***************************************************************** 04/01/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.82 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 Russia keen to set up N-reactors in India 2 Kazakh nuclear firm set to double funds to protect environment in 3 Russia approves draft nuclear agreement with Vietnam 4 Moscow eyes more Russian-made nuclear reactors in India 5 Algeria committed to peaceful use of nuclear energy 6 US: Behind closed doors: Documents confirm suspicions about energy p 7 US: Budget plans exempt sales tax for USEC NUCLEAR REACTORS 8 Fears about Kudankulam N-plant misplaced: Kakodkar 9 Armenia: Director of nuclear power station resigns 10 US: NRC to Meet with Entergy to Discuss Safety Performance at Grand 11 US: NRC to Meet with Entergy to Discuss Safety Performance at 12 US: NRC to Meet with CP&L Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at 13 US: NRC to Meet with CP&L Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at 14 US: NRC to Meet with SCE&G Officials to Discuss Safety Performance a 15 US: NRC to Meet with Progress Energy/Florida Power Officials to 16 US: NRC to Meet with Southern Nuclear Officials to Discuss Safety 17 US: Licensing Board to Hear Oral Arguments on Millstone Spent Fuel 18 US: Public ought to take an interest 19 US: NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet April 11 - 20 US: NRC to Meet with Energy Northwest to Discuss Safety Performance 21 US: Armenia: Director of nuclear power station resigns 22 Taiwan's nuclear power plants survive quake 23 US: NRC to Meet with Entergy Operations, Inc. to Discuss Safety NUCLEAR SAFETY 24 US: Study identifies beryllium health issues 25 US: Utah professor lobbies for funds to continue fallout study 26 Missing N-scientist puzzles French cops 27 US: Potassium Iodide activist being heard 20 years into campaign 28 Japan to give nuclear safety training to Russia, Asian countries NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 29 US: Shattuck cleanup cap questioned 30 US: Yucca Mountain Recommendation Tainted by Undue Influence of Nucl 31 US: NRC to Hold Public Meeting on Decommissioning Activities For 32 US: West Valley impasse 33 US: What’s a senator worth? 34 US: editorial: Passing the toxic tab 35 US: Editorial: Let's help state fight Yucca plan 36 US: Lawmakers unconvinced on Yucca money 37 US: Nuclear Waste: Not in Our Neighborhoods 38 US: Public relations battle rages over Pensacola environmental suit 39 US: Nuclear irresponsibility NUCLEAR WEAPONS 40 US: Tell Bush No "usable" nuclear weapons! 41 VOICE OF THE PEOPLE (LETTER):Israeli nukes 42 UK nuke test claims at Woomera 43 Navy Bombing Resumes at Vieques 44 US: Pentagon cuts off SD-based research group 45 Required Linkage in U.S.-Russian Plutonium Disposition Program 46 New claims of UK nuclear testing in South Australia 47 Taipei opposes nuclear solution 48 Damascus history shaped by explosion that rocked nation 49 US: Opinions:A new nuke policy 50 India to revive N-safety co-operation with US US DEPT. OF ENERGY 51 Remembering the Hanford Giant OTHER NUCLEAR 52 These foolish things ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Russia keen to set up N-reactors in India - The Times of India PTI [ MONDAY, APRIL 01, 2002 12:32:30 PM ] UDANKULAM: Russia is keen on setting up at least four more advanced light water nuclear reactors in India to further strengthen the techno-commercial ties between the two countries which would be discussed during President Vladimir Putin's forthcoming visit to India. This was stated here by the Russia's Deputy Minister of atomic energy, E A Reshetnikov, on Sunday at a press conference after the 'first concrete pouring' of the country's first two 1000 MW each atomic power plants. "Since India is our strategic partner, co-operation between the two countries in nuclear energy sector will be mutually beneficial in the coming years", he said. On the importance of nuclear reactors for Kudankulam, 25 km from Kanyakumari along the coast of Gulf of Mannar, he said it was very important as it gave immense benefits to the local people in socio-economic and health spheres. It was safe in having Russian nuclear reactors in India as the level of expertise and safety records were very high. In fact, there was a rethinking at the global level to go in for nuclear power in a big way as it has been shown to be a clean energy, he said. "Both Russia and US have come out with their ambitious projects," he said. Copyright © 2002 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. | ***************************************************************** 2 Kazakh nuclear firm set to double funds to protect environment in 2002 BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 1, 2002 The national company Kazatomprom (Kazakh nuclear industry) is to double its spending on environmental protection in 2002, the Interfax-Kazakhstan news agency reported on 1 April, quoting the company's press service. "The national company Kazatomprom spent 31.31m tenge [or over 206,000 dollars] on environmental protection measures at its extracting enterprises in 2001," the agency said. "The company is planning to allocate about 64.48m tenge [or over 423,000 dollars] in 2002," the agency said. The current exchange rate is 152.3 tenge to the dollar, the report added. Source: Interfax-Kazakhstan news agency, Almaty, in Russian 0832 gmt 1 Apr 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 3 Russia approves draft nuclear agreement with Vietnam BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 1, 2002 Text of report in English by Russian news agency Interfax Moscow, 1 April: The Russian government has approved the draft of an intergovernmental agreement with Vietnam on cooperation in the peaceful use of nuclear energy. The government information department reports that the Atomic Energy Ministry was instructed to hold talks with Vietnam and sign the agreement on behalf of the government. In the framework agreement, the sides are expected to cooperate in fundamental and applied nuclear energy research, studies in designing, building and operating nuclear power plants, the safe operation of the research reactor in Dalat, Vietnam, prospecting and development of uranium deposits, handling of radioactive wastes, nuclear safety, and the production and application of radioisotopes. Source: Interfax news agency, Moscow, in English 0826 gmt 1 Apr 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 4 Moscow eyes more Russian-made nuclear reactors in India BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 1, 2002 Text of report by Indian news agency PTI Kudankulam (TN [Tamil Nadu]), 1 April: Russia is keen on setting up at least four more advanced light-water nuclear reactors in India to further strengthen the techno-commercial ties between the two countries which would be discussed during President Vladimir Putin's forthcoming visit to India. This was stated here by the Russia's deputy minister of atomic energy, E.A. Reshetnikov, Sunday [31 March] at a press conference after the "first concrete pouring" of the country's first two 1,000 MW each atomic power plants. "Since India is our strategic partner, cooperation between the two countries in nuclear energy sector will be mutually beneficial in the coming years," he said. On the importance of nuclear reactors for Kudankulam, 25 km from Kanyakumari (southernmost tip of India) along the coast of Gulf of Mannar, he said it was very important as it gave immense benefits to the local people in socioeconomic and health spheres. It was safe in having Russian nuclear reactors in India as the level of expertise and safety records were very high. In fact, there was a rethinking at the global level to go in for nuclear power in a big way as it has been shown to be a clean energy, he said. "Both Russia and US have come out with their ambitious projects," he said. Source: PTI news agency, New Delhi, in English 0844 gmt 1 Apr 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 5 Algeria committed to peaceful use of nuclear energy BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 1, 2002 Text of report by Algerian radio on 1 April During his meeting yesterday with Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] Muhammad al-Bardi'i, Prime Minister Ali Benflis stressed Algeria's commitment to develop a nuclear industry for peaceful purposes. He expressed Algeria's readiness to strengthen its cooperation with the agency to achieve this aim. Mr Ali Benflis expressed his satisfaction at the level of cooperation relations with the IAEA, stressing the need to widen and diversify this cooperation to include other spheres of the national economy. Source: Algerian radio, Algiers, in Arabic 0600 gmt 1 Apr 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 6 Behind closed doors: Documents confirm suspicions about energy policy - The Register-Guard, Eugene, Oregon, USA The only thing surprising about learning that industry officials and megadonors had a huge say in the development of the Bush administration's energy plan is that anyone is surprised by that. Industry leaders meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney to impart their wisdom; energy lobbyists churning out memos that end up nearly word for word in the Bush plan; Energy Secretary's Spencer Abraham's puppy-like eagerness to meet with any oil, gas, coal, nuclear power and automobile hustlers who knocked on his door while refusing to meet with any environmentalists or consumer advocates - this is the way the Bush administration works. The Energy Department's release of 11,000 pages of documents merely confirms the assumptions of most Americans, even those who support the administration. The only development that would have been truly surprising would have been if administration officials hadn't heavily edited the documents, which were grudgingly released to comply with a court order under the Freedom of Information Act. To have left them intact would have meant the administration is rethinking its attitude that the public has absolutely no right to know how it operates. Still, there are some revelations in these sanitized documents that are breathtaking by virtue of their sheer audacity. There's a proposal concerning government regulations affecting energy supply and distribution that was submitted by the American Petroleum Institute, which represents the nation's largest oil companies. Two months later, the proposal ended up nearly verbatim as an executive order signed by the president. There was also a memo from Southern Co., a large energy company, calling for a review of federal enforcement actions against companies that perform major renovations and do not upgrade their facilities to comply with the Clean Air Act. At the time, Southern was in the middle of a dispute with federal officials over its compliance. Bush's plan ended up calling for just such a review. In fairness, it's neither unusual nor unwise for administrations to consult with representatives of industries when drafting policy that directly affects them. For the White House to ignore the people who produce and deliver energy would have been an exercise in bad policymaking. The Bush administration's problem is that it played toesies in secret with energy representatives and campaign contributors while stonewalling conservationist and environmental groups. The result was an unsound energy policy that violated all principles of balance and openness. The White House has made things worse by refusing the General Accounting Office's request for the records of Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force meetings. The administration can undo a small part of the damage by making those records public, preferably minus the barrels of Wite-Out it used on the documents released this week. Meanwhile, the Senate should take a harder look at the tainted Bush energy plan, which calls for drilling for oil in the Alaska wilderness, construction of thousands of electricity plants, weakening the Clean Air Act and huge subsidies for coal and nuclear power producers. Senate Democrats have proposed a more balanced approach, but it already has been weakened by the ubiquitous industry lobbyists. That's the way business is done these days in Washington. Copyright © 2002 The Register-Guard ***************************************************************** 7 Budget plans exempt sales tax for USEC The Paducah Sun Paducah, Kentucky Monday, April 01, 2002 The Senate plan would penalize the Paducah plant's operator for layoffs, but the House plan would not. Neither plan is assured. By Bill Bartleman bbartleman@paducahsun.com--270.575.8650 FRANKFORT, Ky.--Separate budgets being prepared by the House and Senate will include provisions to exempt enriched uranium produced at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant from the state's 6 percent sales tax. However, the provisions will be different and will have to be resolved by House and Senate negotiators. The Senate version drafted by Sen. Bob Leeper will tie the exemption to the current employment level of 1,496, while the House version proposed by Reps. Frank Rasche and Charles Geveden is a straight exemption without requiring commitments by USEC Inc., the plant operator. Whether either provision is approved depends on lawmakers resolving other major differences over the budget. Negotiations broke down on Saturday over public financing for gubernatorial campaigns. The Senate wants to eliminate tax-funded campaigns, while the House wants them to continue. If the House and Senate can't agree on a budget by April 15, when the 2002 session must adjourn, Gov. Paul Patton will be forced to call a special session before the current fiscal year ends on June 30. USEC wants the tax exemption because it is moving its final shipping operation from Portsmouth, Ohio, to Paducah. Work to upgrade equipment in Paducah is expected to be completed early this summer. Without the exemption, USEC and its customers will have to pay the sales tax on enriched uranium that is shipped from Paducah. A bill proposing the change appeared headed for easy passage last month until it was blocked by leaders of the plant's production workers union who wanted it tied to job guarantees and northeastern Kentucky lawmakers who were upset over job cuts in Portsmouth, located across the Ohio River from Ashland. Some Kentuckians lost jobs because the Ohio plant was closed and because of the relocation of the final shipping operation. Leeper said that under his provision, USEC would get the full exemption if it continued to employ 1,496 or more in both union and nonunion jobs. If it drops below that level, the exemption would be reduced in proportion to the job cuts. For example, if employment dropped by 10 percent, USEC would lose 10 percent of the $6 million it would save under the full exemption, Leeper said. He is asking for the job commitment because of concerns by the union that as many as 100 jobs could be cut in Paducah this summer. "It gives a signal that we are concerned about USEC making a commitment in exchange for the incentive and at the same time recognizing the importance of the plant and the jobs in the community," Leeper said. He would not say if his provision is negotiable when efforts are made to resolve differences in the House and Senate versions. "All I can say is that there are two steps left in the budget process where changes can be made," Leeper said. Rasche said Leeper's proposal makes a statement for the issues that have been raised between the union and USEC. Officials on both sides have been discussing numerous issues for several weeks in hopes of reaching a compromise and removing the union's objection to the exemption. However, those negotiations ended last week without an agreement. "I haven't seen Sen. Leeper's proposal in writing and don't know exactly how it will work or how practical it is," Rasche said. "I plan to go to Frankfort early to review the issues in an effort to try to work things out" and please both the union and USEC. USEC spokeswoman Elizabeth Stuckle, contacted late Sunday, said, "Since it is a legislative issue, I don't want to get between the two sides." Leon Owens, president of the union, did not return a phone message Sunday night. Geveden, D-Wickliffe, was not available for comment. ***************************************************************** 8 Fears about Kudankulam N-plant misplaced: Kakodkar The Times of India; Apr 1, 2002 BY SRINIVAS LAXMAN MUMBAI: India's nuclear power programme crossed a significant milestone on Sunday when the construction of the nearly Rs 12,000-crore Russian-aided Kudankulam atomic power station located at Thirunelveli district of Tamil Nadu began with the pouring of concrete. Many of the villagers staying in the vicinity of this nuclear complex, which will consist of two 1,000 megawatt light water reactors, are opposed to this project because of the fear of radiation. In an interview given to TNN, Atomic Energy Commission chairperson Anil Kakodkar sought to dispel some of the misconceptions about the project. Excerpts: Many of the villagers residing near the Kudankulam project site have strongly expressed their opposition to the project because of apprehensions that it could lead to a Chernobyl-type of accident. Please comment. I feel their fears are misplaced and baseless because the type of light water reactors to be installed at Kudankulam are of an advanced type and have been certified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). There will be no radiation hazard and I want to assure the villagers that the nuclear power station will be environmentally very safe.There will be no Chernobyl-type of mishaps. I will also like to say that the radiation emission from nuclear units is negligible compared to other sources. Despite the plant being a safe one the villagers do not seem to be convinced about this at all. In the last few weeks they have organised a series of protest meetings against the project. How do you explain this? Do you think the department of atomic energy (DAE) has not done enough to educate the villagers about the safety aspects of the Kudankulam project? I think this is because of a psychological mindset.We have been educating the villagers about the safety aspect of the Kudankulam project and in the coming days we intend to organise more such programmes. Yes, I agree more needs to be done to create a public awareness about this important project and its safety aspects. Did the acquisition of land for the project result in villagers being displaced? Did the DAE have to shell out any compensation? If so what was the figure? A very significant aspect of the Kudankulam programme was that it was a “zero displacement project.’’ This means that no villagers were displaced as a result of the land being acquired for constructing the plant. Often officials of the DAE have talked about India having a wholly indigenous nuclear power programme. If this was the case then where was the need to collaborate with Russia? Some nuclear scientists feel this tie up could lead to a setback to our indigenisation programme. Don’t we have the capability to design and fabricate light water reactors? We do have the technological capability to design and make light water reactors. But right now our focus is on developing heavy water reactors. I do not agree with some of our scientists that collaborating with the Russians will cause a setback to our indigenous programme.The collaboration is only an addition to our own national nuclear programme which will go a long way in increasing the total generating capacity. What is the current status of our nuclear power programme? At present we are generating 2,720 MW from 14 nuclear power stations. I am confident that by 2012 the figure will go up to 9,930 MW.The construction of all the new projects are progressing satisfactorily and recently we got the go-ahead for building the Rajasthan Atomic Power Station units four and five. Finally, what is the significance of the Kudankulam project? Domestically, it is very significant because it will considerably hike the generation of nuclear power in the country with the introduction of bigger units. Secondly it will see the operation of light water reactors. Fifty per cent of the project cost of Rs 12,000 crore is being borne by the Russians in the form credits. ***************************************************************** 9 Armenia: Director of nuclear power station resigns BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 1, 2002 Text of report by Armenian news agency Arminfo Yerevan, 1 April: Suren Azatyan, director of the Armenian nuclear power station (ANPS) since 1993, has handed in his resignation to Armenian Energy Minister [Armen Movsisyan], Arminfo news agency learnt from the Armenian Energy Ministry. According to the statute of the ANPS, the government dismisses, appoints and promotes staff on the proposal of energy ministry. According to the Energy Ministry, Azatyan's resignation and the appointment of a new director will be discussed at the next session of the government. The reason behind the ANPS director's resignation is not clear. To recap, Azatyan is 56 years old, and according to the Armenian labour law men retire at the age of 65. Source: Arminfo, Yerevan, in Russian 0805 gmt 1 Apr 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 10 NRC to Meet with Entergy to Discuss Safety Performance at Grand Gulf NRC: Press Release Region IV - 2002 - 17 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington TX 76011 www.nrc.gov No. IV-02-017 DATE CONTACT: Breck Henderson Phone: 817-860-8128 Cellular: 817-917-1227 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov [opa4@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Entergy Operations, Inc. on Thursday, April 11, to discuss the results of the agency's annual assessment of safety performance at the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station. The facility is located near Port Gibson, Miss., and is operated by Entergy. The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 5:30 p.m. at the Claiborne County Emergency Operations Center, Highway 18E, Port Gibson. NRC staff will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions from the public. A letter sent from NRC Region IV to Entergy addresses plant performance during the period April 1 to December 31, 2001, and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/gg_2001q4.pdf. Current performance information for Grand Gulf is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/GG1/gg1_chart.html. ***************************************************************** 11 NRC to Meet with Entergy to Discuss Safety Performance at Arkansas Nuclear One NRC: Press Release Region IV - 2002 - 18 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington TX 76011 www.nrc.gov No. IV-02-018 April 1, 2002 CONTACT: Breck Henderson Phone: 817-860-8128 Cellular: 817-917-1227 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov [opa4@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Entergy Operations, Inc. on Thursday, April 11, to discuss the results of the agency's annual assessment of safety performance at Arkansas Nuclear One. The facility, which includes two operating reactors, is located near Russellville, Ark., and is operated by Entergy. The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at Arkansas Tech University, Doc Bryan Building Multi-Purpose Rm. 242, Russellville. NRC staff will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions from the public. A letter sent from NRC Region IV to Entergy addresses plant performance during the period April 1 to December 31, 2001, and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/ano_2001q4.pdf. Current performance information for ANO Unit 1 is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/ANO1/ano1_chart.html. ANO Unit 2 information is available at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/ANO2/ano2_chart.html ***************************************************************** 12 NRC to Meet with CP&L Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at Harris Nuclear Power Plant NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 20 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov No. II-02-020 April 1, 2002 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Carolina Power & Light Company officials on Thursday, April 11, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the Harris nuclear power plant, located near New Hill, North Carolina. The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m. in the Harris Visitor Center Board Room. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions. A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to CP&L, which addresses plant safety performance during the previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/har_2001q4.pdf Current information for the Harris plant is available at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/HAR1/har1_chart.html. ***************************************************************** 13 NRC to Meet with CP&L Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at Brunswick Nuclear Power Plant NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 21 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov No. II-02-021 April 1, 2002 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Carolina Power & Light Company officials on Wednesday, April 10, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the Brunswick nuclear power plant, located near Southport, North Carolina. The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m. in the Brunswick Media Center Assembly Room. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions. A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to CP&L, which addresses plant safety performance during the previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/bru_2001q4.pdf Current information for the Brunswick plant is available at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BRU1/bru1_chart.html for Brunswick Unit 1 and at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BRU2/bru2_chart.html for Brunswick Unit 2. ***************************************************************** 14 NRC to Meet with SCE&G Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at Summer Nuclear Power Plant NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 22 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov No. II-02-022 April 1, 2002 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with South Carolina Electric & Gas officials on Tuesday, April 9, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the Summer nuclear power plant, located near Jenkinsville, South Carolina. The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m. at the Summer plant Training Center. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions. A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to SCE&G, which addresses plant safety performance during the previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/sum_2001q4.pdf Current information for the Summer plant is available at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SUM/sum_chart.html ***************************************************************** 15 NRC to Meet with Progress Energy/Florida Power Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 23 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov No. II-02-023 April 1, 2002 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Progress Energy/Florida Power officials on Thursday, April 11, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the Crystal River nuclear power plant, located in Crystal River, Florida. The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m. at the Crystal River plant Training Center on Venable Street in Crystal River. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions. A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to Progress Energy/Florida Power, which addresses plant safety performance during the previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/cr_2001q4.pdf Current information for the Crystal River plant is available at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CR3/cr3_chart.html ***************************************************************** 16 NRC to Meet with Southern Nuclear Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at Hatch Nuclear Power Plant NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 24 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov No. II-02-024 April 1, 2002 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Southern Nuclear Operating Company officials on Thursday, April 18, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the Hatch nuclear power plant. The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m. in the Hatch Visitor's Center at the plant site. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions. A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to Southern Nuclear, which addresses plant safety performance during the previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/hat_2001q4.pdf Current information for the two units at the Hatch plant is available at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/HAT1/hat1_chart.html and www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/HAT2/hat2_chart.html ***************************************************************** 17 Licensing Board to Hear Oral Arguments on Millstone Spent Fuel Pool NRC: Press Release Region I - 2002 - 25 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 www.nrc.gov No. I-02-025 April 1, 2002 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov] A Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has scheduled oral argument on Tuesday, April 2, in Mystic, Conn., in a licensing proceeding concerning a request by Dominion Nuclear Connecticut to amend its license for Millstone Station Unit 3 in Waterford, Conn. The hearing, which is open to the public for observation, will begin at 9:30 a.m. at the Best Western Sovereign Hotel, 9 Whitehall Avenue, in Mystic. Dominion has requested a license amendment to increase the capacity (through the addition of high-density storage racks) of the spent fuel pool of Millstone 3. The Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone and the Long Island Coalition Against Millstone petitioned to intervene. A three-member NRC Licensing Board granted the petition and is in the process of conducting a hearing on the merits of the case. Because oral limited appearance statements were heard on several occasions earlier in the proceeding, they will not be entertained at this session of the hearing. Written statements may be submitted to the Office of the Secretary, Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555. A copy should also be served on the Chairman of this Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, T-3 F23, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555 or cxb2@nrc.gov [cxb2@nrc.gov] . ***************************************************************** 18 Public ought to take an interest Sun-Sentinel: Opinion By Stan Smilan Posted April 1 2002 On March 13, six members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards flew down from Washington, D.C., to conduct a hearing at Florida City's Town Hall, adjacent to the two Turkey Point nuclear reactors, 24 miles south of Miami. The subcommittee came to South Florida in order to allow local input and comment on the application submitted by the Florida Power & Light Co. for a 20-year operating-license extension for the two aging nuclear-power plants. I was the only member of the public who appeared and offered public comment. Despite the fact that the two 28-year-old Turkey Point nuclear plants were among the oldest and cheapest ever built in the United States, no local municipality or county government entity from the tri-county area was present at the meeting. There were no intervenors present to offer responsible rebuttal to FPL's presentation. My comments to the committee were that Turkey Point's nuclear Units 3 and 4 were built at a cost of approximately $285 million each. By contrast, the last nuclear power plant built in the U.S. at Shoreham, Long Island, exceeded a construction cost of $6.5 billion. Additionally, the Shoreham plant was eventually denied an operating license because of a deficiency in the Long Island Lighting Co.'s siting permit application; there was no way to evacuate the people from Eastern Long Island in the event of a catastrophic nuclear accident at the plant. I also pointed out that early nuclear power plant designs, such as Turkey Point's, were so controversial that it caused a rift within the Atomic Energy Commission and resulted in a significant number of the scientific community in the AEC resigning as a matter of conscience; those scientists subsequently formed the Union of Concerned Scientists. I urged the subcommittee to proceed slowly and offer the county and municipal governments in the tri-county area further opportunity to become intervenors, appoint special counsel and fund technical consultants. I offered my opinion that the license-extension proceeding should consider the population explosion projected for the Southeast Florida Treasure Coast, and I cited the South Florida Water Management District's estimate of 15 million people living in South Florida within 30 years. I quoted a March 12 article from the Sun-Sentinel that reported the tri-county area alone would have a population of 7.5 million in 28 years from now. I also said: "I doubt if FPL could get a siting permit for those plants today, considering the population growth projected for the area." I urged the subcommittee to factor in the demographic make-up of the tri-county area -- giving weight and consideration to the fact that the second largest Jewish population concentration in the U.S. is situated in the tri-county area and that simple logic would indicate that this area is a prime target considering the geopolitical climate that exists today. I addressed the close proximity of the aging Turkey Point nuclear plants -- with on-site storage of nearly 30 years of spent fuel rods containing plutonium -- to the Miami International Airport, where jumbo-jet aircraft depart heavily laden with jet fuel for destinations in South America and Europe. On Wednesday the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation will hold public hearings in St. Lucie pursuant to FPL's application for 20-year license extensions for two nuclear power plants on Hutchinson Island, south of Fort Pierce. I hope I will be joined by other members of the public to offer comments at those meetings. The author is a retired airline pilot and a member of the National Association of Atomic Veterans, who resides in Boynton Beach. Copyright © 2002, South Florida Sun-Sentinel ***************************************************************** 19 NRC Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to Meet April 11 - 13 in Rockville, Maryland NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 36 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov [opa@nrc.gov] www.nrc.gov No. 02-036 April 1, 2002 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) has scheduled a meeting on April 11 - 13 in Rockville, Maryland, to discuss, among other subjects, control rod drive mechanism penetration cracking and reactor vessel head degradation. The meeting, most of which is open to the public, will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency's Two White Flint North Building, at 11545 Rockville Pike. It will begin at 8:30 a.m. each day. A complete agenda is attached. For additional information, please contact Dr. Sher Bahadur at 301-415-0138. ACRS AGENDA THURSDAY, APRIL 11 8:30 - 8:35 A.M.: Opening Remarks by the ACRS Chairman - The ACRS Chairman will make remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. 8:35 - 10:30 A.M.: Final Review of the Turkey Point License Renewal Application -The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and the Florida Power and Light Company regarding the license renewal application for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4, and the associated staff's Safety Evaluation Report (SER). 10:45 A.M. - 12:30 P.M.: Advanced Reactor Research Plan - The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) regarding RES' draft Advanced Reactor Research Plan. 1:30 - 3:30 P.M.: CRDM Penetration Cracking and Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Degradation - The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and industry, including Davis-Besse regarding issues related to the investigation of circumferential cracks in PWR control rod drive mechanism (CRDM) penetration nozzles and weldments, and reactor pressure vessel head degradation at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant. 3:50 - 5:15 P.M.: Westinghouse Owners Group (WOG) and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Initiatives Related to Risk-Informed Inservice Inspection of Piping - The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the staff's draft safety evaluation reports on WOG and EPRI addendums to their topical reports (WCAP-14572 and EPRI TR-112657) for risk-informed inservice inspection of piping, including extension of risk-informed methods to the break exclusion region piping. 5:30 - 7:00 P.M.: Proposed ACRS Reports - The Committee will discuss proposed ACRS reports on matters considered during this meeting. Also, it may discuss a response prepared by the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) to the Executive Director for Operation's letter dated March 6, 2002 to the ACNW report dated January 14, 2002 regarding risk-informing NMSS activities. FRIDAY, APRIL 12 8:30 - 8:35 A.M.: Opening Remarks by the ACRS Chairman - The ACRS Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting. 8:35 A.M. - 10:30 A.M.: General Electric (GE) Nuclear Energy Topical Report: "Constant Pressure Power Uprate" (Open/Closed) - The Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and General Electric Nuclear Energy regarding GE Topical Report, "Constant Pressure Power Uprate," and the associated NRC staff's safety evaluation. Note: A portion of this session may be closed to discuss General Electric proprietary information. 10:50 - 11:45 A.M.: Future ACRS Activities/Report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee - The Committee will discuss the recommendations of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee regarding items proposed for consideration by the full Committee during future meetings. Also, it will hear a report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters related to the conduct of ACRS business, and organizational and personnel matters relating to the ACRS. 11:45 A.M. - 12:00 Noon.: Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations - The Committee will discuss the responses from the NRC Executive Director for Operations (EDO) to comments and recommendations included in recent ACRS reports and letters. The EDO responses are expected to be made available to the Committee prior to the meeting. 1:00 - 7:00 P.M.: Proposed ACRS Reports - The Committee will discuss proposed ACRS reports. SATURDAY, APRIL 13 8:30 A.M. - 12:30 P.M.: Proposed ACRS Reports - The Committee will continue its discussion of proposed ACRS reports. 12:30 - 1:00 P.M.: Miscellaneous - The Committee will discuss matters related to the conduct of Committee activities and matters and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of information permit. ***************************************************************** 20 NRC to Meet with Energy Northwest to Discuss Safety Performance at Columbia Generating Station NRC: Press Release Region IV - 2002 - 16 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington TX 76011 www.nrc.gov No. IV-02-016 April 1, 2002 CONTACT: Breck Henderson Phone: 817-860-8128 Cellular: 817-917-1227 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov [opa4@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Energy Northwest on Wednesday, April 10, to discuss the results of the agency's annual assessment of safety performance at the Columbia Generating Station nuclear power plant. The facility is located near Richland, Wa., and is operated by Energy Northwest. The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 6:30 p.m. at the Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate Dr., Richland. NRC staff will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions from the public. A letter sent from NRC Region IV to Energy Northwest addresses plant performance during the period April 1 to December 31, 2001, and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/wnp_2001q4.pdf. Current performance information for Columbia Generating Station is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/WASH2/wash2_chart.html. ***************************************************************** 21 Armenia: Director of nuclear power station resigns BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 1, 2002 Text of report by Armenian news agency Arminfo Yerevan, 1 April: Suren Azatyan, director of the Armenian nuclear power station (ANPS) since 1993, has handed in his resignation to Armenian Energy Minister [Armen Movsisyan], Arminfo news agency learnt from the Armenian Energy Ministry. According to the statute of the ANPS, the government dismisses, appoints and promotes staff on the proposal of energy ministry. According to the Energy Ministry, Azatyan's resignation and the appointment of a new director will be discussed at the next session of the government. The reason behind the ANPS director's resignation is not clear. To recap, Azatyan is 56 years old, and according to the Armenian labour law men retire at the age of 65. Source: Arminfo, Yerevan, in Russian 0805 gmt 1 Apr 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 22 Taiwan's nuclear power plants survive quake BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 1, 2002 Text of report in English by Taiwanese Central News Agency web site Taipei, 1 April: All of Taiwan's six nuclear power generators survived the 6.8-magnitude earthquake which rattled the island Sunday [31 March] afternoon, the Atomic Energy Council said Monday. The council, which supervises the safety of the island's three nuclear plants, said five of the six generators running Sunday remained intact in the tremor. The other had been shut down for regular maintenance before the tremor and was not damaged in any way, the council added. Seismometers monitoring ground motion at the base of the three nuclear plants showed that the shock waves caused by the tremor were far less than those the plants are designed to resist, the council said. Sunday's earthquake was centred in the sea off Hualien, eastern Taiwan, while the first and second nuclear plants are located in Tapei County, northern Taiwan and the third is in Pingtung County, southern Taiwan. Source: Central News Agency web site, Taipei, in English 1247 gmt 1 Apr 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 23 NRC to Meet with Entergy Operations, Inc. to Discuss Safety Performance at River Bend NRC: Press Release Region IV - 2002 - 15 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington TX 76011 www.nrc.gov No. IV-02-015 April 1, 2002 CONTACT: Breck Henderson Phone: 817-860-8128 Cellular: 817-917-1227 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov [opa4@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Entergy Operations, Inc. on Tuesday, April 9, to discuss the results of the agency's annual assessment of safety performance at the River Bend nuclear power plant. The facility is located near St. Francisville, La., and is operated by Entergy. The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. at Best Western Hotel on the Lake, St. Francisville. NRC staff will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions from the public. A letter sent from NRC Region IV to Entergy addresses plant performance during the period April 1 to December 31, 2001, and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/rbs_2001q4.pdf. Current performance information for River Bend is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/RBS1/rbs1_chart.html. ***************************************************************** 24 Study identifies beryllium health issues This story was published Sun, Mar 31, 2002 By John Stang Herald staff writer Hanford has a partial grasp on its beryllium health problems. But those efforts are disjointed, needing better coordination and some upgrades. Hanford officials are digesting those conclusions cited in an independent report released last week. "At the present, the approach is piecemeal, resulting in confusion and uncertainty. ... You have (with the report) a very good ... road map for guiding future action," wrote Dr. Lee Newman, a prominent occupational health and beryllium diseases expert based at the University of Colorado's School of Medicine. He reviewed the report for its author, the Hanford Joint Council for Resolving Employee Concerns. "We want improvements at the site for all employees," said Dave Van Leuven, executive vice president of Fluor Hanford. Two Fluor employees, Craig E. Hall and Richard Brooks, voiced concerns to the company about Hanford's problems with beryllium. To ensure the results have credibility, Fluor wanted an outside agency to study those concerns. So Fluor asked the council to do the study. The council is a committee of whistleblower advocates, contractor officials and outside representatives that try to resolve whistleblower disputes before they blow up publicly. Fluor has forwarded the council's report to the Department of Energy, which has just begun to study it. Also, Fluor is meeting with the site's other contractors to tackle the report's recommendations. Van Leuven said the other contractors support the effort. Beryllium is a natural ore used in nuclear fuel casings. It was used in 43 Hanford buildings, mostly in the 300 and 3000 areas with several scattered elsewhere. Beryllium can float in the air in tiny flakes to get into people's lungs, possibly giving them chronic beryllium disease. That ailment is characterized by shortness of breath, coughing, fatigue, weight loss and lots of phlegm. It could be fatal if allowed to linger. Right now, five Hanford workers have been diagnosed with chronic beryllium disease, and another 25 are diagnosed as "sensitive" to beryllium. That means a combination of genetics and exposures makes these people more susceptible to get chronic beryllium disease. The first case showed up in 1984 at DOE's Rocky Flats site. Awareness of beryllium health problems, especially at DOE sites, has skyrocketed in the past few years. Hall has chronic beryllium disease. Brooks is in the sensitive category. Both still work on the site. Before the council's study began, the pair said Hanford's contractors were dragging their feet on dealing with the beryllium problem. And they believe Fluor made some improvements over the past several months. "It's a fairly accurate report," Hall said, adding that it is worded more diplomatically than he would have liked. Brooks agreed. The report and Newman's March 20 letter noted that roughly 700 out of potentially 13,000 current and former Hanford workers have been tested for beryllium-related symptoms. Both doubted that was enough, and both wondered how the appropriate people can be identified and reached for testing. "The council suggests finding better ways to target employees ... and I think they're right," Van Leuven said. The report and Jon Brock, the council's director, said lengthy questionnaires, red tape and confusion over who should be tested have discouraged many people from being checked. Brock said the council heard some "through the grapevine" stories of supervisors discouraging workers from being tested but found no evidence that actually occurred. Brock, Newman and the report said that Hanford has made a good, honest overall effort to deal with beryllium health issues, and that Hanford has a better grasp on the problems than other DOE sites. Major points noted in the report included: -- Hanford needs a site-wide system in which workers overexposed to beryllium are moved to other locations without any penalties. The site is inconsistent on this matter, lacking such a policy in some instances. -- Medical uncertainty about the effects of beryllium exposure troubles some workers. -- Employees have no easy way to check on the potential for beryllium exposures in their work areas. -- Health advocates are needed to help individual workers use the site's beryllium programs. An ombudsman is needed to represent employees' interests in the overall program. -- Hanford's mix of beryllium programs don't have measurable, objective goals. Different contractors have different policies and exposure standards. This increases confusion since employees and buildings routinely transfer from company to company at Hanford. -- The site has a Beryllium Awareness Group of about 30 employees with chronic beryllium disease or sensitized to beryllium. The group's members don't have definitive goals and are divided on what it should do. The report recommends the group split. One sub-group would be a counseling and support group. The other would be an advisory and education committee for Hanford's beryllium program. Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 25 Utah professor lobbies for funds to continue fallout study Las Vegas SUN April 01, 2002 SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - Dr. Joseph Lyon, whose 1970s research concluded downwind leukemia rates were higher due to atomic tests in Nevada, is lobbying for continued federal funding of a thyroid cancer study. Lyon, a professor of family and preventive medicine at the University of Utah, met with Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, on Friday. Afterward, Matheson said he was concerned that "a substantive, organized effort to get really good information" about Utah thyroid disease might be at risk. If the study is carried out, it could help refine the knowledge base about harm caused by open-air nuclear tests at the Nevada Test Site during the 1950s and early '60s. The Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, was to fund the effort to re-examine people, many now in their 50s, who were first checked in 1965-70. In the original study, the federal government found no ill effects on the children's thyroid glands caused by fallout. Lyon contended that study was flawed by inadequate data about radiation exposure. After Lyon's study concluded leukemia rates among downwinders were higher, the federal government re-examined about half of the estimated 4,800 subjects and found 19 had thyroid tumors, about 3 times the number predicted. In 1997, the National Cancer Institute released a study indicating that radioactive iodine released by fallout hit 40 states. "The contamination of the United States from the Nevada Test Site was much more extensive than originally believed," he said. The exposure undoubtedly put children at risk of thyroid cancer, Lyon said. Lyon would like to take another look at those examined in 1965-70, checking for a connection between thyroid cancer and level of exposure to fallout. "We actually created a mathematical model to estimate how much a dose of radiation they got from the bombs through the food chain," when dairy cattle grazed areas contaminated by fallout. "We started working on this in 1998," he said. Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah, helped with funding from the Centers of Disease Control. However, the federal government says it is running out of money, Lyon said. Government officials seem not to want the study to proceed, he said. They are saying that the results are inconclusive. In January they told researchers that if they can't come up with the money locally, the project would end. Lyon has asked Matheson and Bennett to try to make sure the government continues to fund the program. To do the project would cost about $4 million over three years. "I'm concerned the study isn't going to move forward, and I think it should," Matheson said. "I think the people in Utah have the right to know what the impacts were from this open-air testing." Matheson has been a backer of legislation to compensate downwinders in Utah, Arizona and Nevada for illnesses that may have been due to fallout. Matheson's father, the late Gov. Scott Matheson, grew up in southwestern Utah and died of cancer his son was believed due to the fallout. Lyon's original study was a core part of a downwinders' suit that sought compensation. A federal judge in Salt Lake City agreed with their contention that fallout was to blame for many of the illnesses and death, but higher courts overturned his ruling on the ground of governmental immunity. After that Congress passed legislation to compensate the downwinders. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 26 Missing N-scientist puzzles French cops -DAWN - International; 01 April, 2002 By Our Correspondent PARIS, March 31: When she disappeared last December, Laurence Alavoine was written off as another middle-aged executive who, it was thought at the time, had simply gone off on one of her regular jaunts into the rugged Alpine regions north of Grenoble, where she lived with her husband Olivier. At the time, police located her car, the door on the driver's side left opened, not far away in the Grande Chartreuse part of the barren reaches of the Vercors, the site of an important resistance operation against France's German occupiers back in the summer of 1944. Police told Olivier not to worry, that they would surely find her trace, and, in any case, that she would soon be returning home, especially as the Christmas holidays were fast approaching. One hundred days later, though, no trace of Laurence has ever been found, and police continue, armed with special dogs, to make their way over and about the 150,000 acres of arid terrain located more than two kilometres above sea-level. "She was a fighter and knew how to resist the cold," says a friend. "She must be somewhere out there. We are sure she'll be back sooner or later." Still, police have their doubts not only regarding the likelihood of the return to civilization of Laurence Alavoine, but also what were the true reasons behind her disappearance. Laurence, who was a specialist in nuclear physics, had been investigating the illegal traffic in nuclear fuels that have come to light in France in recent months, a traffic dominated by the mafia, says one police investigator close to the matter, who notes that Laurence Alavoine had become a specialist of sorts in the transfer of nuclear fuels, notably plutonium, between the ex-Soviet Union, especially the Ukraine, and the Middle East. Olivier, her husband, admits today that on the eve of her disappearance she had told him she had come upon an "enormous scandal" and that she would soon be meeting an unidentified contact who had promised her additional information as to the transfer of nuclear technology to the Middle East in general, and Israel in particular. © The DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2002 ***************************************************************** 27 Potassium Iodide activist being heard 20 years into campaign Augusta Georgia: Technology: Web posted Monday, April 1, 2002 By Vickie Chachere Associated Press [http://wire.ap.org/] PALM HARBOR, Fla. -- For more than two decades, potassium iodide has been Alan Morris' cause. In the wake of Three Mile Island, he founded Anbex, Inc., a company that makes the pills which can be taken to prevent against thyroid cancer when there is a large release of radiation. His premise that states with nuclear power plants should have a stockpile of the pills was dismissed for years by some government officials. At nuclear safety conventions, he was booed when he got up to speak. His own brother called them "those crazy pills." But after Sept. 11, Morris has been transformed from alarmist and rabble rouser, to the go-to guy. The little pills produced a windfall this year for his Palm Harbor-based company which is the larger of only two manufacturers of the drug in the United States. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is now offering potassium iodide to 34 states with nuclear plants. But Morris takes no pleasure in his abrupt success. "I could make money on this product, but I would feel great if I could make a difference," he said. Anbex was awarded a contract to supply up to 6 million tablets to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to establish initial stockpiles of potassium iodide, also known as KI, in states that request it. The commission set aside $800,000 for the project, which had been approved in early 2001. The terrorist attacks on America quickly bolstered support for the program. As of last week, 11 states had asked for the pills, according to the NRC. The states are Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maryland, Vermont, Delaware, Florida, Alabama, Arizona, New York, New Jersey, and New Hampshire. The Department of Health and Human Services bought 1.7 million adult-strength tablets and 600,000 children's doses for $180,000. The agency said it plans to spend another $1 million for another 5 million to 10 million doses in the next year. "It's 23 years and one week since Three Mile Island, that's how difficult it has been," said Peter Crane, a former NRC attorney turned potassium iodide activist when he contracted thyroid cancer from childhood tonsil X-rays. Crane led the campaign to increase the nation's potassium iodide supplies. He hasn't met Morris because he wanted to distance himself from anyone who stood to profit from stockpiling. "The frustrating thing is that it should have taken more than 20 years when 20 weeks would have been more than enough," Crane said. "You can't really applaud and say the system worked." Morris and his business partner, Bruce Rodin, invested only about $25,000 a year in the company, selling enough potassium iodide to nuclear power plants, hospitals and the government of Finland to pay the taxes and stay in business. "Survivalist crazies bought from me," Morris noted. "We got a lot of orders around the end of 1999. On Jan. 2 (2000), people stopped buying it because nothing happened." When Morris went to conventions of nuclear safety officers, he'd bring 500 sample packs which would quickly be snapped up by the government workers wanting to protect their own. Still, he couldn't get them to agree larger stockpiles are needed. "On Sept. 12, we started getting orders again," he said. A 14-day supply, the amount an adult would need to protect themselves in an attack or enough for two children, sells for $10. Thyroid cancer is just one of the health effects of a radiation contamination because of the thyroid gland's absorption of iodine. The pills work by saturating the gland with a safe iodine so it does not absorb any of the radioactive iodine released into the air when there is a radiation leak. Children are the most vulnerable to thyroid cancers after a nuclear accident because the thyroid is a growth gland. The use of the pills has been bolstered by research from the 1986 explosion and fire in a reactor at the Soviet Union's nuclear power plant at Chernobyl. The United Nations estimates 11,000 people, mostly children, have contracted thyroid cancer. The World Health Organization now reports that even relatively low levels of radiation exposure can damage the thyroid. Still, there has been opposition to stockpiling in the United States. Among the chief critics are nuclear safety officers who say stockpiling the pills would make some people think they didn't need to evacuate. The pills don't protect against other health risks associated with a radiation leak. "Our main objective if there is a radiation hazard out there is to move people out of that area," said Harlan Keaton, the environmental administrator for Florida's Bureau of Radiation. Florida has increased its stockpile by nearly 800,000 pills, but as a policy still favors evacuation and other safety measures over mass pill distribution. Florida's provides a two-day supply for each person in a 10-mile radius of the state's three nuclear power plants. "We don't have a Chernobyl-type situation," Keaton said. "Our plants are complete different, they are built much better, they are built to withstand accidents. Unlike Chernobyl, we aren't going to let people eat food that's contaminated." Having seen an increase in the nation's stockpiles in recent months, Morris said there are still problems with the distribution of the pills. He believes nuclear safety officials need to supply the pills to a larger area than 10 miles from a power plant. He points to government research showing people living as much as 350 miles away from Chernobyl have high rates of thyroid cancer. He said if safety officials drew the contamination zones out larger, it would be impossible to properly evacuate the areas around most nuclear power plants. In a peninsula like Florida, there literally would be nowhere to run, he said. "If it were really done properly, you would have some for every person in the United States," Morris said. "We're talking about a billion tablets." But the NRC is holding firm to its policy that a 10-mile zone is adequate, as are the one or two day supply it's providing. Radioactive iodine dissipates within a matter of days, officials said. "We don't expect an accident to go on for days and days and days," said Rosetta Virgilio, a spokeswoman for the NRC. On the Net: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/emer-resp/emer-prep/potassi um-iodide.html [http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/emer-resp/emer-prep/potassi um-iodide.html] Anbex: http://www.anbex.com/ [http://www.anbex.com/] ***************************************************************** 28 Japan to give nuclear safety training to Russia, Asian countries BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 1, 2002 Text of report in English by Japanese news agency Kyodo Tokyo, 1 April: Japan will invite nearly 50 trainees annually from China and other parts of Asia as well as Russia and eastern and central Europe in an enhanced international cooperation programme on nuclear safety starting in fiscal 2002, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) said Monday [1 April]. The five-year programme consists of seminars, tours to nuclear plants, training at dedicated centres and the dispatch of experts to the countries, the ministry said. Japan will accept trainees from Asian countries planning to launch nuclear power generation, such as Indonesia and Vietnam, if requested by the countries, METI officials said. The government has appropriated 250m yen for the programme for this fiscal year, which began Monday. The planned programme is an updated version of the government's 10-year programme ended in fiscal 2001, under which Tokyo accepted 1,042 trainees from Russia, China and eight East European nations or former Soviet republics. The original programme was designed to prevent nuclear accidents such as the one at Chernobyl in the former Soviet Union in 1986, the world's worst nuclear disaster. Source: Kyodo News Service, Tokyo, in English 1137 gmt 1 Apr 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. ***************************************************************** 29 Shattuck cleanup cap questioned Denver Post.com [http://www.denverpost.com] EPA plan would cost Citigroup $7 million By [msoraghan@denverpost.com] Denver Post Washington Bureau --> Monday, April 01, 2002 - As the cleanup at a Superfund site in south Denver begins to fall behind schedule, neighbors say the owner of the radioactive waste should have to pay more if costs rise. The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a settlement that would cap the liability of Citigroup, owner of the Shattuck Chemical Co., at about $7 million. That's one-fifth of what EPA officials call the maximum cost of the cleanup. But neighbors of the site in the Overland Park neighborhood are worried that the cost is going to go higher than what EPA is projecting. "When something has to give, it will be citizens' wallets," said Jack Unruh, president of Clean-it!, a neighborhood activist organization. Unruh and several other groups and residents want Citigroup to pay a percentage of the cleanup cost rather than the fixed price of $7 million. Those were among the comments filed with the Justice Department on the proposed settlement, or consent decree. The settlement requires approval from a federal judge. The federal government received 18 comments. Other concerns stated by the neighbors of the site include: Allegations that the cleanup has revealed the site is more polluted than the EPA realized. Having the settlement include the cleanup of all groundwater that was contaminated by the chemical company site. Sticking to plans to build a huge "dome" around the site to prevent radioactive dust from flying around while the waste is removed. Concerns about how the site will be redeveloped. Allowing residents to retain the right to sue even though the EPA has capped Citigroup's liability. Two residents said the settlement should be withdrawn and rewritten with terms less favorable to Citigroup. City Councilwoman Kathleen MacKenzie agreed that Citigroup should pay a percentage and opposed any plans to drop the dome plan. The city of Denver submitted two comments on technical redevelopment matters, but the city didn't take a stand on the settlement. U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, whose district includes the site, submitted a letter praising the settlement and restating some of the the residents' concerns. She did not address the question of how much Citigroup should pay. U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Loveland, who has also been actively involved in the Shattuck case, did not submit comments. The EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers are planning to send the waste to an Idaho site run by U.S. Ecology, but that plan has not been finalized. As part of the comment period, a Utah waste site also touted its credentials for accepting the waste. EPA officials in Denver and state environmental officials are working on responses to the comments and must report their status to the U.S. District Court by April 15. The cleanup has fallen behind because the company hired to perform it has filed for bankruptcy. Also, workers have run into difficulties erecting the huge dome to contain the waste. The project was supposed to be done in 2003, but that has now fallen to 2004. "It looks like we're about six months behind schedule," said EPA spokesman Rob Henneke. Shattuck was the only one of about a dozen Denver mineral-processing sites where the EPA decided against hauling away the radioactive waste. Dirt contaminated with radium, uranium and heavy metals was mixed with coal ash and concrete and entombed as a giant mound, or "monolith" alarming those living in the surrounding neighborhood. In 1999, under heavy political pressure, the EPA reversed its decision to leave the waste on site. EPA National Ombudsman Robert Martin is planning to hold a meeting with residents later this month, depending on the outcome of a court action about the status of the ombudsman's office. All contents Copyright 2002 The Denver Post ***************************************************************** 30 Yucca Mountain Recommendation Tainted by Undue Influence of Nuclear Industry Lobbyists Public Citizen April 1, 2002 Science Smothered Under a Mountain of Lobbyists, Report Says WASHINGTON, D.C. – Nuclear industry money and lobbyists may have biased Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham’s controversial recommendation that a nuclear waste dump be developed at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, according to a report released today by Public Citizen. The report, which analyzes nuclear industry campaign contributions to Abraham and the lobbying expenditures of top contributors, concludes that Abraham’s site recommendation is not a responsible, science-based policy assessment but "a bill of sale to the well-funded nuclear industry lobby." In February, Abraham formally recommended that the proposed nuclear waste dump be built and President Bush concurred. (Bush himself received nearly $300,000 from the nuclear industry for his presidential bid.) Nevada’s governor has pledged to veto the plan, but Congress could override the veto. A congressional vote is expected late this spring. "President Bush and Spencer Abraham are trying to fool the public when they say the decision to dump waste at Yucca Mountain is based on science," said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. "When it comes to the administration's nuclear waste policy, it's as if every day is April Fool's Day. Unfortunately, the only people who are laughing are nuclear industry executives and their handsomely paid lobbyists." The report discloses that the nuclear industry contributed $82,728 to Abraham during the 2000 election cycle, when he was a U.S. senator, and spent even more money lobbying on issues dear to the industry’s bottom line, including the ill-conceived nuclear waste dump proposal. In 2000 alone, leading nuclear energy interests that helped bankroll Abraham’s unsuccessful Senate campaign spent more than $25 million to hire some of the highest-powered lobbyists in Washington, D.C., including top officials from the Reagan and Clinton administrations, records show. Eight of the lobbying firms hired made Fortune magazine’s recent list of the 20 most influential firms in Washington. The nuclear industry is doling out so much cash because it is itching to build new power plants and needs a place to store nuclear waste. But Yucca Mountain, the only site under consideration for the proposed repository, lies in an earthquake zone and atop a drinking water aquifer. Also, storing waste there would require shipping it through almost every state, creating rolling radioactive hazards for communities everywhere and creating a network of vulnerability amid heightened national security concerns. "This unsafe project cannot be justified," said Joan Claybrook, Public Citizen’s president. "It is unconscionable that the money the nuclear industry is spending to lobby in support of this dangerous dump comes from the working families who pay power bills and whose communities may be jeopardized when this deadly waste goes rolling through." Public Citizen’s report, Yucca Mountain Bought and Sold, shows that: The pro-repository nuclear power interests that bankrolled Abraham's 2000 campaign spent $25 million lobbying Congress and federal agencies in 2000 – nearly a half-million dollars every week. In addition to their in-house lobbyists on staff, Abraham's close nuclear friends employed 53 independent lobbying firms, for a combined total of 199 individual lobbyists. More than 80 percent of those lobbyists reported on disclosure forms that they were lobbying on nuclear waste legislation, Yucca Mountain appropriations or closely related issues. Some of the lobbyists themselves contributed to Abraham's 2000 campaign, including Winston & Strawn, the law firm that had to withdraw as a consultant to the U.S. Department of Energy Yucca Mountain project last year when it was revealed that the firm was lobbying for the Nuclear Energy Institute in a blatant conflict of interest. Nearly half the lobbyists hired by Abraham’s top nuclear contributors previously worked for the federal government. The roster includes seven former members of Congress; former acting Energy Secretary Elizabeth Moler, who also was former chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; Gregory Simon, the chief domestic advisor to former Vice President Al Gore; Haley Barbour, political affairs director in the Reagan White House and former chair of the Republican National Committee; and James Curtiss, who served on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Abraham attributed his Yucca Mountain recommendation to compelling national interests, but he should have said compelling special interests," Hauter said. "No wonder they call it nuclear power." Public Citizen ***************************************************************** 31 NRC to Hold Public Meeting on Decommissioning Activities For Hematite, Missouri, Fuel Processing Facility NRC: Press Release Region III - 2002 - 11(revised) - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region III 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532 www.nrc.gov No. III-02-011 (revised) March 28, 2002 CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 Pam Alloway-Mueller (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov [opa3@nrc.gov] CORRECTED RELEASE - NEW MEETING LOCATION: Missouri National Guard Armory 2740 Highway P Festus, Missouri (3 ½ miles north of Festus) NRC TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING ON DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES FOR HEMATITE, MISSOURI, FUEL PROCESSING FACILITY The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a public meeting Wednesday, April 3, in Hematite, Missouri, to discuss the agency's activities associated with the decommissioning of the Westinghouse nuclear fuel processing plant at Hematite. State of Missouri personnel will also participate in the meeting. The meeting will be at 6 p.m. in the First Christian Church Hematite on Highway P in Hematite. There will be two portions of the meeting. The first portion will be between the NRC staff, state personnel, and Westinghouse officials to discuss an amendment of the company's NRC license covering the cessation of operations and preparations for decommissioning. Current issues in the environmental monitoring program will also be discussed. The second portion of the meeting -- expected to begin about 7 p.m. -- will be conducted by the NRC staff and the State of Missouri to describe NRC and state activities during the decommissioning of the plant. Brief presentations by the NRC and the state will be followed by a question-and-answer session for the public attending the meeting. The Hematite facility processed uranium and fabricated fuel for use in commercial nuclear power plants. Manufacturing activities were halted in June of last year, and Westinghouse consolidated its fuel production in its South Carolina facility. ***************************************************************** 32 West Valley impasse Buffalo News - West Valley impasse The massive effort to stabilize nuclear waste is near completion, but the future of the site has the federal and state governments battling over a number of issues "I'm not leaving here any time soon." Alice C. Williams, Department of Energy site director SHARON CANTILLON/Buffalo News file photo The West Valley Demonstration Project is close to achiev-ing its goal, but federal and state agencies are at odds over the site's future. JOHN F. BONFATTI News Staff Reporter 4/1/2002 WEST VALLEY - The U.S. government has spent about $1.9 billion. As recently as last year, there were about 800 people working here. Yet the West Valley Demonstration Project has operated pretty much below the public's radar for 21 years. Maybe it's because it is an unwelcome reminder of another long-gone Western New York business whose damage to the environment will have to be dealt with for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Maybe it's because the project deals with scientific principles that aren't easily grasped and ecological degradation that isn't readily visible. Perhaps it's because the groundbreaking work has gone so remarkably well, with nary a ripple - until now - in the federal-state partnership that shepherded it. But as the project achieves its chief objective - stabilizing dangerous liquid nuclear waste that threatened to flow from corroding underground tanks into Cattaraugus Creek, Lake Erie and beyond - the debate about what should happen next here is triggering alarm bells. The issues are: • The partnership between the federal Department of Energy, which has contributed 90 percent of the money spent here, and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, which contributed the other 10 percent, has been fractured by contentious negotiations over the site's future. • The federal budget for the project was cut from $107 million in 2001 to $91.6 million this year, and Congress is threatening more cuts unless the DOE and state come to agreement by the fall. • The work force here, which remains one of the largest in Cattaraugus County, has been cut in half from its peak of roughly 1,400 in 1994 to about 675, with additional cuts projected. • Several citizen watchdog groups, as well as state officials, believe the federal government, which was instrumental in the site's original establishment in the 1960s as the country's only commercial nuclear fuel reprocessing center, is eager to wash its hands of West Valley. "Unfortunately, it sure looks like it," said Bill Flynn, the Western New York native who is president of the state energy authority. "They want out," said Carol Mongerson, the Concord resident who pushed for the landmark federal legislation that established the cleanup project in 1980. Alice C. Williams, the site's director for the DOE, said the department still has a lot of work to do before it can leave. "I'm not leaving here any time soon," she said. By September, Williams said, the vitrification work at the site will be completed. That involves pumping the liquid radioactive waste from the underground tanks, forming it into glass canisters and storing those canisters behind the thick, concrete walls of the old reprocessing building. In all, 600,000 gallons of this extremely radioactive material has been solidified using pioneering technology the DOE is now employing at two larger sites elsewhere. Eventually, it is destined for a federal waste repository proposed for Yucca Mountain, Nev., which President Bush recently signaled his intention to build. If it's built - and there are a number of steps before that can happen - the earliest Yucca Mountain could be ready to accept nuclear waste is 2010, so the federal presence here won't end in the near future. Who will pay the Yucca Mountain disposal fee, currently estimated at about $200 million, and what will happen to the 200-acre project area once that waste is gone? These are the key questions that derailed negotiations between the DOE and the state. The DOE says New York is obligated to pay the disposal fee. "The DOE's position is consistent: that (the state) has to sign the standard high-level waste disposal contract," Williams said. "With that contract, there is agreement you pay the fee." Tentative agreement faltered During negotiations under the Clinton administration, the DOE's position was more flexible. Flynn said there was a "tentative agreement" that the federal government pay the fee in exchange for the authority's releasing state funds it was holding in reserve, a move the DOE felt would accelerate the cleanup. Williams confirmed that the proposal was part of the old negotiations but that it was pulled off the table, along with the other tentative agreements that had been reached, when the DOE abruptly declared talks were at an impasse just before Clinton left office. While compromise on the fee issue was close, the major stumbling block involves who should have control over and responsibility for the site after it has been decontaminated and decommissioned. The DOE interprets the law as saying that "when the decommissioning has been completed, the DOE will return operational control of the site back to New York," Williams said. But exactly how much decontaminating will be done remains to be seen. An environmental impact statement currently being prepared will help determine what will be done.The DOE has presented what it calls "a vision" for decontamination that would clean the old processing building, the new vitrification facilities and the underground tanks; turn the buildings into rubble; then entomb the rubble and tanks under a concrete cap. This bothers the Coalition on West Valley Waste, which wants the material - which will remain dangerous for hundreds of years - kept on the site in above-ground storage, where it could be easily moved off-site later. There are already two large dumps on the site containing nuclear waste, as well as contaminated groundwater the project is attempting to contain. "They're making short-term costs lower, but long-term costs are going to be higher," said the Coalition's Mongerson of what has been called the "cheap to keep" approach. "You're going to end up with a higher volume and a much greater problem once the site does finally erode." Full decontamination sought The notion of an incomplete decontamination is also unacceptable to the state energy authority, which owns the site and fears it will be stuck with a site that isn't really clean. "They want to leave before all of the waste is gone from the site," Flynn said. "And underline the word "all.' They should stay. That's their responsibility." Williams said if the DOE did leave waste behind, "It is DOE's position we would monitor and maintain and repair as necessary in perpetuity," but New York would remain the owner of the site. Some of the politicians who have been involved in trying to solve the impasse between the DOE and the state said that, regardless of what the DOE is obligated to do under the law, the federal government needs to take the site over. They say that the federal government developed atomic power, encouraged states to promote non-military uses for it and, in the case of West Valley, supplied the majority of the spent nuclear fuel that was reprocessed. "This is a clear instance where the federal government should have ownership and oversight," said Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-Clarence, who grew up five miles away from the site in Springville. "The federal government has an obligation to remain at West Valley indefinitely." Reynolds and other members of the New York congressional delegation say their immediate priority is making sure there are no further budget cuts. Frustrated by the impasse in negotiations, Congress last year slashed $17 million from the West Valley budget, trimming it to $91.6 million. And the House Appropriations subcommittee on energy and water is threatening to cut an additional $20 million if there's no agreement by Sept. 30. Rep. Amo Houghton, R-Corning, who represents West Valley, said he has pressed the bosses of those doing the negotiations - Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and Gov. George E. Pataki - to get involved. "Unless they do, nothing's going to get done," he said. The budget reduction was one reason why the site's contractor, West Valley Nuclear Services, cut its work force from 716 in 2001 to 568 as of early last month. About another 100 people work on site for other contractors or government agencies. James Little, president of West Valley Nuclear Services, said an additional 60 jobs will likely be trimmed in the near future. Under the Bush administration, the DOE asked West Valley Nuclear Services to develop a plan for accelerating the cleanup. That worries Bill King, supervisor for the Town of Ashford, where the site is located. "I don't understand why all of a sudden we want to do things fast," he said. "Speed is bound to put us in a disastrous situation." The contractor's acceleration plan calls for cleaning the tanks, the reprocessing building and the pool, which, until last summer, contained spent nuclear fuel rods. The plan also calls for speeding up ongoing construction of a $31 million remote waste handling facility that will cut up and package radioactive waste. "This is what our work force is outstanding at: high-level waste handling," Little said. If the plan is adopted, "by 2004, there would be no urgent rush left on site," he said. Loss of expertise a concern If the plan is adopted, Little sees West Valley Nuclear Service's work force, which hit a peak of 970 workers in 1994, dropping to about 500. While some say the specific goals of the project made layoffs inevitable, they bemoan the brain drain of well-trained, highly specialized workers. Those workers have expertise in handling hazardous waste, and their experience could be invaluable as the project shifts into a decontamination and decommissioning mode. A loss of technically trained workers could also affect one possible future use for the site that intrigues area economic development officials: a research institute for dealing with dangerous waste. "We could use this technical capacity to solve other highly difficult problems in the non-nuclear area," asked Mark Mitskovski, who represents Erie County on the citizens task force monitoring the cleanup. "Why throw it away?" e-mail: jbonfatti@buffnews.com ***************************************************************** 33 What’s a senator worth? Jon Ralston [online@rgj.com] RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL 3/31/2002 10:30 pm So how many senators does $10 million buy these days? And how much political inoculation does that kind of cash garner? Those are the questions as Gov. Kenny Guinn rummages around the state budget for $10 million in loose change, Nevada’s two U.S. senators worry about saving face and the clock begins to inexorably tick toward a summer showdown on Capitol Hill over Yucca Mountain. Guinn is in an impossible position. He will file his resolution of disapproval of King George’s decision as soon as a week from today, -that rare occurrence of a state plebe vetoing a political fiat from His Majesty’s Scientific Service. But Sen. Harry Reid has been pressuring him, using his colleague John Ensign and others to help, to call a special legislative session to approve an additional $10 million. Ensign has called this a “do or die fight” and he’s not wrong. But the governor not only has a $100 million budget hole to deal with, he has a few political problems as well. First, his fellow Republicans, especially Sir Bill of Reno, don’t want to give Harry Ensign the money. Second, Guinn probably believes that other issues, especially the medical malpractice crisis, are equally deserving of a special session. And, finally, he must deal with the possibility that he is being set up by Reid and other Democrats so that if he doesn’t call the special session, he will have a bull’s-eye on his back when the Democrats later play the blame game. Can the dump really be stopped now? No one really knows, but I can tell you this, folks: Reid and Ensign probably don’t think it can politically (the legal case may be another matter). Reid can get 35 senators, maybe 40. That still leaves Ensign to find about a dozen Republican senators, who would have to defy the monarch in the White House and the Duke of Trent, too. Surely, senators have intimated to Ensign and/or Reid that if their constituents were frightened of nuclear waste transportation, that would give them the cover to vote with Nevada. But what will $10 million buy? Let’s suppose that they only need 12 senators to change their votes. Then, let’s suppose the best case, that they can find six pairs, -Jim Jeffords and Pat Leahy in Vermont are most often named, but let’s say there are five other same-state senators, too. Do the math: That’s six states and $10 million, or an average of $1.7 million per state. Not a lot of gross rating points there. But shouldn’t the anti-dump forces try, just in case they can turn senators, just in case Majority Leader Tom Daschle can’t find a way to keep the bill off the floor? Or is it all just a waste of money? Not if $10 million buys a majority in the U.S. Senate. And not, if the Democrats are really being cynical, if it buys enough for them to score political points later. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 34 editorial: Passing the toxic tab Denver Post.com Monday, April 01, 2002 - Taxpayers, not industry, will pay the future cost of Superfund cleanups, possibly including several Colorado projects. The budget decision, made by a Republican Congress during the Clinton years but recently reinforced by the Bush administration, shifts far too much of the cost onto the public. Established in 1980, Superfund's goal was to make the industries responsible for creating some of the nation's biggest toxic messes pay for cleanup. The program included a trust fund, supported by a tax on the oil and chemical industries, to decontaminate sites where the polluters either couldn't be identified or couldn't pay. However, the tax expired in 1995, and Congress hasn't reauthorized it. President George W.Bush not only hasn't supported renewing the tax and replenishing the trust fund, he has been hostile to the idea. He failed to include reauthorization for the tax in his budget plan last year, and his spending proposal for 2003 expressly says he will not seek renewal next year. Since industries no longer pay into the trust fund, taxpayers must fill the gap. In 1994, just before the tax expired, taxpayers paid about $350 million, or 21 percent, of Superfund costs. . Next year, taxpayers will fork over $700 million, or half of Superfund's expense. By 2004, taxpayers will shoulder the entire $1.3 billion program. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency had invested some industry tax money in a trust, but that reserve is fast disappearing. In 1996, the trust fund contained about $3.8 billion. By next year it will have dwindled to a paltry $28 million. Instead of finding new ways to pay for the programs, the Bush administration simply plans to clean up fewer polluted sites. Federal efforts are, in fact, being sliced in half. For example, the Clinton administration cleaned up 80 Superfund sites during each of its last four years in office. By contrast, the Bush administration aims to decontaminate only 40 sites per year. What the decline means for the 20 or so Superfund sites in Colorado isn't clear. Some locations, such as Rocky Flats, the former nuclear bomb trigger factory south of Boulder, are government property so Uncle Sam is paying all the cleanup costs. But others, mostly abandoned 19th-century mines, were supposed to get some money from the now-vanishing trust fund. Whether they will receive any funding in the new Bush budget is uncertain. The decision to abandon the trust fund won't make the huge costs of environmental cleanups magically disappear. If industry doesn't pay its fair share, taxpayers will be forced to bear the burden. The administration should face strong public pressure to reauthorize the industry tax and replenish the trust fund. Superfund is too important to be starved. All contents Copyright 2002 The Denver Post ***************************************************************** 35 Editorial: Let's help state fight Yucca plan Las Vegas SUN April 01, 2002 Gov. Kenny Guinn is working hard to lay his hands on the funds needed to wage a national battle against Yucca Mountain. The battle is necessary because when Guinn vetoes President Bush's recommendation that the nation's deadly nuclear waste be buried at the mountain 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, it will all come down to a vote in the U.S. Senate. If 51 senators vote yes on Yucca, it could be all over. Thanks primarily to Sen. Harry Reid, Nevada has a cadre of support, but it will take another 15 or 20 senators voting with him to nail down a sure victory. A bankroll of about $10 million would enable the state to inform people in key states, through advertising, of the dangers associated with nuclear waste rolling or floating through their towns. Maybe people think it's just a truck or two for awhile or maybe they don't think about it at all. That's why they need to be told that the waste will be moving through their areas for the rest of their lives and for the lives of their children. And the need to understand the consequences in the event of an accident or terrorist strike. Winning over the people residing in states where Yucca Mountain is not in the news every day would be a giant step toward winning over their senators. This is why a plan by Clark County Commission Chairman Dario Herrera should be embraced when the commissioners meet Tuesday. Herrera will ask that the county donate $3 million toward the good fight. State legislators should be inspired by Herrera's plan and support state appropriations over and above the millions the state is now spending on lawsuits in Washington to fight the dump. The state does not want to find itself short at a time when money could mean all the difference for its future. We hope the County Commission will approve the $3 million. We also hope that other municipalities throughout the state, which have been generous to date, can find a way to increase their commitments to this cause as well. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 36 Lawmakers unconvinced on Yucca money Las Vegas SUN April 01, 2002 Guinn hopes state could add funds to fight By Erin Neff Looking for ways to fund the fight against the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump, Gov. Kenny Guinn believes it will be easier to get a 21-member legislative committee to agree to spend money than convene a special session of the entire 63-member Legislature. But Guinn could be in for a difficult campaign. Several members of the Interim Finance Committee told the Sun they are not willing to commit ahead of time to approving additional money for a lobbying campaign against the proposed nuclear waste dump. U.S. Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., asked Guinn to call a special session to appropriate $10 million to build national support against Yucca Mountain. Congress is expected to take up the issue later this year. The money would go to buy television advertising and start grass-roots campaigns against the dump in several states through which the nuclear waste would travel. But state lawmakers are cautious about spending the money. A Sun poll last week found a slight majority for a special session in the Assembly and a negative response in the Senate. Lawmakers are concerned about finding the money as the state budget deficit is $100 million. Of the 14 members of the Interim Finance Committee reached by the Sun, nine expressed concern, if not outright objection, to the proposal. Of the seven committee members who were unavailable, three had previously said they were against spending the money, two were noncommittal, one was for and one was unavailable. Even those who support spending some additional state money for the fight want to see local governments chip in before they do. That could prove additionally troublesome, as a number of local leaders say their cities or county coffers just can't be tapped for the proposed television ad campaign. "I'd like to see a commitment from the other entities and I'd like to see a plan for the spending," said Assembly Minority Leader Lynn Hettrick, R-Gardnerville, who serves on the finance committee. "I think $2 million is probably all we can get out of the IFC." Initially Guinn floated the idea of a special session to appropriate $10 million for the fight. But when lawmakers bristled, he came up with an alternative -- take a few million from the state's contingency account, which the finance committee controls, and make up the difference with help from local governments. Guinn said he would have to post an agenda today for the state Board of Examiners in order to get that three-person panel, which he chairs, to recommend an appropriation to the finance committee before its April 10 meeting. "I have to move muy pronto," Guinn said. But many finance committee members think the fast moves by the governor are devoid of the type of information they need to approve his request. "You want to see where the money's going," Assemblyman David Goldwater, D-Las Vegas, said. "Whether it's $10 million or $5 million or $5, if you don't have accountability, reasonable people will wonder how you spent their tax dollars." The contingency fund, which has $8.8 million, is designed to last until the start of the next Legislature, in February. Before the start of the 2001 Legislature, the fund had $100,000 left after covering emergency costs of floods and the summer fire season. Assemblywoman Vonne Chowning, D-North Las Vegas, is one of the few finance committee members who supports spending money out of the contingency fund for the Yucca fight. "This certainly qualifies as a meritorious use," she said. A number of lawmakers who previously said they would support a special session had serious doubts about taking the money. "The budget is so short anyway, what's going to happen to the rest of the needs?" Assemblywoman Marcia de Braga, D-Fallon, said. Sen. Bill O'Donnell, R-Las Vegas, has long advocated that Nevada should negotiate with the federal government for benefits in exchange for having the repository. He said Guinn's latest proposal "skirts the Legislature." "It's unfortunate that he would even ask," O'Donnell said. "He should be a leader and go to the federal government and start to dialogue about what will protect us and how we should be compensated." Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins, D-Henderson, said he will support any request the governor brings to the committee. "Actions speak louder than words," Perkins said of his colleagues on the committee. "They're either going to stand up against Yucca Mountain, or they're not." Perkins said going to the finance committee instead of holding a special session would save money and time and should be easier for other lawmakers to support. Asked if those who vote against the expenditure are soft in their opposition to the dump, Perkins said: "Absolutely." Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno, said he would defer to Guinn to find the money for the appropriation. However, he also said he might not support the expense given the numerous financial crises facing the state. "We don't even know that this campaign is going to work," Raggio said. Hettrick agreed, adding: "We really do need to sit down and analyze whether this is futile." Guinn is trying to appease Raggio and the other Republicans on the finance committee by asking local governments to find more money, and thus, lessen the state's responsibility. All nine Republicans on the committee, and three of the 12 Democrats, oppose a special session. Clark County Commission Chairman Dario Herrera has said he will seek $3 million from the county, but he has his work cut out for him. Already Commissioner Bruce Woodbury has stated his opposition, and a number of commissioners are concerned about whether the money could be legally contributed to a media campaign, and about what programs might be cut or delayed as a result. County commissioners will take up the matter Tuesday. Herrera has expressed his confidence in getting the money. Meanwhile none of the city governments appear to be searching their budgets for additional revenue. Both Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman and City Councilwoman Lynette Boggs McDonald said they would support additional funding for the state's fight, but neither said they believed the money was available without cutting a program or delaying a project. "It becomes a policy decision for the whole council," Boggs McDonald said. "It's the classic robbing Peter to pay Paul," Goodman added. "I don't know that we can do it." Las Vegas Councilman Gary Reese said he would be in support of looking for additional money in the city's budget, but said the governor should be looking at alternative ways to convince top officials to oppose the storage of nuclear waste, such as lobbying. While Reese said he supports the Yucca Mountain fight, he has reservations about spending additional city money that may take away from needed services, such as the police department. "I don't think you need to sell the ship to fight one big battle. You still have to be able to keep the ship afloat," he said. "I would definitely look (for the funding) but I can't take money that's been designated for something else and put it over there. So far the state has contributed $4 million, Clark County has spent $1 million and the private sector and other local governments have chipped in with about $1 million for the Nevada Protection Fund. Las Vegas is pledging $100,000 in the 2003 fiscal year, which begins July 1. North Las Vegas said it has not been asked to contribute, and will probably be unable to find money in its budget. "They really need to make a commitment if we're going to be able to get any more money," Guinn said. In addition to taking money from the contingency account, Guinn said he was also looking to see if there were any money available in receipts from the tobacco settlement, which currently funds the state's Millennium Scholarship and Senior Rx programs. Guinn said he doubted any tobacco receipts will be available. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 37 Nuclear Waste: Not in Our Neighborhoods (washingtonpost.com) Monday, April 1, 2002; Page A14 As a Nevadan and chairman of the Clark County Commission in southern Nevada, I object to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's plan to transport 77,000 tons of the nation's most toxic nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, 90 miles from Las Vegas [op-ed, March 26]. Transporting nuclear waste across the country magnifies the possibilities for a terrorist attack. More than 100,000 truckloads and trainloads of highly radioactive waste will travel through 43 states for 40 years just to dump the 77,000 metric tons of existing high-level nuclear waste. Every one of these shipments is a potential target for a terrorist. The Energy Department is eager to point out its track record for safe shipment of waste. However, far more waste will be transported each year during the next 40 years than has been transported since the advent of nuclear power. In its own technical documents, the Energy Department admits that accidents and incidents of radiation release will occur during its proposed shipping campaign. Most communities along the proposed transportation corridor are not aware of the immense cost of preparing for and responding to an incident involving high-level radioactive waste. The cost to Clark County public safety agencies just to prepare for the commencement of high-level nuclear waste shipments is expected to reach $360 million. Further, costs to the county government for personnel, planning, training and public outreach to prepare for incoming shipments is expected to reach almost $2.7 billion during the project's proposed 39 years of shipments. While Congress may provide some public safety funding to the 43 states through which the shipments will travel, costs to communities will far exceed any federal funds received. A study of Clark County bankers and appraisers indicates that even without an attack or accident a property value loss of more than $500 million can be expected in the county's housing market, which is one of the most active in the nation. In the end it will come down to a vote in Congress. Congress should place the interests of the millions of families who will be put at risk ahead of the interests of the Nuclear Energy Institute and other special interests and corporations. Congress should act to strengthen security at existing nuclear plants while continuing to study viable alternatives to long-term storage rather than trucking high-level radioactive waste through our neighborhoods. DARIO HERRERA Chairman Clark County Commission Las Vegas © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 38 Public relations battle rages over Pensacola environmental suit Jacksonville.com: 3/31/02 033102 apnews 7 Jacksonville.com PENSACOLA, Fla. (AP) - One side in an $500 million environmental lawsuit has been hammering at the other in a newspaper with links to a former congressman, also a partner in the plaintiffs' law firm.--> Sunday, March 31, 2002 The Associated Press PENSACOLA, Fla. - One side in an $500 million environmental lawsuit has been hammering at the other in a newspaper with links to a former congressman, also a partner in the plaintiffs' law firm. Meanwhile, an ex-state legislator and a public relations firm have been trying to gin up public support for the defendant, Conoco Inc., accused of polluting Pensacola's water supply. "What you have going on is a very nasty class-action lawsuit in which both sides are trying very hard to tell their story to prospective jurors," Nova Southeastern University law professor Bob Jarvis said. Houston-based Conoco has accused the law firm headed by Fred Levin, namesake of the University of Florida's law school, of violating legal ethics by using The Independent Florida Sun, a free weekly, to disseminate vitriolic and inaccurate statements. Conoco has asked a Circuit Judge Michael Jones to punish firm member Mike Papantonio, the lead attorney for citizens allegedly harmed by pollution from an abandoned fertilizer plant once owned by Agrico Chemical Co., now part of Conoco. Former U.S. Rep. Joe Scarborough, the Sun's publisher emeritus, is a partner in the firm, Levin Papantonio Thomas Mitchell Eschsner & Proctor. Scarborough, a Pensacola Republican, said Papantonio has no control over what goes in the Sun. The First Amendment protects his right to make public statements and the newspaper's right to print its views on the matter, Scarborough said. Papantonio, also an environmental activist, said he disagreed with the Sun's implication Pensacola's water is unsafe but believes Conoco covered up past problems. He accused the company of "media envy" and hypocrisy Conoco spent $300,000 on its publicity campaign last year, according to court documents. That included hiring a public relations firm, making donations to local charities and conducting a market survey with questions suggesting the plaintiffs' lawyers were interested only in making money. The company also has hired former legislator Debbie Ritchie for such things as working on a reception related to a World War II memorial and volunteering at a children's center and art museum. She served as a Democratic state representative from Key West under the name Deborah James Horan and is married to Buzz Ritchie, a former legislator from Pensacola. He was the House Democratic leader before retiring in 1998 and was succeeded by his former wife, DeeDee Ritchie, also a Pensacola Democrat, who resigned two years ago to run for the Florida Senate. Scarborough and Sun reporter Duwayne Escobedo attended at least two depositions where defense witnesses were questioned. Escobedo was listed as appearing "for the plaintiffs." He declined comment other than to say he stood by his stories. Conoco's complaint was based on the Feb. 22 Sun edition that included a cover photograph showing a small girl holding a glass of presumably polluted water and the headline "Radioactive Water on Tap." Information from: Pensacola News Journal Copyright 2002 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be © The Florida Times-Union ***************************************************************** 39 Nuclear irresponsibility [St. Petersburg Times Online: Opinion: Editorials and Letters] Even though the dangers at existing nuclear facilities and waste sites haven't been addressed, Washington is rushing to encourage construction of new plants. © St. Petersburg Times published April 1, 2002 Congress is irresponsibly pressing forward with legislation that would encourage construction of new nuclear power plants. Even the Senate energy bill that might have balanced the Bush administration's pro-nuclear stance is industry-friendly. Written by Senate President Tom Daschle and Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (both Democrats), the bill would provide hundreds of millions of dollars in incentives to build new plants and to extend the life of existing reactors. And it would reauthorize a program in which American taxpayers underwrite the insurance for the nuclear industry. But Congress and the industry have skipped a crucial step -- protecting us from the threats posed by nuclear power generation. Before another nuclear power plant is permitted, or even planned, the federal government should resolve the challenge of nuclear waste disposal and shore up the security at existing reactors. Spent fuel is piling up at more than 100 nuclear reactors in 31 states, including three in Florida. The fuel presents a significant risk to human health and the environment if dispersed by accident, natural disaster or terrorist act. The government's answer is to ship the material to an underground storage site in Nevada called Yucca Mountain, but that plan has faced a variety of obstacles. Las Vegas lies within 90 miles of Yucca Mountain, and the residents there are understandably worried. The waste that would be stored at Yucca Mountain is still highly radioactive, and a freshwater aquifer flows beneath the site, which is in an earthquake-prone area. The greatest risk, however, could be in transporting the material there from every corner of the country. While in transit by truck or rail car, the waste would pass by tens of millions of American homes and be vulnerable to accident or terrorist attack. Even if transportation and storage is carried out flawlessly, it is only a temporary fix, because the total amount of radioactive waste is already greater than Yucca Mountain's capacity, and growing each year. The government hasn't even begun to address security shortcomings at the reactors. U.S. Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., recently presented his concerns to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and concluded that "there is little comfort to be found in the agency's response to my questions." Markey found that the NRC doesn't require adequate background checks on reactor employees; that spent fuel is stored in buildings that are not hardened structures; that the NRC was slow to react to the Sept. 11 disaster with security enhancements; that reactor sites fail their security tests about half the time. Then there are the everyday challenges to safe operation of a nuclear reactor. Workers at an Ohio reactor recently discovered that corrosion had nearly eaten through the container that holds pressurized cooling water. Until then, corrosion had not been a concern for the 69 nuclear reactors of that design. A failure could have spewed out radioactive water and possibly have led to core damage and even a meltdown. If there ever is such a catastrophic event, guess who would pay for most of the damage done? Taxpayers. That's because a reauthorization of the Price-Anderson Act has been made a part of the Senate energy bill. The act was originally approved in 1957 to get the fledgling nuclear power industry off the ground. Insurance companies wouldn't write policies for nuclear reactors (perhaps they know something we don't) so the act required the industry to come up with $9.4-billion to cover financial claims, and made the federal government responsible for any amount over that. Problem is, a nuclear accident could cost more than $300-billion, according to a government study. Because existing nuclear reactors are already covered by the act, there is only one reason to renew it: to encourage construction of new nuclear power plants. In fact, that seems to be the direction in which the Bush administration, the House and the Senate are all headed. But they had better slow down. The promise of nuclear power is misleading. Its potential costs are hidden but almost unlimited. It is difficult to defend against a variety of possible terrorist plots. If something goes wrong at a reactor or waste sites or along the waste transportation route -- whether by accident or intentional act -- the potential consequences are almost too horrible to imagine. Rather than rushing a decision to expand nuclear power, Congress should be slowing down and giving the issue the serious thought it demands. © Copyright 2001-2002 [http://www.sptimes.com/tpc/TC.Copyright.html] St. ***************************************************************** 40 Tell Bush No "usable" nuclear weapons! Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 18:12:17 -0600 (CST) Reply-To: Jim Harris Here is a new Progressive Secretary Letter. [ ] Send - Send this letter to congress people for zip code ________ [ ] Send - Send this letter to congress people for the state of ____ Sign my letter _____ [ ] No - Don't send this letter Note: This letter supports a campaign of the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), It goes to President, Vice President, and Congress. Further information: Ask Pat@progressivesecretary.com for document on "FCNL on Usable Nukes." From: Your Name and eMail Address To: The President, The Vice President, Your Senators, Your Representatives Subject: Tell Bush No "usable" nuclear weapons! Dear _________________: I urge you, in the strongest terms, to oppose the idea of "usable" nuclear weapons and to cut funding from the Energy Department budget for the new nuclear warhead called the "Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator." Recent news accounts report that the Bush Administration plans to target non-nuclear states with nuclear weapons, and Congress may have been implicitly notified of this in January, 2002. Targeting non-nuclear states with U.S. nuclear weapons and developing sinister new types of nuclear weapons are unacceptable. These actions would contradict decades of American assurances and years of progress toward ending the threat of nuclear weapons. Please stop these dangerous new directions toward a new nuclear warfare age now! Sincerely, Your name Sincerely Jim Harris http://www.ProgressiveSecretary.Org. Make Your Voice Heard. Enroll in http://www.ProgressiveSecretary.Org. Progressives send far fewer letters than conservatives. This is an easy way to level this field. ( ~#\L=NuclearWeapons1\P=22216\S=P) ***************************************************************** 41 VOICE OF THE PEOPLE (LETTER):Israeli nukes Chicago Tribune | Israeli nukes Awad Paul Sifri Published March 31, 2002 Naperville -- Your editorial "The New Nuclear Debate" (March 23) fails to mention Israel, the one nuclear power in the Middle East. As far back as 1967, Israel and the CIA leaked news that Israel had over 200 nuclear weapons lacking only a "turn of a screw" to be ready. Israel has rejected outside inspections. The Bush administration could end the threat of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East by demanding that Israel eliminate its nuclear arsenal. Arab countries have either signed the non-proliferation pact, or vowed to do so once Israel complies. Copyright © 2002, Chicago Tribune ***************************************************************** 42 UK nuke test claims at Woomera news.com.au - [01apr02] AAP REPORTS say the United Kingdom secretly tested a nuclear weapons delivery system at Woomera in South Australia as recently as 1978. Britain's Guardian newspaper says research to be presented to a UK conference tomorrow shows the system was tested at the Woomera rocket range between 1969 and 1978. Woomera, in the South Australian desert, was used as a rocket testing facility until it was turned into a detention centre two years ago. Rocket enthusiast John Pitfield says public record office documents show the system was used to dispense missiles and manoeuvre a Falstaff rocket, part of Britain's Polaris nuclear missile program. But the paper says no nuclear warheads were launched at Woomera while the system was being tested. The Defence Department and Defence Minister Robert Hill were not immediately able to verify or reject the claim. NEWS.COM.AU ***************************************************************** 43 Navy Bombing Resumes at Vieques Las Vegas SUN April 01, 2002 VIEQUES, Puerto Rico- U.S. Navy planes began dropping inert bombs Monday on the firing range here for the first time since October, as military police handcuffed and detained five women who invaded Navy land. Although the protests surrounding what is expected to be three weeks of war exercises have been muted since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, small bands of demonstrators have launched protests on the outlying Puerto Rican island since this weekend, erecting barricades and holding vigils. The five women reportedly broke through the fence line around 5 a.m. and were detained about four hours later. They were led by Independence Party Vice President Maria de Lourdes Santiago. After their detention, the women sat cross-legged with their hands in plastic manacles, sometimes pumping their fists into the air and shouting "Vieques, si. Marina, no. Fuera la Marina!" - Navy get out!" The detentions came as the Navy began air-to-ground exercises at 8 a.m. Exercises were last held in September and October. On Sunday night, a group of protesters from the Independence Party said they were gathering for a peaceful protest at Camp Guadeloupe near the Navy's Camp Garcia when security personnel fired pepper gas and rubber bullets into the crowd. One woman was reportedly hit in the buttocks, said activist and party leader Abdel Guadeloupe. Navy spokesman Lt. Corey Barker denied that Navy security forces fired at the crowd but said demonstrators had thrown rocks at an all-terrain vehicle and had put spikes in the road. The Navy posted an order Friday declaring its Vieques range would become "hot" on Sunday - a warning to fishermen and beachgoers that waters around the eastern half of the island are restricted. In the past, the Navy and protesters have made counterclaims about incursions into the camp and its inner seaside bombing range, which hundreds of protesters invaded periodically last year, often forcing the Navy to halt or postpone exercises. But the protest movement has lost vigor and support since Sept. 11. Only about two dozen cars and fewer than 100 activists turned out Sunday for a car cavalcade through civilian areas of the Puerto Rican island of Vieques. Car horns blared, the island's blue and white striped flag flapped from windows, loudspeakers blasted salsa songs urging the Navy off "la Isla Nena," the "darling little island," as Vieques is known. The movement finally got the attention of the world when it led protesters to invade the Navy's bombing range after two 500-pound bombs fired off target from a Marine jet killed a Puerto Rican civilian guard working on the range in April 1999. Activists occupied the range for a year, preventing exercises until they were forcibly removed by U.S. Marshals. Current Gov. Sila Calderon, who was elected largely because of a promise to force the Navy to leave immediately, now shies away from outright criticism. She says she backs a deal, endorsed by President Bush, for the Navy to leave by May 2003. Even that may be jeopardized by a post-Sept. 11 law allowing the Navy to use Vieques until it finds an alternative. The Navy says there's no other one place where it can do what it does in Vieques where, simultaneously, planes drop bombs, ships lob shells at the shore and Marines practice amphibious landings. The agreement that led to the ouster of the protesters cut back Navy exercises to 90 days a year, down from about 180, and limited ammunition to inert bombs. In January, the Navy relocated exercises scheduled for Vieques to North Carolina's Camp Lejeune and Florida's Pinecastle range. Those exercises used live bombs, which the Navy said was essential before deployment in Afghanistan. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 44 Pentagon cuts off SD-based research group SignOnSanDiego.com Rift leaves JASON, which has been providing military with answers for 42 years, in the lurch By Bruce Lieberman UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER March 31, 2002 Since the dark days of the Cold War, a group of scientists has met secretly every year in La Jolla to ponder the Pentagon's most vexing challenges. But a rift between the group, known as JASON, and its Defense Department sponsor may threaten the meeting this summer at a time when the nation faces the risk of biological, chemical and nuclear terrorism. The Pentagon's Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, or DARPA, has severed its 42-year-old contract with JASON, suggesting that its members are relics of the Cold War focused on nuclear physics and ill-suited for today's threats to national security. JASON members disagree, and believe they will soon secure a new sponsor at the Pentagon. The group, which has 50 members, relies on a $1.5 million annual budget from the Department of Defense and $2.25 million from the Department of Energy and a variety of federal agencies. But its continued work depends on Pentagon sponsorship. "I'm optimistic that we'll close a deal very soon, within a few days," said physicist Steven Koonin, the chairman of JASON and a professor and provost at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. Still, without firm assignments and enough time to prepare, JASON scientists  or Jasons, as they are called  may not be able to convene this summer for their annual six-week meeting at General Atomics in La Jolla, Koonin said. "We are dead in the water at the moment," he said. The uncertainty comes at a time when scientific expertise in biological and chemical terrorism is critically needed, JASON members say. John H. Marburger III, President Bush's science adviser, expressed support for the group during a visit to San Diego last week. "I think the Jasons are a valuable asset to the nation, and I hope that we can continue to take advantage of what they have to offer," he said. The federal government depends on numerous science advisory groups. But JASON members say they are unique because of their independence from government. And, unlike other advisory groups, they actually create new technologies. "None of us depends on this for our economic livelihood," said Edward Frieman, a senior adviser to JASON and director of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography from 1986 to 1996. "We can be incredibly honest and look very dispassionately at the issues," he said. "We will take on something and do our best to get at the ultimate aim, whether it agrees with the government position or not." As a senior adviser, Frieman, who joined JASON 40 years ago, is less active in the group than he once was. Most JASON work is classified. Acting on assignment from the Pentagon, the Department of Energy and other federal agencies and working on their own ideas, the Jasons prepare detailed reports that summarize their summer studies. Officials at DARPA have said little about their decision to cut ties with the group. "DARPA didn't feel that JASON was responsive to DARPA's current needs," agency spokeswoman Jan Walker said March 22, refusing to elaborate. JASON members say the Defense Department's belief that they are out of touch with today's realities is bogus. "To imply that we're a bunch of physicists caught in the Cold War is just wrong," said Koonin. Instead, members say, the conflict stems from DARPA's insistence that the scientists accept three new members  two Silicon Valley executives and an engineer  who members say lack the credentials to join. The Jasons viewed the Pentagon's effort to handpick new members as an attempt to politicize a fiercely independent group. JASON refused DARPA's call, so the agency dropped its association with the group, members said. Accepting new members at the behest of the government would "send us down the slippery slope to not being independent," said Frieman. "We are neutral. . . . It was rather disturbing to see an attempt to politicize (the Jasons)." The Jasons say they recruit members from a variety of disciplines. At the height of the Cold War, when the Pentagon saw repeated successes in the Soviet space program as a peril to national security, nearly all JASON members were physicists. But over the years, the group has adapted to changing times, tackling problems related to submarine warfare, nuclear weapons testing and missile defense; and more recently bioterrorism and advances in decoding the human genome, Koonin said. Of the group's 50 members, 19 are biologists, chemists, engineers, computer experts and other nonphysicists, he said. Many San Diego scientists have been Jasons, including Russ Davis, Kenneth Watson, Walter Munk, William Nierenberg, Frieman, Henry Abarbanel, Kenneth Case, Roger Dashen, Patrick Diamond, Michael Freedman, Marshall Rosenbluth and Herbert York from UCSD. Among the Jasons today are women; former astronaut Sally Ride, who now lives in San Diego, used to be a member, said Koonin. Some JASON members have said DARPA's snub has damaged the government's relationship with some of the country's top scientists  thinkers to whom the Pentagon has repeatedly turned to for expertise. "The current flap is basically something that none of us wanted," said Frieman. "It's unfortunately left scars." JASON began in 1959 with three scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Marvin Goldberger, Kenneth Watson and Keith Brueckner, then young theoretical physicists, were the first members. It was the idea of physicist Charles Townes, the head of a consortium of universities attempting to aid the Pentagon. The Defense Department was in dire need of technical direction. Nuclear weapons research was under the aegis of the Atomic Energy Commission, now the Department of Energy. Townes, who later won the 1964 Nobel Prize for his work in the development of the laser, conceived of JASON as a group of advisers who could counsel the government on new, rapidly evolving technologies, from nuclear weapons to intercontinental ballistic missiles to submarine detection. "At the time, we recognized the need for expertise we could never get in-house," said Herbert York, who as an official in the Pentagon co-founded DARPA in 1958 and championed the formation of JASON. York, the first chancellor of UCSD, is a senior JASON adviser. JASON offered the Pentagon what it needed, said Goldberger, now 79. The Department of Defense "simply did not have a high level of technical competence, and we, in a number of areas, supplied that," said Goldberger. "It was at a time when the Cold War was very intense, and we wanted to try to make a contribution to the country." Goldberger, Watson and Brueckner, who along with York and Frieman today live in La Jolla, quickly founded JASON. Goldberger, who worked on the Manhattan Project as a young college graduate, was named the group's first chairman, and the three men invited 30 colleagues to join them in a preliminary meeting in 1959 in Washington, D.C. JASON held its first summer session in 1960 in Berkeley. The name, JASON, was the invention of Goldberger's wife, Mildred, who suggested it after seeing the consortium's logo  which resembled a Greek temple  and thought of the Greek myth about Jason and the Argonauts. "Here were these bright young men going out to save the world," Goldberger said, laughing as he recalled his wife's idea. The early Jasons were all scientists between 35 and 40 years old  a deliberate move, Goldberger said, to bring young blood into the highest circles of scientific research. "We began to see the same people on all these committees, and they were all the same old warriors from World War II," said Goldberger. "We thought it was important to bring in young people." That tradition continues today, members say, and keeps the Jasons fresh and relevant. The average age of a Jason is about 50. "It's really rather remarkable that it's stayed together so long and stayed effective, and brought in young people," said Goldberger. "The idea that everyone is 77 years old is just false." SignOnSanDiego Services © Copyright 2002 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 45 Required Linkage in U.S.-Russian Plutonium Disposition Program NCI document March 27, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE (202) 586-4403 AND MAIL Hon. Spencer Abraham Secretary of Energy U.S. Department of Energy James Forrestal Building 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20585 Dear Secretary Abraham: In a hearing on March 6 before the House Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee, you stated that the U.S. surplus plutonium disposition program “shouldn’t be further paused pending the financing of the Russian program.” This statement suggests that the U.S. program need not proceed in parallel with the Russian program and that the Department of Energy (“DOE” or the “Department”) might move forward with plutonium disposition, notwithstanding the absence of progress on the Russian side. On behalf of the Nuclear Control Institute (“NCI”), we are writing to urge the Department to clarify its position and reaffirm its commitment to maintaining parity between the two programs. At the March 6 hearing, Congressman Clyburn (D.-S.C.) asked if progress on the program to dispose of surplus warhead plutonium through conversion to mixed oxide (“MOX”) fuel and use in conventional power reactors depended on the Russians. Your response, quoted above, suggested that the United States had an independent obligation under the U.S.-Russia plutonium disposition agreement (U.S.-Russia Agreement Concerning the Management and Disposition of Plutonium Designated as No Longer Needed for Defense Purposes and Additional Cooperation, entered into September 2000 [the “Agreement”]) to move forward promptly with the MOX program, even if the Russian program was delayed. NCI understands that a “senior aide” at DOE subsequently clarified that the “goal is to keep [the U.S. and Russian] programs very much in parallel.” See D. Horner, “DOE Scraps WIPP Plan for Impure Pu, Now Mulling Making MOX From It,” NuclearFuel, March 18, 2002, pp. 3, 5. However, DOE’s plutonium disposition program report, recently submitted to Congress pursuant to the FY 2002 National Defense Authorization Act, sets out an ambitious schedule for construction of MOX facilities that is difficult to square with the notion that the U.S. and Russian programs will remain truly linked. See DOE, Report to Congress: Disposition of Surplus Defense Plutonium at the Savannah River Site (February 15, 2002). The same is true of the schedule proposed by Duke Cogema Stone & Webster for consideration by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the “NRC”) in developing the NRC’s planning basis for environmental and other regulatory reviews that would permit the start of construction of the MOX fabrication plant as early as October 1, 2003. See NRC, Response to the Duke Cogema Stone & Webster Proposed Basis Following Changes to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program (March 12, 2002). Because of the importance of a truly bilateral plutonium disposition program to U.S. national security and non-proliferation policy, NCI believes that a clear statement from you is necessary to set the record straight. In particular, the Department must make it plain that it will not make a major commitment to the construction and operation of a MOX fabrication facility, unless and until it is evident that the Russians are likewise taking expeditious action pursuant the Agreement to dispose of their surplus weapons plutonium. NCI strongly supports the safe, secure and cost-effective disposition of surplus warhead plutonium as quickly as possible. Given the bilateral nature of our accord with the Russians and the clearly articulated policy of Congress that the U.S. and Russian programs should proceed in tandem, NCI believes it would be inappropriate for the Department to commit tens of millions of dollars prematurely to the MOX option, especially when it may turn out that other options, such as immobilization, are more cost effective, less risky and more likely to win Russian acceptance if the MOX option proves financially infeasible and too heavy a safety and security burden, as we believe should soon become evident. The U.S. and Russian programs to dispose of surplus weapons plutonium are integrally related under the terms of the Agreement. Indeed, from the very beginning, the premise of the programs was that they generally “should proceed in parallel.” B. MacDonald and N. Yegorov, Co-Chairs, Joint United States/Russian Plutonium Disposition Study, Executive Summary at 2 (September 1996). In addition, it has long been specifically understood that disposition through burning MOX in conventional power reactors was a so-called “coupled option,” in which both programs would “move in rough parallel.” DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration, Fact Sheet (January 23, 2002). The Agreement plainly contemplates that progress in the two plutonium disposition programs should be linked. Thus, the Preamble affirms the intention of each party to proceed “by stages” to remove plutonium from its weapons program. Article II, para. 4, expressly refers to the obligations of each party to dispose of 34 metric tons of weapons plutonium as being “reciprocal.” Even more to the point, Article II, para. 3, specifically provides, “The Parties shall cooperate in the management and disposition of disposition plutonium, implementing their respective disposition programs in parallel to the extent practicable” (emphasis added). Article IV contemplates that both parties will “take all reasonable steps” to achieve the same disposition rate of two metric tons per year, commencing no later than December 31, 2007, and that they will notify each other of their progress in reaching milestones specified in the Annex on Schedules and Milestones. Article V provides that the parties will “undertake to develop a detailed action plan . . . to at least double the disposition rate . . . at the earliest practicable date.” Finally, Article IX and the Annex on Schedules and Milestones establishes a direct correspondence between progress in the two programs. Clearly, the terms of the Agreement leave no doubt that linkage and parallelism are intended to apply to the U.S. and Russian disposition programs. At the same time, Congress has been steadfast and consistent in promoting parallelism between the U.S. and Russian plutonium disposition programs and in emphasizing that the United States program should not get far in front of the Russians. The strongest statement of this policy came in connection with Congressional consideration of FY 1999 appropriations for the Department. The Senate Report stressed at that time, While some efforts have been made to link the United States program to progress on plutonium disposition in Russia, those linkages are not sufficient. At a minimum, the two countries disposition programs should be conducted under a bilateral accord that sets specific schedules for materials disposition in both countries and Russian material must be converted to nonweapons forms at no less than the rate of United States material--anything else would amount to an unequal and irresponsible disarmament. * * * The Committee has two interests in this matter: to show support for the Department's decision to endorse the eventual use of mixed-oxide fuel for the disposition of excess weapons plutonium, and also ensure that the United States does not unwisely proceed with a program that does not ensure that an equal amount of plutonium will be converted to nonweapons forms by the Russian Federation. For that reason, the Committee has provided the full amount of the request, but has also included a statutory proviso that funds for the design, licensing, or construction of a mixed-oxide fuel fabrication facility in the United States, shall be available only after the United States and the Russian Federation agree on a bilateral schedule for the conversion to nonweapons forms of excess weapons plutonium in accordance with which the conversion rate in the United States does not exceed the conversion rate in the Russian Federation. S. Rep. No. 206, 105th Cong., 2d Sess. 118-119 (June 5, 1998) (emphasis added). See S. 2138, 144 Cong. Rec. S. 6541, 6545 (daily ed., June 18, 1998). The House expressed sentiments similar to those of the Senate. Thus, the House Report on the appropriations bill stated, The Committee supports the Administration's efforts to reach agreement with the Russian Federation on a bilateral program for the conversion and disposition of weapons derived plutonium. The Department of Energy should proceed with preparations for plutonium disposition to include the design and licensing of key disposition facilities as well as qualification of MOX fuel in order to send a signal to Russia of the seriousness with which the U.S. views the disposition of stockpiles of excess weapons plutonium. The United States, however, should not proceed unilaterally to dispose of excess plutonium without parallel progress on the Russian side. Further, the Committee does not intend to authorize the expenditure of funds for the actual construction of these facilities without such an agreement. H.R. Rep. No. 581, 105th Cong., 2d Sess. 116 (June 16, 1998) (emphasis added). Finally, the Conference Report on the FY 1999 appropriations bill stated, The conferees have deleted bill language proposed by the Senate which limited the design and procurement activities for the mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility. The Department of Energy should proceed with preparations for plutonium disposition to include the design and licensing of key disposition facilities as well as qualification of mixed oxide fuel. The United States, however, should not proceed unilaterally to dispose of excess plutonium without parallel progress on the Russian side. No funds have been provided to initiate actual construction of plutonium disposition facilities without such an agreement. H. Conf. Rep. No. 749, 105th Cong., 2d Sess. 110 (September 25, 1998) (emphasis added). In the years since 1998, no Congress has expressed a different view. Indeed, the Congressional sentiments expressed in 1998 have been reaffirmed as recently as the 2001 appropriations cycle. For example, the House Report on the Department’s FY 2001 appropriations bill stated the House Appropriations Committee’s “concerns that the U.S. program is being conducted at a faster pace than the Russian program,” noting that “[t]he design of several expensive new facilities in the United States is underway while funding for comparable Russian facilities is still uncertain,” and calling upon the Department to explain in a report to Congress “the process by which parity between the two countries will be maintained throughout execution of the program.” H. R. Rep. No. 693, 106th Cong., 2d Sess. 109 (June 23, 2000). In short, given the terms of the Agreement and expressions of Congressional intent, maintenance of parity between the Russian and American plutonium disposition programs is essential. Proceeding to actual construction of a MOX fabrication facility without Russia being at the same point will represent a move toward unilateral and premature disposition through MOX on the U.S. side and is unacceptable. The Department should leave no doubt on the public record that it will proceed deliberately and on a pace that mirrors that of the Russians. We ask, therefore, that you provide us with a clear statement reaffirming that the intent of Congress and the terms of the Agreement calling for linkage and parallelism between the U.S. and Russian plutonium disposition programs will be honored and that licensing and construction of a MOX fabrication plant in the United States will not proceed prematurely. Thank you for your consideration of our views. We look forward to a prompt response. Sincerely, Paul L. Leventhal Eldon V.C. Greenberg President Garvey, Schubert and Barer Counsel to NCI CCs: Senator Robert C. Byrd, Chair, Committee on Appropriations Senator Ted Stevens, Ranking Member, Committee on Appropriations Senator Harry Reid, Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, Subcommittee on Transportation, Infrastructure, and Nuclear Safety Senator Pete V. Domenici, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Senator Carl Levin, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services Senator John Warner, Ranking Member, Committee on Armed Services Senator Jack Reed, Chairman, Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Senator Wayne Allard, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Strategic Forces Senator James M. Jeffords, Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works Senator Bob Smith, Ranking Member, Committee on Environment and Public Works Senator James M. Inhofe, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Transportation, Infrastructure, and Nuclear Safety Senator Joseph R. Biden, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations Senator Jesse Helms, Ranking Member, Committee on Foreign Relations Senator Daniel Akaka, Chairman, Subcommittee on International Security, Proliferation and Federal Services Senator Thad Cochran, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on International Security, Proliferation and Federal Services Rep. C.W. Bill Young, Chairman, Committee on Appropriations Rep. R. Obey, Ranking Member, Committee on Appropriations Rep. Sonny Callahan, Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Rep. Peter J. Visclosky, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development Rep. Bob Stump, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services Rep. Ike Skelton, Ranking Member, Committee on Armed Services Rep. Mac Thornberry, Chairman, Special Oversight Panel on DOE Reorganization Rep. Ellen Tauscher, Ranking Member, Special Oversight Panel on DOE Reorganization Rep. John M. Spratt, Committee on Armed Services Rep. Billy Tauzin, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce Rep. John D. Dingell, Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Commerce Rep. Joe Barton, Chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality Rep. Rick Boucher, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality Rep. Edward J. Markey, Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, House Bipartisan Task Force on Nonproliferation Rep. Christoper Cox, Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality Rep. Henry J. Hyde, Chairman, Committee on International Relations Rep. Tom Lantos, Ranking Member, Committee on International Relations Rep. Benjamin A. Gilman, House Committee on International Relations Rep. Christopher Shays, House Bipartisan Task Force on Nonproliferation ***************************************************************** 46 New claims of UK nuclear testing in South Australia theage.com.au CANBERRA, April 1 AAP|Published: Monday April 1, 7:29 PM Britain secretly tested a nuclear weapons delivery system at Woomera in South Australia as recently as 1978, reports said today. The Guardian newspaper in London said research to be presented to a British conference tomorrow showed the penetration aids carrier (PAC) system was tested at the Woomera rocket range between 1969 and 1978. Woomera, in the South Australian desert, was used as a rocket-testing facility until it was turned into a detention centre two years ago. Rocket enthusiast John Pitfield said public record office documents showed PAC was used to dispense missiles and manoeuvre a Falstaff rocket, part of Britain's defunct Polaris nuclear missile program. But the paper said no nuclear warheads were launched at Woomera while the system was being tested. British Rocketry Oral History Program conference co-organiser Dave Wright said it was inconceivable that senior figures in the Australian government did not know Falstaff was being tested. The Defence Department and Defence Minister Robert Hill were not immediately able for comment. It comes as veterans involved in Britain's nuclear testing at Maralinga, also in South Australia, during the 1950s await the results of a Scotland Yard investigation. About 17,000 Australian servicemen and civilians took part in nuclear tests in Australia between 1952 and 1958 at Maralinga and Emu Field in South Australia and the Monte Bello Islands off Western Australia. The last known testing of nuclear weapons on Australian soil was a US project on Christmas Island in 1962-63. Scotland Yard is investigating claims from widow Shirley Denson that her husband Eric was ordered to fly his plane into a mushroom cloud in 1958 at Christmas Island after scientists detonated a nuclear weapon. The pilot committed suicide in 1976. Mrs Denson claims military leaders knowingly and maliciously exposed him to illegal levels of radiation. If her case gets to court, it could open the way for similar claims from thousands of Australian, New Zealand and British servicemen who were exposed to radiation fallout both in the air and on the ground. Copyright © 2002 John Fairfax Holdings Ltd. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 47 Taipei opposes nuclear solution CNN.com - - March 31, 2002 Taiwan's President Chen Shui-bian is hoping to ease tensions with China Willy Wo-Lap Lam CNN's Senior China Analyst (CNN) -- Taipei has indicated it is opposed to the United States using nuclear weapons to resolve a possible crisis in the Taiwan Strait. And in another olive branch to mainland authorities, Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian reiterated his wish to pay a visit to his home town in Fujian Province. In a reply to a query from legislators, the Taiwan Defense Ministry said a nuclear threat from Washington against China would increase tension in the Taiwan Strait because this would "provide hardliners in the mainland with a pretext to boost their influence." The ministry was referring to a leaked Pentagon report, which said the U.S. might consider using nuclear weapons against China in the event of cross-Strait warfare. The ministry said such a threat would "increase [Beijing's] the sense of mistrust and insecurity and affect [the mainland's] political and military judgment and decision-making" It said Taipei's defense strategies had not been affected by the Pentagon's "nuclear posture review." The ministry said if the U.S. and the mainland were to stop observing their self-restraint on the use of nuclear weapons, "this could spell disaster to the Taiwan Strait and neighboring areas." While the official Chinese reactions to the Pentagon's "nuclear posture review" have been relatively mild, officers in the People's Liberation Army are reported to have lobbied Beijing for more funds to counter the latest threat from the U.S. Meanwhile, Taiwan papers on Monday quoted Chen as saying he would like to visit his hometown, the village of Kejiazhuang in coastal Fujian Province. "If there is an opportunity to go to the mainland, I would like to go to my old village in Fujian." Chen was engaged in an Internet chat with the Taiwan public over policy matters. The president defended the slush fund set up by his predecessor, Lee Teng-hui to conduct "flexible diplomacy," saying it was necessary to have financial means to conduct special types of diplomacy and intelligence work. © 2002 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. ***************************************************************** 48 Damascus history shaped by explosion that rocked nation TheCabin.net Blast from the past Before: A nuclear missile silo once brought jobs and money to Damascus before tragedy and fear in 1980, when an explosion at the silo left one airman dead, 21 injured and forced 1,400 area residents to evacuate their homes as a monstrous cloud of toxic rocket fuel fumes darkened the sky. Sunday, March 31, 2002 By JUSTIN PETRUCCELLI Log Cabin Staff Writer Damascus is not unlike many rural Arkansas locales. It is more or less located on either side of a two-lane highway and populated primarily by people who have never known any other home. Its residents are farmers, small businessmen and retirees. But for 23 years during the height of the Cold War, Damascus, along with 17 other rural Arkansas communities, played host to a very prominent neighbor -- the United States Air Force, which resided several hundred feet underground and whose ominous cargo included a 10-megaton nuclear warhead affixed to a 100-foot Titan II intercontinental ballistic missile. The silo brought jobs and money to Damascus. But it also brought tragedy and fear in 1980, when an explosion at the silo left one airman dead, 21 injured and forced 1,400 area residents to evacuate their homes as a monstrous cloud of toxic rocket fuel fumes darkened the sky. It's been more than 20 years since the silo was destroyed and filled in, but its shadow still looms over the history of this small town. After the blast. It was 1960 when the Air Force announced plans to begin construction of intercontinental ballistic missile bases around Arkansas. According to University of Central Arkansas political science professor Mark Mullenbach, the decision to build up the U.S.'s nuclear arsenal came much earlier, during President Harry Truman's administration, and was ultimately put into practice by President Dwight Eisenhower "Truman decided that we needed to build up our nuclear arms and just threaten any communist enemy with a nuclear attack," Mullenbach said. "It's a very dramatic change in military defense. The result of that is the building and deployment of nuclear missile bases. One key decision the Eisenhower administration made was to focus on strategic, or nuclear, forces instead of conventional forces. Prior to this decision, the U.S. military defense meant that the U.S. would oppose communism primarily with conventional forces, as it did in Korea." As for the decision to place the silos in places like Damascus, Mullenbach cited several factors, the most important of which were its proximity to Little Rock Air Force Base and its relatively small population. "The main criteria was rural," he said. "They didn't want to house the missile sites in urban areas because it was common knowledge that they would be primary targets for the other side. These were underground silos. That's an important point about these missiles is that they were the first hardened silos. The purpose of that was for them to be able to survive a first strike. That was unique before the 1960s." Raydean Wood was just 7 years old when construction began on the Damascus silo in 1960 with her father working as a security guard at the site. She said Damascus more or less peacefully co-existed with its neighbors in the silo, albeit in relative uncertainty. "None of us knew what they were all about when we were kids," she said. "It was just jobs for the locals. When they were first building (the silo), it wasn't just the Air Force. It was the residents building, too." But the people of Damascus would soon know at least some of the destructive power of the weapon in their back yards. On Sept. 19, 1980, in a story too strange to be fiction, a maintenance worker at the silo dropped a wrench, puncturing one of the silo's fueling tubes and eventually causing an explosion that brought tiny Damascus under the international microscope. Monty Rowell, station manager for student-run radio stations KCON and KUCA at the University of Central Arkansas, was just six weeks into his first job as news director for KCON, then Conway's local Arkansas Radio Network affiliate, when he went to Damascus to cover a fuel leak and came back with the story of a lifetime. "I remember just being so darn green and not really knowing what we had on our hands until that thing blew up," Rowell said. "It's one of those things you don't forget. To see the sky light up like that, I think we all thought we were dead. It looked like an early morning sunrise. I remember I was talking to Fred Jordan, who was working for KTHV in Little Rock, and all of the sudden that ground shook. When the ground shook, the top of that silo flew off and flames shot out. I remember running across Highway 65 and jumping into the ditch. I got about halfway across the road and I remember thinking, 'Why the hell am I running?' We all thought we were gone." Rowell said that going back to the site a few days later made him realize just how serious the explosion had been and how lucky he was to be alive. He said he also realized later that the affects of the accident went beyond physical destruction. "They took us out to the site about three days after the explosion," he said. "There were pieces of concrete sticking out of the ground that were three to four stories high. The devastation was unbelievable. When you consider those bomb doors are supposed to be able to withstand a direct hit, it was even more humbling. One thing the explosion did was it set off a wave of protesters. It really stirred up the anti-nuclear movement. It became obvious that (Titan II missiles) weren't safe. They didn't even have spare parts to repair them." Wood said she also remembers the night of the accident, but from the more personal perspective of someone forced to leave her home, uncertain when she might be able to return and what she might return to. "The first thing I remember is that they had a leak," Wood said. "We stood in our yard and the cloud was the shape of a mushroom. Planes and helicopters would fly through it to try to bust it up. That was when some of our farmers got gassed because they didn't know they were evacuating. When (the silo) blew up, we owned a restaurant in Damascus, so we were dealing with reporters from all over the world. The Air Force people would come in to get food but they wouldn't tell you anything. We knew it had blown up but we didn't know if the warhead had blown up. They hadn't found it yet. People in Damascus didn't have much respect for the Air Force at that time and they were upset at the governor for not evacuating the town sooner." Wood said that after the accident, Damascus residents returned home to the outstretched hands of Air Force officials, ready to offer quick and easy compensation for any monetary damages they suffered as a result of the explosion. But she says she and her neighbors were not told the whole story. "After we were allowed to come back, we weren't thinking about all the diseases we could get," she said. "There was no way we could go back once we signed off saying we were OK and got our little bit of money. We had well water and we'd take samples to the Health Department and they'd say it was bad. But the Air Force would come in and test it and say it was fine. We finally had to just drink it. It was either that or buy water the rest of our lives. So many people didn't take it seriously. There were a lot of problems and the Air Force left us hanging. People didn't take it seriously when the Air Force wanted to put those missile bases up there otherwise they wouldn't have sold their land to them." Roy Payne, who was mayor of Damascus in 1980, tells a somewhat different story. He praised the Air Force as well as his fellow Damascus residents for their resolve in the face of such a harrowing situation. "Everything just ran along like it always did -- smooth," he said. "The people didn't get excited. They just evacuated and went where they were supposed to go. I got calls from the BBC in London and other foreign countries. And the Air Force needed some office space so they could take claims from people who had damage. So I set it up for them. They kept that office open for three weeks. They were really nice people. They conducted themselves like gentlemen. They were going to have an air show and the colonel told me to find out how many wanted to go to the air show and they reserved us seats for free." After the accident, Payne managed to get his 15 minutes of fame when a Canadian television network invited him to appear on "Front Page Challengers," a game show where a panel tried to figure out his claim to fame by asking questions of him. "I stumped that panel," he said, smiling. "They flew me up there, picked me up in a limo and set me up in the Park Plaza Hotel. I enjoyed it. They treated me really nice. They knew more about me than I did." Payne echoed Wood's sentiment that the daily lives of Damascus residents were largely unaffected by the silo's presence in town and that most were happy to do their part for what they felt was the good of the country. "Some people didn't actually realize it was up there," he said. "If we're going to have things for defense, somebody's got to have them in their back yard. But the average person didn't even think about it." :: 1997-2000 Log Cabin Democrat A division of Morris Communications [http://morris.com] ***************************************************************** 49 Opinions:A new nuke policy Augusta Georgia: Web posted Monday, April 1, 2002 Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff Much of the world was aghast several weeks ago when the Bush administration "leaked" a so-called "secret review" by the Pentagon to develop clean, small, tactical nuclear weapons capable of boring deep into underground caves or tunnels to deliver intense but limited devastation. The "leak" came at about the same time the president identified seven nations that either have or are developing the ability to unleash a nuclear attack on the U.S. or its allies. The Iraqi regime was seen as the main threat. Alarm spread that President Bush - with his 80 percent domestic approval rating - was embarking on some kind of Dr. Strangelove first-strike policy. True, the first use of nuclear weapons would mark a historical shift in U.S. nuclear war policy, which has always been based on retaliation. Mutually assured destruction (MAD) was appropriate when there were only two nuclear superpowers and missiles were the only means of delivery. But with the advent of new technology and terrorists' suicide missions, the nature of national security is undergoing radical change. In this new mad world, MAD will not deter deranged zealots from recruiting young "martyrs" willing to blow themselves up to kill others. If small nuclear body-bombs become available for suicide missions they will, of course, be used. This is how, despite U.S. and allies' military might, Islamic terrorists believe they will eventually win the war against Israel and Western "infidels." In a major metropolitan area a nuclear explosion by a small, crude, dirty bomb could cause up to 10,000 deaths and thousands of injuries and radioactive illnesses. And where could those N-devices (and other weapons of mass destruction) be developed? Intelligence indicates deep inside caves and tunnels where conventional weapons can't reach them. Iraq and North Korea are honeycombed with such shelters that are thought to be storage sites for as many as three nuclear bombs and other fissile material. It is from this perspective that Americans, like the administration, should view the war against terrorism. If Saddam Hussein gets an N-bomb, he won't fire it off on a missile, inviting his own destruction, he'll pass it off to a shadowy suicide terrorist group. If our government has reason to believe such a threat is imminent, it would be derelict to not strike first with tactical nuclear weapons against those underground caverns. 1996 - 2002 The Augusta Chronicle. ***************************************************************** 50 India to revive N-safety co-operation with US - The Times of IndIA PTI [ MONDAY, APRIL 01, 2002 12:45:59 PM ] UDANKULAM: India is making all efforts to revive its nuclear safety co-operation with the United States, Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Anil Kakodkar has said. Talking to reporters here on Sunday, Kakodkar, who attended the 'Global Nuclear Meeting' in US recently, said India was trying to revive the nuclear safety co-operation it had with the American Nuclear Regulatory Body. The cooperation came to a close abruptly after the Pokhran-II nuclear tests in May 1998. India would further negotiate with the US at official level on the revival of cooperation, he said. On the private participation in the country's nuclear power programme, he said, "We want additional power and it could be through foreign investments or from private sector". However, "we are working out the conditionalities by making few modifications in the Atomic Energy Act", he said. ***************************************************************** 51 Remembering the Hanford Giant This story was published Sun, Mar 31, 2002 By Chris Mulick Herald Olympia bureau The future of nuclear power in the Northwest was literally hanging in the balance 25 years ago today, and no one had a better view than Larry Noble. The engineer watched from atop the concrete pit of the WNP-2 containment structure as a behemoth derrick hoisted a 966-ton bundle of fate into the air and over his head. Within six hours, the heaviest reactor vessel ever lifted was set to rest inside what is now the region's only operating nuclear power plant. "This whole thing was very stressful," Noble said. "You drop that thing and it's the end of the project." It was both the debut and curtain call for what became known as the Hanford Giant, the towering twin-boom derrick Kennewick's Neil F. Lampson Inc. designed specifically for what is now known as the Columbia Generating Station. To many casual observers, the history of the Washington Public Power Supply System didn't begin until 1983, when it defaulted on $2.25 billion in bonds. But in 1977, before the conglomerate's 40-year history was marred by the massive collapse of its ambitious construction plans, the Hanford Giant's exploits were a big deal. Lifting the reactor vessel in place not only marked a major construction milestone for the 1,150-megawatt power plant, it also was a crowning achievement for an emerging Kennewick-based crane company attempting its most demanding lift. "At its time the lift for WNP-2 was big news," said Gary Miller, an Energy Northwest spokesman and regional public power historian. "It was a significant event for the community." Until then, nuclear plants were built with the reactor vessels assembled inside. But WPPSS, the public power consortium now known as Energy Northwest, figured it would be quicker to assemble all the fittings and other inner workings separately. That way, crews wouldn't have to work within the tight confines of the containment structure. One estimate suggested assembling the reactor separately would save a year in construction time. Getting it into the plant was another matter. It wasn't clear whether anything so heavy ever had been lifted. Furthermore, the reactor vessel would have to be hoisted high enough to clear the plant's walls. So WPPSS commissioned the Hanford Giant, a derrick whose twin booms stood three times as tall as the Federal Building in Richland and were anchored by a huge slab of concrete. "As an engineer, it was impressive going out and looking at these two twin towers with these huge concrete bases," said Dan Porter, who was developing a program to inspect welds at the plant at the time. "It was a huge lift." Wind was bound to be a complicating factor at the desert construction site, so crews monitored weather reports closely. The wind was "virtually nonexistent" the day of the lift until the end, after the reactor was inside the containment but not yet secured, Noble said. Then the wind picked up and the massive vessel began swaying three inches to one side and three inches to the other. "You'd think 'Ah, we're safe,' but then the wind started pushing the Hanford Giant around," he said. "It was pretty scary." But even so, the rigging team of Lampson and Oakland-based Rigging International managed to set the vessel down. "Those guys are good," Noble said. "You can't believe how relieved I was. I was jumping for joy." Though its design was incorporated into newer units, the Hanford Giant never was used again in that configuration. Lampson soon developed a mobile model that rendered the old one obsolete. But for those who were there, the Hanford Giant hasn't been forgotten. "That was the biggest lift we'd ever done," company President Bill Lampson said. "It went off as planned. It was a big step forward for the Lampson company." Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 52 These foolish things [Guardian Unlimited] Some April fool jokes in the Arab world have backfired spectacularly. Brian Whitaker reports Monday April 1, 2002 1. Did you know that one of Colonel Gadafy's sons is studying nuclear engineering in Liverpool? 2. Did you know that conservative Muslims once called for the demolition of the Cairo Tower on the grounds that its shape might "excite" women? 3. Did you know that Saddam Hussein was vaccinated against anthrax last September? "Hang on a minute", I hear someone say, "today is April 1 and you're pulling our legs." Well, not entirely. Two of the statements above are true and one is false. See if you can guess which.* Much of the Arab world officially uses the Islamic calendar, and today is the 18th of Muharram in the year 1423, but that doesn't stop people from joining in the April fun. On April 1 last year, a Kuwaiti newspaper told its readers that the Kuwait Towers - concrete spires supporting giant spheres - were about to be moved from the spot where they have stood for 20 years opposite the Emir's palace and transported to a tribal area as part of a rural development plan. Crowds of people turned up to watch the moving operation and others phoned the newspaper to complain about this assault on a national landmark. The idea was plainly ludicrous - the tallest of the three towers is 613ft (187m) high - but it might just be credible in Kuwait where outrageous expense is rarely an obstacle to anything. Good April fool jokes rely on stories that are far-fetched but just plausible enough for people to be taken in by them. They should also cause amusement once the truth is known - which is where Saddam Hussein's son, Uday, went wrong last year. A front-page story in his newspaper, Babel, announced huge increases in food rations for the Iraqi people. A note on the back page informed readers that it wasn't true. Perhaps I've missed the joke, but I can't imagine many Iraqis would find that very funny. The Syrian government daily, Tishrin, played a similar cruel trick last April when it announced salary increases for civil servants and a $60-a-month payment to several million unemployed people. The paper then added what - for Syria - was a risque touch of satire. Citing "private sources that had taken part in a secret meeting", it said the Syrian authorities had "studied ways of repatriating some $50bn stolen from state coffers and placed in foreign bank accounts". "The government has decided to reopen files on people implicated in major corruption scandals with a view to putting them on trial," it continued. In neighbouring Jordan, the official news agency, Petra, became so excited by this news that it relayed the story to a wider audience - only to issue a correction a few hours later when it realised it had been hoaxed. For journalists, this is one of the delights of April Fools' Day, because it embarrasses those who regurgitate other people's work without rechecking the facts. An April fool story in the Guardian a few years ago, which contained several broad hints that it was entirely fictitious, turned up in a Spanish newspaper around April 6, rewritten as a serious news item. Occasionally such jokes are taken so seriously that they get totally out of hand, as happened in Lebanon last year. It apparently began with an ordinary April fool joke which succeeded in hoodwinking four science students at the Lebanese University. A couple of weeks later, the victims of the joke decided to take their revenge and spread a story that a Syrian intelligence agent had kidnapped four students from the university campus. Syrian involvement in Lebanon is always a delicate issue, and the affair led to the temporary closure of the university, the arrest of the student pranksters and a personal intervention from Lebanon's defence minister. The Lebanese authorities were not the only ones who failed to see the funny side. On March 31 last year, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia issued a warning to Muslims not to participate in April foolery, which he described as "a practice of the unbelievers". "It is prohibited because lying is prohibited at all times and under all conditions; except for three," he said. (The three exceptions, according to the mufti, are in times of war, to bring reconciliation between people, or to protect the honour of a husband or wife.) The Saudi religious authorities also take a stern view of Valentine's Day which - although named after a Christian saint - has become popular among young people in the kingdom. This year on February 14, the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Evil banned the sale of red roses, teddy bears and greeting cards associated with the occasion. Banning Valentine's Day fits with the general policy of discouraging relationships between men and women outside marriage, but April Fools' Day is not a Christian festival and has no religious significance. It did, however, originate in Christian countries. The usual explanation is that it began shortly after1562, when Pope Gregory introduced a new calendar and moved the start of the year from April 1 to January 1. News travelled slowly in those days, and it took years for some people to realise, or accept, that the calendar had changed - with the result that they continued to hold new year festivities on April 1. Those who had adapted to the change more quickly regarded such people as stupid and started playing tricks on them. Religious scholars may regard April foolery as un-Islamic frivolity, but if it teaches us to question what we're told, there ought to be more of it, not less. Especially in the Middle East, where governments fool people all year round with scant regard for the Grand Mufti's rules on lying. As the American wit Mark Twain observed, April Fools' Day is "the day upon which we are reminded of what we are on the other three hundred and sixty-four". * Answer: 1 and 2 are true; 3 is false. [brian.whitaker@guardian.co.uk] ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************