and positioning accordingly for Nevada's best interest." O'Donnell acknowledged he drew a lot of opposition. "I got a lot of heat from a very focused group of individuals. However, in talking to the general public, I got a lot of support." "The attorney general (Frankie Sue Del Papa) had problems with it (SJR4) because she feared it would be implied consent," O'Donnell said. "However, in light of the news report on (Vice President Dick) Cheney's energy policy, we are a key component in the production of electricity for the next 20 years. "So I don't see the issue of Yucca Mountain going away even if we do spend $4 million," he said, referring to a bill pushed by Gov. Kenny Guinn to spend $4 million to fight location of the dump in Nevada. Nevada Adjutant General Tony Clark said passage of those two resolutions "would have sent the wrong message to the Department of Energy and the nuclear industry, and we could be fragmented. It is better that did not pass at this point." Clark and Del Papa worked together against the two resolutions. Another resolution by Sen. Jon Porter, R-Boulder City, urging Congress to require federal agencies to prepare environmental impact statements on the transportation of waste, also died without a vote. Clark said the attorney general's office supported the Porter resolution. He said it was essential the DOE conduct these studies on the impact of shipping this waste through numerous states. The one resolution that passed this session expressed strong opposition to any nuclear waste in Nevada and it served notice the state would veto any plan. Clark said, "It shows a united front in opposition to having that trash stored in Nevada." He said, "Nevada has already done its share in nuclear development in this country -- the Test Site and the storing low-level nuclear waste." Most of these nuclear power plants are east of the Mississippi River. If there is a storage repository, it should be in that region of the nation "where they are generating the waste," he said. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 23 Nevada Senate OKs $4 million to fight Yucca Mountain dump ASSOCIATED PRESS May 31st, 2001 Former DOE official recants support for Yucca Mountain LAS VEGAS (AP) — The principal author of the policy zeroing in on Yucca Mountain as a potential site for storing the nation’s high-level nuclear waste now says the project should be scrapped. W. Kenneth Davis, Energy Department undersecretary from 1981 to 1983 during the Reagan administration, said in an unsolicited letter to the Bush White House that the site won’t be approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “In my opinion, (it) should be put in mothballs,” Davis wrote in a three-page memorandum after the Bush-Cheney national energy plan signaled renewed federal support of nuclear power. Davis told the Las Vegas Sun that Yucca Mountain can’t overcome political and technical obstacles. He cited Nevada’s strong opposition to transporting and storing 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste at the site, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. “At Yucca Mountain, you are going to run into a hailstorm of protest over shipping,” he said. Nevada also is balking at providing water rights to the project, and state lawmakers are allocating $4 million for a public relations campaign and legal fight. Gov. Kenny Guinn, all four members of Nevada’s bipartisan congressional delegation and Las Vegas business and casino interests are united in opposition to the Yucca Mountain plan. Davis cited the potential for water and radiation to escape Yucca Mountain and said burying nuclear wastes in a permanent repository was never intended when he authored the policy. He said he left the DOE before a decision was made to turn temporary nuclear waste storage into a permanent solution. Yucca Mountain was selected in 1987 as the only site to be studied for permanent storage of highly radioactive commercial and defense nuclear waste. Davis went from the federal agency to Bechtel Inc., a government contractor, and retired in 1995. Bechtel is now part of the Bechtel-SAIC partnership that holds the main Yucca Mountain contract. © 2001 Reno Gazette-Journal ***************************************************************** 24 Promise of state money fuels Vegas fight against Yucca Mountain May 30, 2001 LAS VEGAS (AP) - With Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn eager to sign a state check for $4 million to fight a proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, Las Vegas casino and business interests poised to plunge into the fray. "There's overwhelming opposition to this on the Strip, and we're some of the best marketing brains in the business," said Stephen Cloobeck, president of Las Vegas-based Diamond Resorts International. The gambling industry, civic leaders and elected officials in the city and Clark County have united against the idea of putting the nation's nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles from Las Vegas. Cloobeck has served since the beginning of the year as interim head of an anti-dump coalition calling itself "Save Nevada." He said the group also is raising money and hopes to match the state's total. Opponents fear the idea of trucks and trains rumbling past the nation's fastest growing metropolitan area carrying 77,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel and military waste to the dump site. Cloobeck and a spokesman for Guinn on Wednesday praised the state Senate for passing a bill to put up $4 million for a legal and public relations fight against the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. Guinn, who proposed the bill, is eager to sign it, governor's spokesman Jack Finn said. The measure, SB494, now goes to the Assembly for final action. It would provide $1 million for a public relations campaign and $3 million for a legal fight if the U.S. Energy Department recommends construction of the high-level nuclear waste dump. Yucca Mountain, at the western edge of the Nevada Test Site, is the only site being studied to entomb the nation's highly radioactive waste. The earliest it could open is 2010. The Energy Department is scheduled to forward its recommendation next year to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, who will make a recommendation to President Bush. The Senate bill passed Tuesday originally appropriated $5 million for the anti-dump efforts. It was reduced because of budget concerns. Cloobeck said that within two weeks - after the bill reaches Guinn and funding is assured - a full-time executive director will be named to head the anti-Yucca Mountain drive. Cloobeck said he is not a candidate for that job. He promised a cooperative marketing and political blitz involving the state, county, city, businesses and residents. "Eighty percent of this community knows about this and doesn't want this here," he declared. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 25 Ex-energy official opposes Yucca plan [Las Vegas Review-Journal] Thursday, May 31, 2001 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL A former Reagan administration energy official who proposed Yucca Mountain for disposing of the nation's highly radioactive waste now says that the Bush administration should abandon the project because the Nuclear Regulatory Commission won't approve it. W. Kenneth Davis, an energy undersecretary from 1981 to 1983, expressed his view near the end of a three-page commentary on the Bush-Cheney energy plan. He said the solution to the problem of storing spent nuclear fuel is to keep it at reactor sites "and eventual sites for reprocessing plants" even though the political climate is not right to raise the issue of nuclear fuel reprocessing. That position, in part, parallels Nevada's stance that high-level radioactive waste should be kept at sites that generate it and not shipped across the country for disposal in Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "It is not necessary to inflame the anti-nukes any more than necessary now," according to a memo from Davis of San Rafael, Calif. "Yucca Mountain, which is unlikely to be licensed, in any case is not a reasonable view of the shipping required if nothing else, and in my opinion should be put in mothballs," he said. Citizen Alert, a statewide environmental group staunchly opposed to the proposed repository, said Davis' letter reflects the group's position that the mountain, even with engineered barriers designed to keep radioactive materials from escaping, is not a safe place to put 77,000 tons of the nation's most lethal nuclear wastes. "Nevadans have not been blowing smoke all these years just to keep the dump out of our back yard," Citizen Alert Executive Director Kaitlin Backlund said. "Nevada's position is based on science, and Mr. Davis' comments are another indicator of that." This story is located at: http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/May-31-Thu-2001/news/16217284.html ***************************************************************** 26 Berkley plans Yucca measure [Las Vegas Review-Journal] Thursday, May 31, 2001 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By STEVE TETREAULT DONREY WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Rep. Shelley Berkley plans to introduce legislation next week to shut down the Yucca Mountain program and divert billions of dollars to find alternatives to nuclear waste burial. Contending that the government faces "insurmountable problems" with geology and water seepage at the proposed underground repository 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, the Nevada Democrat's bill -- posted Wednesday on her Web site -- will call for an abrupt about-face. It would stop government funding of Yucca Mountain work and instead direct money now held in a $17 billion nuclear waste trust fund to be spent on studies of "risk-decreasing technologies" that could prolong storage of spent fuel at power plants, or reduce the radiation danger of the material. Nevada lawmakers specifically want more money spent to investigate the possibilities of accelerated transmutation, a process that reworks nuclear waste into a less radioactive and more compressed substance. A repository still might be needed to store transmutated waste, but Nevada politicians believe research may lead to other possibilities. "I would like to divert the money in the trust fund that's been earmarked for Yucca Mountain to instead go into research of emerging technologies," Berkley said. "We'd like to divert every dime in the trust fund. Let's take that money and do something more productive with it. "The end goal is to keep nuclear waste out of Nevada," she said. Berkley said she realized her approach -- to ditch a program that has spent $7 billion so far on Yucca Mountain studies -- is an ambitious one. Asked how she planned to get it considered in Congress, she said, "I thought I would introduce it first." Berkley said she will begin seeking co-sponsors when Congress returns to session next week. She said she hopes to partner with Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., who also advocates further research into burial alternatives. A spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute said Berkley may score points with anti-nuclear constituents but her bill won't solve the need for nuclear waste storage. "It appears the legislation would be good for her politically, but we believe it would complicate a final science-based decision on Yucca Mountain," said Mitch Singer, an NEI official. In 1999, Berkley sponsored an amendment to authorize $6 million over two years for transmutation research. It was placed on an Energy Department research bill that failed to win final passage that year. The Bush administration budget for 2002 contains no money for transmutation work. ***************************************************************** 27 Regulators find errors in report on Yucca Mountain nuclear dump ASSOCIATED PRESS May 31st, 2001 LAS VEGAS (AP) — The Nuclear Regulatory Commission wants Department of Energy scientists to recalculate how a proposed nuclear waste repository would endure inside Yucca Mountain in Nevada. William Reamer, the commission’s high-level waste branch chief, called for Yucca Mountain Project managers to address eight “technical errors” or “inconsistencies” in the repository’s Total System Performance Assessment. The document will be one of many used to determine whether the site is suitable and can safely contain the nation’s highly radioactive waste for at least 10,000 years. In a May 17 letter, Reamer refers to errors in calculations on the chemistry of waste containment packages and when they would fail; how fast some of the materials surrounding the waste would degrade over thousands of years; and the amount of radioactivity that could escape from a potential volcanic release. Energy Department officials said Tuesday that the errors found in the report would have a minimal effect on performance projections. But a top Nevada official heading state efforts to fight the proposed waste dump said the discovery of errors undermines the credibility of the performance report. “I think they’ve got a real big problem on their hands,” said Bob Loux, Nevada’s Nuclear Projects Agency. Yucca Mountain Project scientists said they’re confident that engineered barriers and the geology of the mountain will meet requirements for entombing 77,000 tons of radioactive waste. The site is at the western edge of the Nevada Test Site, 90 miles from Las Vegas and 20 miles from the California state line. It is the only site in the nation under study for storing the nation’s commercial and military nuclear waste. Steve Brocoum, assistant manager for the project’s Office of Licensing and Regulatory Compliance, and Bob Clark, the project’s quality assurance manager, said all the calculations in question would be analyzed and corrected. The Energy Department is expected to forward its recommendation on the Yucca Mountain site next year to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. He’ll follow with a recommendation to President Bush. The earliest the first load of nuclear waste could arrive is 2010. © 2001 Reno Gazette-Journal ***************************************************************** 28 Daschle says Yucca Mountain a dead issue May 31, 2001 LAS VEGAS (AP) - Nevada got a boost in its fight to keep nuclear waste from being stored at Yucca Mountain when the incoming Senate majority leader on Thursday put up a formidable partisan roadblock. "I think the Yucca Mountain issue is dead," Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said after arriving in Las Vegas. "As long as we're in the majority, it's dead." Since 1987, Yucca Mountain has been the only site studied to become the graveyard for 77,000 tons of the nation's spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive research waste. The Energy Department is scheduled to forward its recommendation next year to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, who will make a recommendation to President Bush. The earliest it could open is 2010. The state's bipartisan congressional delegation, Republican Gov. Kenny Guinn, state and city leaders and the gambling industry are opposed to the dump site, 90 miles from Las Vegas. The state Senate on Wednesday passed a bill to put up $4 million for a legal and public relations fight against the proposed dump. Daschle, in town to speak at a private fund-raiser for Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., spoke with reporters when he arrived at the Las Vegas Executive Air Terminal. Daschle's trip to Las Vegas was his first outside of South Dakota since Vermont Sen. James Jeffords left the Republican Party last week to become an independent, giving Democrats control of the Senate with a 50-49 majority. Daschle will become the Senate's new majority leader next week and Reid the majority whip, the No. 2 man in the Senate. Daschle said the new positions he and Reid will have "will allow us to put Nevada's agenda on the national agenda." He then spoke briefly about Yucca Mountain and predicted a proposed ban on college sports betting won't pass the Senate either. "Because it passed on a committee 10-10, it's very likely it's in for a rough road," he said. "I think we can convince the majority of senators to be opposed to it as well." Earlier this month, the Senate Commerce Committee split 10-10 over whether to gut a bill outlawing betting on college sports, which is legal only in Nevada. The tie vote meant the bill survived and now goes to the full Senate. Thursday's $1,000-a-head fund-raiser at the Bali Hai Golf Club was expected to bring in $500,000 for Reid's 2004 re-election campaign. All contents copyright 2001 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARTICLES ***************************************************************** 1 Contractor to donate $2 million to WSU Search the Tri-City Herald Online This story was published 5/31/2001 By Joni Carrasco Herald staff writer CH2M Hill Hanford Group announced Wednesday that it will contribute $2 million to Washington State University Tri-Cities over the next six years. The $2 million endowment will be in cash and in-kind contributions to support entrepreneurial programs and expand information technology course offerings. It is the largest gift ever to WSU Tri-Cities, officials said at a news conference held to announce the bequest. WSU President Lane Rawlins said the gift will not only have a huge effect on the branch, but it also "marks the arrival of WSU Tri-Cities as a major institution in the region." Fran DeLozier, president of CH2M Hill Hanford Group, said the firm decided to give the grant over a six-year period so the school could plan for it in its budget. "As a businessperson, I know the frustration of not knowing what the budget will be," DeLozier said. "Making this commitment is important to the fulfillment of long-term plans." The money will be used to expand course offerings in computer science and information technology and will fund a full-time faculty position. Money from CH2M Hill in the past year has allowed WSU Tri-Cities to increase its computer science faculty by 50 percent. The grant will also support such programs as Business LINKS and the Yakima Valley/Tri-Cities Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement Program, as well as the Southeastern Washington Business Information Center and the Columbia Basin College/WSU Transfer Office. Business LINKS provides business counseling and information for students and entrepreneurs who have just started or are looking to start a business. LoAnn Ayers, director of community outreach and development, said the money will be a great help. "The people who need us the most can afford us the least," she said. Business LINKS has helped 10,000 people from Yakima to Walla Walla since it began in 1995, Ayers said. "This is a significant increase, not just financial," said Kirk Reinkens, program director for the Yakima Valley/Tri-Cities MESA. "(CH2M Hill) will also provide guest speakers and role models. Without those guest speakers sharing their experience, the students may not get that exposure." The MESA Program aims to encourage students who are underrepresented in mathematics, engineering and science training to enter those fields. The CBC/WSU Transfer Office makes it easier for CBC transfer students to remain in the area and earn their degrees, thereby keeping those students in the community for local jobs. "Our strategy is to support programs with proven track records," DeLozier said. She said the goal is to provide the resources to prepare people for information technology jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities and to keep the talent in the community. Back to top stories Copyright 2001 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 2 Senator Expects Guest-Worker Plan Thursday, May 31, 2001 Albuquerque Journal--> By Rene Romo *Journal Southern Bureau* LAS CRUCES — Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., predicted Wednesday that Congress could soon come up with a new guest-worker program that would extend protections to Mexicans now working illegally in the United States. No legislation for such a program has yet been drafted for the idea that grew out of a trip a delegation of four Republican senators made to Mexico in January to meet with President Vicente Fox. But Domenici said the time for such an agreement is right. President George W. Bush, the former Texas governor, has a good relationship with Fox, Domenici said, and will concentrate American foreign policy more on Latin American countries. The proposal would, in general terms, allow more Mexicans to work long-term in the United States and ensure that labor laws, such as a minimum wage, cover those workers. Domenici also said the legislation perhaps could create accounts for those foreign workers with Social Security taxes withheld from paychecks. "This may be a time of dramatic change," Domenici said. "Remember, we've got to try something." Domenici made his remarks to about 160 members of the Las Cruces and Rio Grande Rotary clubs gathered for a luncheon at the Best Western Mesilla Valley Inn. Domenici also said the United States needs to boost construction of nuclear energy plants, which he has long advocated. Domenici said nuclear energy produces ''no ambient air pollution'' and hailed a new technology, called ''transmutation,'' that could drastically reduce the amount of time nuclear waste would need to be stored underground until its toxicity declines. Transmutation, which is being developed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, uses a high-energy particle beam to neutralize some nuclear waste radioactivity. Newer generations of safer nuclear power plants, Domenici said, will allow the U.S. economy to continue growing but not harm the environment. On another front, Domenici on Wednesday sent letters to U.S. Labor Secretary Elaine Chao and New Mexico Department of Labor Secretary Clinton Harden urging the officials to use their respective agencies to offer immediate assistance to the 80 workers laid off Tuesday by copper producer Phelps Dodge at its Tyrone facility. Domenici asked Harden to deploy a ''rapid response team'' to Silver City to notify workers about available resources, and he asked Chao to investigate what federal programs might be used in the region. Copyright Albuquerque Journal ***************************************************************** 3 Radioactive substance inside stolen equipment Article published May 30, 2001 A gauge with radioactive material that is used to measure soil moisture and density at construction sites was stolen Sunday from a parked pickup truck at the Inverness II mobile home park in Temperance, Monroe County sheriff's deputies said. The device poses no threat unless it is broken up or mishandled, officials of Bowser-Morner, Inc., a Toledo firm that owns the gauge, said. The company is asking anybody with information about it to call the firm at 691-4800 and ask for Richard Allen, or Monroe County sheriff's deputies at 734-243-7070. A $200 reward is being offered for information leading to its recovery. The gauge was made by Troxler Electronic Labs and weighs about 35 pounds. It has a yellow cover with a carrying handle at the end of two steel rods. It was in a locked plastic container marked with radioactive material labels. The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660, (419) 724-6000 ***************************************************************** 4 Fiji veterans seeking compensation for nuclear test health problems Radio Australia News - 30/05/01: Fiji veterans seeking compensation for nuclear test health problems The Fiji Nuclear Tests Veterans Association is stepping up calls for compensation for Fiji's Christmas Island nuclear test veterans in the wake of allegations that the British used Australian and New Zealand soldiers as "guinea pigs" during nuclear tests in the 1950s. The association's president, Ratu Jone Tabaiwalu, is inviting members, widows and children of the veterans to a meeting to discuss the current situation at the Naval Base Hall in Suva's Walu Bay next week. In 1957-8, Britain conducted nine atmospheric nuclear tests at Christmas Island and Malden Island in the central Pacific. Together with British and New Zealand troops, nearly 300 Fijian soldiers and sailors witnessed the development of Britain's nuclear program. Forty years on, many of these Fijian veterans are suffering health problems attributed to exposure to radiation from the nuclear tests and are still seeking recognition for their participation in the program. (07:05:20 AEST) [Top] This service includes material from Pacnews, Agence France-Presse (AFP) and ***************************************************************** 5 Pakistan plays down nuclear anniversary Asia Times: May 31, 2001 atimes.com By Nadeem Iqbal ISLAMABAD - On the third anniversary of Pakistan's detonation of nuclear devices in response to India's tests, there has been no official boasting about the country's nuclear status. Unlike in the past, there was no official ceremony to commemorate the nuclearization of the country. All Chief Executive General Pervez Musharraf said was "there is a complete consensus on Pakistan's strategic nuclear plan and nothing will distract the nation from fortifying national security, and he called on the country's nuclear scientists to expand their research to ensure they made the most of the latest technology. The only people out on the streets on May 28, the day Islamabad carried out the first in a series of nuclear explosions in 1998, were scores of anti-nuclear activists marching on the main capital avenue. The protesters, carrying placards saying. "We want bread, not bombs" and "Congratulations! We are nuclear beggars", demanded that the government cut the defense budget and move funds to social sectors such as education and health. Pakistan went ahead with the tests despite its precarious economic condition and imminent international economic sanctions, saying it was aimed at restoring strategic balance in South Asia. At the time, then prime minister Nawaz Sharif said: "If Pakistan is still subjected to economic sanctions [after the tests], I would consider it the will of God and choose the road of self-reliance wherein lies our salvation." Sharif was ousted in a bloodless army coup on October 12, 1999, and is now living in exile in Saudi Arabia. His promise of "self- reliance" has remained just talk in a country whose people appear to care little about becoming a nuclear power and worry instead about its economic woes. Today, Pakistan is one of the most heavily indebted countries with around US$35 billion in foreign debt and it pays large amounts in interest payments on that debt each year. More than 80 percent of Pakistan's annual budget is spent on defense and debt servicing, leaving little for social spending and development. Conducting nuclear tests is expensive - one nuclear test costs around 3.22 billion rupees ($60 million), says Asim Akhtar of the Citizens' Peace Committee (CPC). The six nuclear tests conducted by Pakistan on May 28 and 30, 1998 should have cost it around 19.32 billion rupees, he says. The total allocation for the social sector, in contrast, is mere 11.7 billion rupees. The CPC was created by university professors, journalists, students, activists and other members of the civil society soon after the tests. In the beginning, it did not attract much of attention in Pakistan. But in a changed environment where economic realities are pressing hard, it is earning the sympathy of more and more people. On May 28, a large number of CPC activists carried around a 500- meter long banner with the signatures and messages of thousands of people condemning the nuclear regime and supporting peace as permanent human security for the people of South Asia. A nuclear pacifist, Pervez Hoodhboy, said, "Some nuclear hawks wrote that after going nuclear, soldiers would need little more than salaries, the defense budget could be slashed because national security would become solid as a rock and [at last] funds would go into development and education. "This argument was so simple and seductive that many well- meaning people were taken for ride," he argued. "But what we have seen since?" Hoodhboy lamented. "After the tests, the acquisition of battle tanks, artillery, aircraft, surface ships and submarines is now claimed by many of the same people to be more urgent than even before." Explaining the lackluster official response by Pakistan's military government to the nuclear anniversary, Maria Sultan, a senior researcher in the Institute of Strategic Studies, said in an interview that "Pakistan is fully aware of the lethality of nuclear weapons. That's why since the tests, instead of expressing jubilation, it is behaving as a responsible nuclear nation which went nuclear just to show its credible nuclear deterrence," Sultan added. These statements would definitely be disputed by nuclear rival India, with whom Islamabad held tit-for-tat nuclear tests, as well as by other critics. Pakistan's official position is that it conducted its nuclear tests only after the Indian explosions of May 11 and 13, 1998, and then declared a moratorium. Since detonation, Pakistan has been under pressure from international lobby to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) to avail itself of financial dividends attached to the signing. In February of last year, Pakistan established a highly powerful Nuclear Command and Control Authority under Musharraf to formulate policy and exercise employment and development control over all strategic nuclear forces and strategic organizations. But critics say that in the absence of a civilian government, the system of checks and balances which should constitute the pivot of any command and control is missing. Moreover, they argue that the consensus among experts is on the need for an operational culture that promotes confidence building, conflict resolution and the imposition of mutually acceptable limits on nuclear weapons. (Asia Times Online/Inter Press Service) Building B - 5th Floor, 102/1 Phra Arthit Road, Chanasangkhram, Bangkok 10200, Thailand ***************************************************************** 6 ARAB STATES INTERESTED IN NUCLEAR COOPERATION Middle East Newsline - Area News - Updated Daily CAIRO [MENL] -- The Arab League wants to form closer ties with the International Atomic Energy Agency as part of efforts to promote the development of nuclear power. Arab diplomatic sources said the cooperation would include the help of the IAEA to build small- and medium-sized nuclear reactors. Several Arab countries, including Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Syria, are interested in advancing their nuclear programs. The agency has been aiding Egypt in studies for the development of such reactors to generate electricity and desalinate sea water. IAEA director Mohammed El Baradei met Arab League secretary-general Amr Mussa met on the sidelines of a nuclear conference in Cairo on late Monday. The meeting was attended by Egyptian Electricity Minister Ali Saidi. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************