***************************************************************** 09/03/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.225 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 Summit agreement is struck, but US blocks deal on clean energy 2 AU: Nations commit to clean water - 3 U.K. N-industry faces meltdown 4 Japan: 4 yrs sought for ex-boss of N-plant 5 Russian Nuke Technicians Flood Iran for Final Push at Bushehr Reacto 6 Japanese Nuclear Officials Resign 7 Greenpeace activists punished for protest 8 Iran Says Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant Develops Well 9 AU: We're enviro villains: Brown 10 TEPCO heads to roll; inspections start 11 U.S. sees nuclear as renewable energy* 12 Nuclear policies to stay intact despite TEPCO trouble 13 Ireland forms EU anti-nuclear alliance * NUCLEAR REACTORS 14 US: TVA nuclear plant insurance not up since 9-11 15 TEPCO shuts down reactor after suspected fuel leak 16 Japan: Nuclear reactor shut down NUCLEAR SAFETY 17 US: Sick workers plead with Congress to expand aid program 18 US: State rejects free pills for use after nuclear disaster 19 Montenegro cleaning up radioactive legacy of war 20 Ibaraki couple file damages suit over 1999 nuclear accident NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 21 US: NRC to Hold Public Meetings to Discuss New Environmental 22 US: State to sign new contract for lawyers to fight nuke dump 23 US: Op: Hartsville residents should read up on LES, enriched uranium NUCLEAR WEAPONS 24 [southnews] The nuke-free guided tour of Iraq 25 OP: Crippling capability should be enough 26 Inside Saddam's weapons factory 27 Navy Begins New Vieques Exercises 28 Councillor arrested over nuclear protest 29 Serbian brothers and US allies bring three nuclear bombs to Russia 30 Outside View: Indo-Pakistan nuclear myth* US DEPT. OF ENERGY 31 Y-12, ORNL workers not getting fair shake 32 Wamp: DOE funds will reinvigorate OR site 33 ORNL helps build homeland security 34 Breakthrough - DOE finally takes action OTHER NUCLEAR ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Summit agreement is struck, but US blocks deal on clean energy Independent.co.uk 03 September 2002 13:47 BDST By Geoffrey Lean in Johannesburg Oil nations 'guilty of nuclear blackmail' over energy targets 'Politicians come, but nothing changes' Anti-West anger at summit as Mugabe rounds on Blair Leading article: Mr Blair's speech underlines the weakness of this summit Tony Blair: Kyoto must be ratified by everyone Ministers and heads of state agreed a new plan of action last night for tackling poverty and saving the environment, but, in a rebuff for Tony Blair, they did not include a target for increasing renewable energy. An "unholy alliance" of oil exporting countries and the United States, backed by Japan, succeeded in frustrating all attempts to set a target and managed to include clauses promoting nuclear power and fossil fuels that are the main cause of global warming. The decision is a body blow to the credibility of the summit, as the target was probably the most important touchstone of whether it would make progress in tackling the twin crises of growing poverty and escalating environmental deterioration. The overall verdict must be that it has largely failed. But Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary, who led the British negotiators, told /The Independent/ last night: "I can genuinely say that I am delighted. We have a very strong plan of implementation." Margot Wallström, the European environment commissioner, said she was disappointed by the failure to get a renewable energy target. Steve Sawyer of Greenpeace said: "It is called a plan of action, but it is not much of a plan and there does not seem to be an awful lot of action." Renewable energy was an important yardstick of success because of, all the issues on the table at the summit, it could have done most to address the poverty and the environmental crises facing the planet. It is widely seen as the best way of bringing electricity to the Third World poor and it would drastically cut the two million deaths a year caused by breathing in smoke from burning wood and dung. It would also save the soil and, by reducing the amount of these traditional fuels taken from the land, it would combat global warming. In a personal initiative two years ago, Mr Blair persuaded his fellow G8 leaders to set up a task force to look at increasing the use of renewable energy. The group, co-chaired by Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, a former chairman of Shell, produced recommendations that would have brought clean renewable energy to one billion people by 2010. But Opec and the US sank that and all subsequent targets, including a plan backed by all of Latin America that would have quadrupled the world's share of clean renewable energy by the end of the decade. By last night, all that was left was a modest EU target that would have increased renewables by just 1 per cent over the decade, but that was rejected as well. Britain and the EU were unable to hold that line against the assault of the oil exporting countries and the oilmen in the White House. Some of the language of the text closely reflects Vice-President Dick Cheney's controversial energy plan. Britain was left with just two consolations. This is the first time energy has been included in such a plan; until now, Opec and the US have resisted even discussing it. And it included a paragraph agreeing to phase out energy subsidies "that inhibit sustainable development" ? but only "where appropriate". The collapse leaves as the only significant achievement of the summit the setting of a target to halve the number of people in the world without basic sanitation. The Tories and Liberal Democrats expressed disappointment. Sue Doughty, a member of the Commons Environmental Audit Committee, said: "These targets are worth more than nothing but less than something." Published 9/2/2002 12:34 PM JOHANNESBURG, South Africa, Sept. 2 (UPI) -- The U.S. delegation has managed to indirectly include nuclear power into a text promoting renewable energy at the U.N. sustainable development conference, further drawing the ire of environmental groups. Remi Parmentier, head of Greenpeace, on Monday called the move absolutely outrageous, saying the language proposed would open the way to increasing nuclear power. A paragraph in the main conference negotiating text is supposed to boost solar and wind energy, but has been amended by the United States and a few oil-producing G77 countries. Brazilian delegate Suami Coelho said, "The problem with this paragraph is that it doesn't specifically exclude nuclear, it has an open-ended reference to energy technologies." A U.S. delegation spokesman said, "It is fair to say we advocate all forms of energy technologies." Some environmental non-governmental organizations say that nuclear energy is unsafe and produces waste that lasts for millennia. Others disagree, saying that fewer people die from the use of nuclear fuel than from mining coal or drilling for oil. Furthermore, pro-technology advocates say, nuclear energy does not contribute to global warming. In some countries, such as France, nuclear energy provides a majority of the electrical power, and around the world it provides about 7 percent. But the question of whether nuclear power is relevant for developing countries is complicated. According to South African NGO energy specialist Kelvin Kemm "developing countries are often incapable of widely using coal, oil and gas because they do not have the wealth to build significant power-grid systems, even when they can afford a power station." And it's the grids that are required to transmit electricity from these fossil fuel power stations to towns and villages across Africa. As a result, rural communities often use biomass fuels such as wood and dung. In small amounts these biomass fuels are sustainable, but NGOs are concerned that for large communities they are environmentally destructive, since they lead to deforestation. They also pose health hazards when burned in rural houses. More than 4 million people die from respiratory diseases, which are exacerbated by indoor fires. As a result, Kemm and many energy economists see an advantage for developing countries in using fuels that are less harmful to environment and health, but don't require grid systems. In an amazing example of unanimity all NGOs think that there is room for technologies like solar energy as a solution. The discrepancy comes in the scope of these fuels in the future. The pro-market NGOs see solar energy as a bridge fuel, which will fall by the way side when poor countries get richer. At that point these countries will develop grids and then use whatever fuel sources are most economic, which they say, is likely to be fossil fuels. The anti-globalization NGOs say that solar energy should not be regarded as just a bridge fuel but is in fact the fuel of the future. However, Kemm suggests that nuclear power could be a bridge fuel as well for these nations. New forms of nuclear power station, which are being developed in South Africa, are, he claims, inherently safe. The Pebble Bed Reactor, as it's known, is much smaller in size than old style nuclear power stations and produces the energy requirement of a small town. It also can be shut down by satellite, should the plant be attacked, he says. He admits it's an expensive fuel, and not available for rural areas, only towns, but claims the technology is affordable with aid. Although it may well be too expensive for the rest of Africa, it is being exported to Europe, the United States, China and Cuba. The nuclear lobby is obviously arguing vigorously that this technology should be considered renewable because it could massively expand their markets. And they go further than Kemm and argue that nuclear is not only a bridge fuel for Africa, but the solution to climate change. Experienced conference delegates inform United Press International that the energy paragraph, which sparked the argument, is likely to be amended. But for the moment it stands and the green groups are dismayed. "This proposal, which could be seen as opening the door for more nukes, is making a farce of this entire summit," said Greenpeace's Parmentier. Kemm, along with the pro-market NGOs, argue that Africans, rather than outside groups, should decide what fuels mix they use in the future. Copyright © 2002 United Press International ***************************************************************** 12 Nuclear policies to stay intact despite TEPCO trouble Tuesday, September 3, 2002 at 09:30 JST TOKYO ? Japan will maintain its nuclear power policy and ensure safety, despite confirmation by Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) that its employees have falsified reports on damage at nuclear power plants since 1986, top government spokesman Yasuo Fukuda said Monday. "We have no plan whatsoever at this moment to review the policy. Ensuring safety is of first priority, and nothing, including the environment and costs, is more important than ensuring safety," the chief cabinet secretary said at a news conference. Earlier Monday, TEPCO announced that its president and chairman ? Nobuya Minami and Hiroshi Araki ? will resign to take the blame for cover-ups of damage at the utility's nuclear power plants. Speaking at a news conference, Minami admitted his company's employees were indeed involved in the cover-ups, adding TEPCO will announce a set of measures to punish those responsible after its full internal investigations are completed. (Kyodo News) Japan Today Discussion ***************************************************************** 13 Ireland forms EU anti-nuclear alliance * online.ie home The Irish Examiner 03 Sep 2002/ *By Carl O'Brien, Johannesburg* IRELAND has formed an alliance with five other European Union countries in a bid to limit the expansion of nuclear energy. The Government has signed a joint letter, seen by the Irish Examiner, which calls on the Brussels Environment Commissioner not to include nuclear power as part of an initiative to promote clean energy around the world. The inclusion of the other signatories Germany, Austria, Belgium, Denmark and Greece significantly strengthens Ireland's attempts to build up an anti-nuclear stance within the EU. The matter arose at the Earth Summit talks where nations are arguing over a target for renewable energy in a bid to increase its usage over the next decade. EU members such as Britain and France have been calling for nuclear energy to be included in this target, which would pave the way for greater use of nuclear energy around the world. But the letter says the inclusion of this is "definitely not in line with the positions taken by the EU so far" and insists that only "environmentally sound" energies should be considered. A spokesman for Environment Minister Martin Cullen, who played a role in drafting the letter, said it was a major step forward in their campaign against nuclear power. "It's in Ireland's interests to form a political alliance among like-minded countries which have concerns over nuclear energy," the spokesman said. "By bringing fellow EU member states on board, the action should strengthen our goal of ending unacceptable risks such as Sellafield." The alliance could also prove valuable to Ireland as further EU treaties governing areas such as nuclear waste disposal are drawn up. Last year, Ireland joined with Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden in objecting to the commissioning of a 550 million MOX reprocessing facility at Sellafield. The Government also argued against the plant before the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea in Hamburg. However, the British Government has insisted that the plant, which supports thousands of jobs in the Cumbria area, is completely safe. The latest flare-up over Sellafield involves the transport of two shipments of nuclear fuel from Japan to Britain through the Irish Sea. Nuclear rods were rejected by the Japanese authorities on safety grounds after it was discovered that British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) had falsified quality control records relating to them at Sellafield. The ships carrying the materials have been in transit for some time and are due to arrive in the Irish Sea shortly The Examiner Logo ***************************************************************** 14 TVA nuclear plant insurance not up since 9-11 By Richard Powelson, News-Sentinel Washington bureau September 3, 2002 The Tennessee Valley Authority has not increased insurance coverage for its three nuclear power plants since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks or since President Bush disclosed in January that U.S. nuclear power plant diagrams were found in caves used by terrorists in Afghanistan. TVA's current property casualty insurance allows up to $1.06 billion in coverage per site, plus an extra $1 billion limit spread between all three plants. Last year TVA estimated the value of two of its nuclear plants at well above their insured limit - Watts Bar at $6 billion and Browns Ferry at $2.8 billion. TVA Director Bill Baxter said the Knoxville-based, federal wholesale power producer is reviewing risks and insurance options based on terrorism activity. Nearly all of Tennessee and parts of six adjoining states receive electricity from TVA plants. "It's a new world that we're living in today," Baxter said. "I think everybody is re-examining what are insurable risks. There is a lot of discussion within the industry. How do you measure that risk? What part is insurable? What part would the federal government need to step up on? What part do you self-insure on? Legitimately, all of those things are being re-examined in the light of Sept. 11." TVA should try to insure its nuclear plants at full value so it could afford to replace the power should nuclear plants be heavily damaged by natural or man-made attacks, said Stephen Smith, executive director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy in Knoxville. The organization spends much time studying TVA's power systems and their effect on the environment. "Post-September 11, you should have greater investment in security and greater investment in things like insurance," Smith said. "With the ongoing sophistication and threats from terrorism ... the likelihood of a nuclear plant attack has dramatically increased. They couldn't build another nuclear plant for $2.06 billion (insurance coverage), but they could replace it with another form of power, like natural gas." TVA is part of a national insurance pool of operators of 103 nuclear reactors in 31 states. TVA has five functioning reactors. The mutual plan sells policies offering up to $2.75 billion of casualty coverage per site, plus up to $500 million more for business interruption. The fund has a policy of covering up to two full-loss events nationally in 12 months - or up to $6.4 billion, said Jim Smith, chief financial officer of the plan called Nuclear Electric Insurance Ltd. That limit covers any casualty, such as fire or tornado, but not terrorism, he said. Since Sept. 11, terrorism coverage has been limited to a total of $3.2 billion from the pool within 12 months, Smith said, plus whatever could be obtained from private reinsurance coverage and federal funds. It is unknown how much would come from the two latter categories, he said. TVA normally pays $5.5 million a year for its nuclear insurance. But it and other insured members could be required to pay up to 10 times the annual premium in an emergency, he said. Jim Smith said nuclear plants are fairly safe from terrorist attacks. "The probability of a nuclear accident has not changed as the result of 9-11," he said. "What has changed is the threat of terrorism. Most terrorist attacks will not penetrate the reactor" due to heavily reinforced containment structures of reinforced concrete and steel liners. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission placed all nuclear plants on mandatory Level III security, the highest level, after Sept. 11. They have remained at that high security since then. The agency is studying whether to prescribe a new, even higher level of security for certain situations. The nuclear industry, through its trade group called the Nuclear Energy Institute, has been following federal legislation that would cover uninsured losses at high levels if caused by terrorism against any U.S. business. The Senate has passed a bill that would provide up to $100 billion in one year for uninsured losses. But the House passed a bill that would provide federal loans for such losses that must be paid back. Leaders in both bodies are exploring a compromise. TVA manager Vicki Harkleroad, who handles the agency's insurance, said TVA long has self-insured its non-nuclear power plants but is studying whether to buy private insurance in light of world events. Nuclear plant coverage was not increased after Sept. 11 or the January disclosure of finding nuclear-plant diagrams in a terrorist cave in Afghanistan, she said, because TVA has tight security and assumes low probability of a terrorist attack at one of its sites. Also, the insurance is meant primarily to meet federal mandates for handling damage to a reactor, any decontamination or permanent shutdown and is not intended to cover full value to replace lost power, she said. "There's not $6 billion of nuclear property insurance available in the marketplace" for a plant like Watts Bar, Harkleroad said. She said terrorism is a concern and an attack on a U.S. nuclear plant is not impossible. "I certainly hope it's improbable that they would attack any place else in the United States," Harkleroad said. Baxter said he feels "very good" about TVA's extra security at its nuclear plants, which costs "several million more dollars" a year. How likely in his mind is a terrorist attack on a U.S. nuclear plant? "I don't think it's wise to speculate on it," Baxter said. "You do everything that a prudent person can possibly do, and that's it. You don't speculate about that kind of thing." Richard Powelson may be contacted at 202-408-2727 or powelsonr@shns.com Copyright 2002 The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 15 TEPCO shuts down reactor after suspected fuel leak Tuesday September 3, 3:43 PM Tokyo Electric Power Co. Inc. (TEPCO) has shut down a nuclear reactor because of a suspected fuel leak, hours after its top directors offered to resign over a cover-up of faults at nuclear plants. "An extremely small amount of radioactive substance was detected in exhaust from the building," TEPCO said Tuesday. "But there was no radiation leakage beyond the premises of the plant," as radiation sensors, set up around the perimeter of the plant, showed no change, spokesman Akio Kobayashi said. The world's largest private power company completed the manual shut-down of the Number Two reactor at the Fukushima Number Two nuclear power plant, 200 kilometres (124 miles) northeast of Tokyo, at 2:30 am (17:30 GMT, Monday). The 1.1-million-kilowatt water reactor was one of those for which the check-up records had been falsified to cover up cracks and other damage, the company confirmed. The spokesman said the company believed there was "no particular linkage" between the crack in a core structure of the reactor that had been concealed in the inspection reports and the suspected fuel leakage. It was unclear when the reactor would resume operating, he said. The trade ministry's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said last week that TEPCO was suspected of falsifying check-up records on its nuclear plants from the late 1980s to the early 1990s. The 29 suspicious records concern inspections of TEPCO's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant in Niigata, 250 kilometres (155 miles) north of Tokyo, as well as the Number One and Number Two Fukushima nuclear plants. President Nobuya Minami on Monday announced he would resign this month along with the company chairman, vice president and two advisors. "It is almost certain that facts were covered up or altered with the involvement of our employees," Minami told a news conference Monday. Speaking at a meeting of the nuclear safety committee at the Cabinet Office on Tuesday, the president said "quite many officials were directly involved" in the falsification, Jiji Press news agency said. Meanwhile, another power company said a radiation leak occurred in southwestern Japan on Monday. Shikoku Electric Power Co. Inc. said it detected "a slight leakage" of radioactive cooling water from a pipe at the Ikata nuclear power plant. Copyright © 2002 AFP. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 16 Japan: Nuclear reactor shut down News.com.au - (By Miwa Suzuki in Tokyo, ) 03Sep02 THE scandal-hit Tokyo Electric Power Co Inc (TEPCO) said today it had shut down a nuclear reactor in northern Japan because of a suspected fuel leak. "An extremely small amount of radioactive substance was detected in exhaust from the building," TEPCO said, announcing more bad news for the company, hours after its top executives offered to resign over falsifying inspection records at nuclear plants. "But there was no radiation leakage beyond the premises of the plant," as radiation sensors, set up around the perimeter of the plant, showed no change, spokesman Akio Kobayashi said. The world's largest private power company completed the manual shut-down of the Number Two reactor at the Fukushima Number Two nuclear power plant, 200 kilometres north-east of Tokyo, at 2.30am (3.30am AEST). The 1.1 million kilowatt water reactor was one of those for which the inspection records had been falsified to cover up cracks and other damage, the company confirmed. TEPCO decided to shut it down as a dust monitor showed an unusually high level of radiation late yesterday, followed by an alarm signal from a radiation sensor indicating the possibility of a fuel leak, Kobayashi said. But the spokesman said the company believed there was "no particular linkage" between the crack in a core structure of the reactor that had been concealed in the inspection reports and the suspected fuel leakage, although a full investigation had yet to be done. It was unclear when the reactor would resume operating, he said. The trade ministry's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency said last week that TEPCO was suspected of falsifying inspection records on its nuclear plants from the late 1980s to the early 1990s. The 29 suspicious records concern inspections of TEPCO's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant in Niigata, 250km north of Tokyo, as well as the Number One and Number Two Fukushima nuclear plants. Yesterday TEPCO's President Nobuya Minami announced he would resign this month along with the company chairman, vice president and two advisers. "It is almost certain that facts were covered up or altered with the involvement of our employees," Minami told a news conference. TEPCO also said it would start renewed inspections on five reactors with possible cracks by shutting them down for around 50 days each. The Fukushima Number Two reactor was one of the five. The company began its inspection by shutting down the Number One reactor at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant today. Separate inspections by the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency separately continued for a second day at the plants in Fukushima and Niigata prefectures. This report appears on news.com.au. ***************************************************************** 17 Sick workers plead with Congress to expand aid program By Nancy Zuckerbrod, Associated Press September 3, 2002 WASHINGTON - Sick nuclear weapons workers say a new federal program aimed at compensating them for on-the-job exposure to toxic substances will leave many without the help they need, and they want Congress to do something about it. Under the program, the Energy Department will reverse a decades-old policy and help people who worked for contractors at government weapons plants file for assistance under the nation's state worker compensation programs. Workers exposed to toxic substances, such as asbestos and harsh chemicals, were not included in a year-old program in which the government agreed to compensate nuclear workers sickened by cancer-causing radiation or silica and beryllium, which cause lung problems. The Energy Department plans to tell contractors not to oppose claims if government-appointed medical panels determine people got sick while working at DOE nuclear facilities. The agency will reimburse contractors who pay the compensation and will no longer reimburse them for fighting the claims. Historically, the workers have had trouble getting help through state worker compensation, in part because contractors have put on vigorous defenses. But circumstances at roughly half the nation's nuclear facilities could still make it extremely difficult for the workers to get help. The Energy Department currently has no authority to pay the claims outright, since the workers were not technically federal employees. And problems exist at sites where no contractors are left or where contractors are not self-insured but have bought worker compensation insurance from a private company. The Energy Department has no contractual relationship with the private insurers and cannot instruct them to pay the claims. Similarly, if contractors get worker compensation insurance by paying into state-run insurance funds, the Energy Department has no authority to instruct the state funds to pay compensation claims. That's a problem in Nevada, Ohio and Washington - all states with Energy Department plants. Labor advocates say it is wrong for workers who built the nation's bombs across the country to be treated differently from one another. Nuclear worker Rod Cook, who believes he was exposed to asbestos at the government's uranium plant in Paducah, Ky., says he doesn't think he should have to go without compensation just because there is no government contractor left there. USEC Inc. leases the western Kentucky plant from the Energy Department to produce nuclear fuel for commercial use. But since it isn't a government contractor, the Energy Department cannot tell the company to pay the claims. Doctors recently removed part of Cook's lung and 7 feet of tissue around his chest cavity because of asbestos exposure. "When I hired in, I told them I'd give them 40 hours of work for 40 hours of pay. I didn't tell them I'd give them part of my lung," he said. "Somehow, I'd like to be compensated by somebody." Labor advocates are lobbying Congress to solve the problem by requiring the federal government to pay the claims directly, guaranteeing all nuclear workers exposed to toxic substances will receive compensation if doctors' panels determine their jobs made them sick. It's not fair that people exposed to toxic chemicals and other dangerous substances were left out of the new program, said Janet Michel, who worked at the now-shuttered uranium facility at the Oak Ridge nuclear facility. "If you have found your illness is caused by your work place, then you shouldn't be treated any differently than someone who was exposed to beryllium or silica," said Michel, who suffers from numerous ailments and who says she has tested positive for cyanide, mercury and nickel exposure. Government officials expect workers at Oak Ridge to generally fare better under the new program than those at some of the agency's other facilities. The Oak Ridge contractors are self-insured. In addition, their agreements with the government state that they will process claims against former site contractors. The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 State rejects free pills for use after nuclear disaster HoustonChronicle.com - Sept. 3, 2002, 9:19AM Associated Press FORT WORTH -- Fearing that potassium iodide pills would provide a false sense of security during a nuclear accident or attack, Texas officials have decided not to order the free cancer-blocking pills for residents near the Glen Rose and Bay City area nuclear plants. "Honestly, a rapid, timely evacuation is the best way to protect public health in the event of an accident," Arthur Tate, director of the division of compliance and inspection for the Texas Department of Health, said in Sunday's editions of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Potassium iodide, a salt, can protect against thyroid cancer in the event of a nuclear accident. The medication fills a person's thyroid so there is no room for the radioactive material to be absorbed. At least 16 other states, half of those that have nuclear power plants, have taken advantage of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's offer to provide the pills for residents living within a 10-mile radius of a nuclear plant. Advocates said that used in conjunction with evacuation, the pills can provide prevention against thyroid cancer. But, Tate said, the pills protect against only one type of radiation -- radioactive iodine. He said they are not considered an effective defense against a so-called "dirty bomb," which is likely to be contaminated by a variety of radioactive materials. In the case of an accident or attack, radioactive iodine will probably be only one harmful component of the plume, he said. "This has been looked at by a lot of people as an anti-radiation drug and that is just not the case," he said. Texas keeps the pills on hand for emergency workers at both nuclear plant sites, as well as for prisoners, nursing-home residents and others who can't be moved easily, Tate said. When the Nuclear Regulatory Commission made its post-Sept. 11 offer of the free pills, health officials consulted with several groups, including local officials near the power plants -- the Comanche Peak site near Glen Rose in North Texas and the South Texas Project plant near Bay City -- before making the decision not to order any, Tate said. By late August, more than 9 million of the free pills had been requested by states, said Roger Hannah, a commission spokesman. The cost of supplying the pills, which have a shelf life of at least five years, has been about $1.6 million, he said. Some doctors said the pills should be distributed beyond a 10-mile limit. American Thyroid Association officials, pointing out that it's unclear how far nuclear fallout would spread, recommend distributing the pills in advance to residents living within a 50-mile radius. Within 200 miles, the pills should be stockpiled at schools, post offices, hospitals and other locations that can easily be accessed, the association said. ***************************************************************** 19 Montenegro cleaning up radioactive legacy of war IHT: Marlise Simons The New York Times Tuesday, September 3, 2002 U.S. fired uranium-tipped bullets at area KOTOR, Montenegro In the early morning, the scientists come to work on a small tongue of land with one of the loveliest views along the Mediterranean. Behind them is the stunning bay of Kotor and its crown of steep mountains; ahead is the shimmer of the open sea, a few hours' sail from Italy. But the men hunch down, their eyes fixed on the ground. They scoop up bits of soil and rock, moving slowly and meticulously like archaeologists. Protective clothing covers them from head to toe. The cape, closed off to tourists, is marked with signs saying: "Radioactive danger. Trespassing Forbidden." The scientists from Montenegro are searching for war debris, specifically bullets coated with slightly radioactive depleted uranium. U.S. warplanes fired about 480 rounds at the cape on the final day of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's 1999 air campaign against Yugoslavia, according to NATO records. No one was killed. But to the scientists, the attack is inexplicable. The only tokens of past life are a collapsed bunker and some ruined walls more than a century old, leftovers from the Austro-Hungarian Empire. "We don't understand why anyone would want to attack and contaminate the place on the last day of the war," said Perko Vukotic, a professor of nuclear physics at the University of Montenegro at Podgorica who heads the 12-man cleanup team. The group has collected scores of bullets and fragments, some buried deep in the soil. But the main problem, they say, is that casings have broken and many uranium parts have disintegrated and turned into potentially toxic dust. "Water corrodes the uranium and it becomes powdery," said Vukotic. "It crumbles as easily as cigarette ash and spreads in the soil. People can touch it or inhale it. The wind blows it around." The work in Montenegro, the little state that with Serbia makes up the Federation of Yugoslavia, is the first thorough cleanup of uranium in the Balkans. NATO has disclosed that it fired thousands of rounds of munitions with tips of depleted uranium against targets in Bosnia in 1995 and in Serbia and Montenegro in 1999. Uranium is one of the hardest metals and is therefore suitable for penetrating targets like tanks. Depleted of its most radioactive part for use in nuclear fuel, the material still emits low-level radiation. There have been heated debates in Europe over the use of this ammunition in the Balkans. The main concern was the risk that the material could have lasting ill effects on people and the environment. Pentagon and NATO officials acknowledge that depleted uranium, like other heavy metals, can be toxic, but insist that its low-level radiation is not harmful. Many civilian specialists agree, but some research in the United States, Canada and Britain has shown that uranium particles can be inhaled, enter the bloodstream and lodge in the bone, where they can deliver low but steady and potentially harmful radiation. There is no agreement on what is a harmful dose and some NATO countries want the ammunition banned. "We had to make a choice, because nobody knows the truth," Vukotic said. "Either we say nothing about this and close Cape Arza, or we decontaminate it." Industries that handle depleted uranium use special precautions to store it, he said. The team is closely following the recommendations of the United Nations Environment Program, which conducted the only comprehensive study of the environmental impact of the Balkan wars. In one of its reports, it said that "given the considerable scientific uncertainties" about long-term behavior of depleted uranium, the authorities should give the "highest priority" to forbidding public access, collecting and removing pieces, decontaminating areas where possible, and storing the material safely. Ground water should be monitored, the UN agency said. The latest report, in March, said that, surprisingly, depleted uranium particles were "still in the air two years after the conflict's end." In Brussels, a NATO spokesman said that "480 rounds were fired at a legitimate target on the cape, but we do not keep the targeting records." Villagers said that there was nothing to attack and that they had not seen soldiers around the site for over a decade. A Western military official said he believed the site had a surveillance radar, but conceded that this would have drawn fire at the start and not at the end of the air campaign. Serbia was hit by about 3,500 rounds of depleted uranium, and its cleanup has only just begun. Copyright © 2002 the International Herald Tribune All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 20 Ibaraki couple file damages suit over 1999 nuclear accident Tuesday, September 3, 2002 at 17:30 JST MITO ? A couple in Hitachi, Ibaraki Prefecture, filed a suit Tuesday with the Mito District Court against nuclear processing firm JCO Co. and its parent company seeking 60 million yen in compensation for endangering their health as a result of Japan's worst nuclear accident in 1999. Shoichi Oizumi, 73, and his 62-year-old wife Keiko are the first local residents to file a civil suit against JCO and Sumitomo Metal Mining Co over radiation exposure caused by the nuclear accident. (Kyodo News) Japan Today Discussion ***************************************************************** 21 NRC to Hold Public Meetings to Discuss New Environmental Information on Proposed MOX Nuclear Facility NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 103 - 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. 02-103 September 3, 2002 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold public meetings September 17-19, in South Carolina, Georgia and North Carolina to discuss environmental impacts of the proposed Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility contained in a report by the Department of Energys contractor, Duke Cogema Stone & Webster (DCS). The DOE is proposing to construct the MOX facility at its Savannah River site near Aiken, South Carolina. If NRC grants the license, DCS could build a MOX facility that would convert surplus weapons-grade plutonium, supplied by the Department of Energy, into fuel for use in a limited number of commercial nuclear power reactors. Commercial nuclear power plants in the United States currently use only uranium as fuel; the mixed oxide fuel would be a combination of uranium and plutonium. There would be no reprocessing or subsequent reuse of the spent fuel. Converting weapons-grade plutonium into MOX fuel helps advance the cause of nonproliferation by converting the material into a form unsuitable for use in weapons. The DOE announced in January that it would not build and operate the Plutonium Immobilization Plant as part of its hybrid approach for surplus weapons plutonium disposition. Instead, DOE decided that 34 metric tons of surplus weapons plutonium would be converted to MOX fuel at the proposed MOX facility. This decision resulted in design changes to the proposed facility, which affect the scope of NRCs Draft Environmental Impact Statement, and required DCS to submit a revised environmental report for NRC review. The revised environmental report will be discussed at the public meetings. The September 17 meeting will be held at the North Augusta Community Center, located at 495 Brookside Avenue, North Augusta, South Carolina; the September 18 meeting will be held at the Coastal Georgia Center, located at 305 Fahm Street, Savannah, Georgia; and the September 19 meeting will be held at the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center, located at 600 E. Fourth Street, Charlotte, North Carolina. All three meetings will be held from 7 p.m. until 10 p.m. and will include an opportunity for the NRC staff to address questions and comments from the public. Information on the revised environmental report and other documents associated with the proposed MOX project are available through the NRCs MOX web page at http://www.nrc.gov/materials/fuel-cycle-fac/mox/licensing.html. Documents may also be obtained by contacting NRCs Public Document Room at 301-415-4737 or 1-800-397-4209. For general information on the environmental review process, contact Tim Harris at 301-415-6613. For technical information associated with the proposed MOX facility, contact Tim Johnson at 301-415-7299 or Drew Persinko at 301-415-6522. ***************************************************************** 22 State to sign new contract for lawyers to fight nuke dump Las Vegas SUN: Today: September 03, 2002 at 11:14:54 PDT By Cy Ryan SUN CAPITAL BUREAU CARSON CITY -- State officials are ready to sign a new $4 million contract for high-priced private attorneys who will lead the fight against a nuclear dumpsite at Yucca Mountain. The state Board of Examiners will be asked Thursday to approve the contract with Egan &Associates, a McLean, Va., law firm that specializes in nuclear issues. Joe Egan, who heads the firm, said last week he was so confident of winning that he would accept payment only if the repository was stopped. Bob Loux, director of the state Office of Nuclear Projects, said although Egan offered this deal, the state agency is not permitted to sign a contingency fee contract. Loux said the $4 million contract supersedes a previous $2.5 million agreement with Egan approved in September 2001 for three years. The contract sets a maximum amount the state can spend. The new contract is expected to cover expenses for the coming year at Egan's rate of $395 an hour, Loux said. "All the cases that have been filed will be heard this year," Loux said. That will increase the hours Egan will put in for the state, he said. Meanwhile, one of Nevada's lawsuits made progress last week. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit declined to dismiss the state's challenge of Nuclear Regulatory Commission rules for licensing a planned repository. The court rejected the government's motion to dismiss the case on Thursday, Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa said. A merits panel will review the state's reasons for the challenge to the licensing guidelines. The state is objecting to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission allowing the Energy Department to rely on preventing radiation from escaping the repository by man-made barriers, rather than using the mountain's natural geologic features to contain it. Nevada attorneys are also arguing that current rules only require the department to contain wastes for 10,000 years, when nuclear wastes are dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years. Nevada is preparing other legal actions. Charles Cooper, a deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department during the Reagan administration, is preparing a lawsuit to test the constitutionality of the Yucca Mountain project. He will earn $450 an hour under a subcontract with his law firm, Cooper &Kirk. Bill Briggs, a former solicitor for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, will be paid $350 an hour to help the state in its fight to stop the Energy Department from getting a license to build from the regulatory commission. His compensation will come via a subcontract with Ross, Dixon &Bell. Other attorneys involved are: Howard Shapar at $435 an hour; Charles Fitzpatrick, $370 an hour; Robert Cynkar, $340 an hour; Vincent Colatriano, $295 an hour; Michael Stine, $290 an hour; and Michael O'Mealia, $140 an hour. The nuclear projects office also has a contract with Antonio Rossmann, a San Francisco lawyer, for $300,000 a year. He charges $300 an hour, and his associate Roger Moore bills at $210 an hour. Rossmann is considered an expert on land use issues. Del Papa said the Energy Department intends to spend more than $16 million alone in its legal effort to gain a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This state money comes from funds approved by the Legislature. Sun reporter Mary Manning contributed to this report. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 23 Op: Hartsville residents should read up on LES, enriched uranium The Oak Ridger Online - Monday, September 2, 2002 The (Nashville) Tennessean , Aug. 27 Skepticism would be a healthy reaction for Hartsville residents, who are now absorbing the idea that their community could be home to a uranium enrichment facility. Louisiana Energy Services, a consortium led by British-based Urenco and including Duke Power, wants to build the $1.1 billion plant. Enriched uranium, which is created by a centrifugal process, is used to fuel nuclear power plants, which provide about 20 percent of the nation's energy. The fuel is far less potent than weapons-grade uranium. The lure of this particular project is employment. LES says that the construction of the plant would employ 400 workers and 250 permanent employees would be needed to operate the plant. In these times, the prospect of new jobs is a powerful incentive in any community. Yet communities know that employment estimates need to be balanced with other considerations. What level of pay will the jobs command? Will the jobs go to local residents or will new workers be brought in to fill them? This particular project also raises other considerations involving public safety, environmental protection and land use. Advocates of nuclear energy say that a nuclear fuel facility of this type poses no more danger than other energy plants and that nuclear energy is far less damaging to the environment. They also correctly point out that until the United States shows some inclination to curb its energy use, it must contend with the byproducts of energy production. While they may be right about the safety of nuclear, the American public doesn't seem convinced. For now, Hartsville's best reaction is to read up on LES and enriched uranium and to make a community-wide pledge to control its own destiny and protect its quality of life. [http://www.oakridger.com/dailydouble] [http://www.oakridger.com] All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 24 [southnews] The nuke-free guided tour of Iraq Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 17:50:26 -0500 (CDT) 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/MVfIAA/7gSolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ---------- The nuke-free guided tour of Iraq By Paul McGeough, Herald Correspondent in Baghdad September 4 2002 Akashat is a long way to go to see something that is not there. After three hours in a rattling Russian helicopter, one of Baghdad's most senior weapons scientists clambered through the bomb-flattened remains of what he said had been Iraq's only uranium extraction plant, before declaring: "We don't do it any more." In the stifling heat of the desert, just a few kilometres short of where the Euphrates River crosses into Iraq from Syria, Mohammed Hussam Amin escorted the Herald to this dusty industrial complex which has emerged as a possible source of uranium for Saddam Hussein's feared new nuclear weapons program. United States and European intelligence agencies are focusing on the plant, which was a small part of a rambling fertiliser factory, because its past as a domestic supply of uranium means that United Nations sanctions would not necessarily have denied Saddam a vital ingredient. This reporter is not a scientist and he did not have access to the rest of the complex or to any of a string of other locations named as possible centres in a dispersed new Iraqi attempt to go nuclear. But this much of what Dr Amin said yesterday, seems to be true: More than 70 US air raids on the Company of Phosphate during the 1991 Gulf War destroyed the Belgian-supplied uranium extraction plant, which, in the seven years until the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, had produced 168 tonnes of yellowcake. Dr Amin, a missiles expert who now heads Iraq's weapons monitoring agency, had a folder of photos of the imposing structure that existed before the attacks; more that were taken of the shambles in the aftermath of the bombing; and an account of how the site had become the near-vacant lot it appeared to be yesterday, as the result of a clean-up supervised by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The hawkish majority in the Bush Administration is basing its call for a war against Iraq on claims that the US must strike first because there is "no doubt" that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and is prepared to use them against the US and its allies. Germany's Federal Intelligence Service last year raised suspicions about work it said was being done at Akashat, also referred to as Al Qaim, in a report predicting Saddam would be able to make a nuclear strike on his neighbours within three years, and on targets in Europe within five years. The extraction of uranium in conjunction with the mining of phosphate for the Akashat fertiliser works was raised at hearings by the US Senate's foreign relations committee last month. Richard Butler, the Australian who formerly headed the UN weapons inspection program, quoted to senators from an IAEA estimation that Saddam could produce a nuclear weapon in two years; and Khidir Hamza, an Iraqi nuclear scientist who defected in 1994, told the hearings Baghdad might be able to develop two or three nuclear warheads by 2005. But there are deep divisions in the ranks of Mr Butler's former inspection staff on Iraq's nuclear capacity. In March, the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, promised a dossier that would prove Iraq had gone beyond the stage of nuclear blueprints, but he has not released any. And when the US Vice-President, Dick Cheney, was pressed on the veracity of the intelligence last week, he said: "We cannot really judge." Recently, Mr Hamza spelt out the risks as he saw them: "Iraq already had a workable nuclear design when I left. A minor enrichment capability is all that was needed to provide the nuclear core for three weapons." But a "fact sheet" released by the IAEA in April stated that in the early 1990s it removed 22.4 kilograms of highly-enriched, weapons-grade uranium from Iraq. It says it was convinced the "intrusive" inspections it was able to carry out until 1998 had found all the weapons-grade uranium Iraq had at the time. The Vienna-based organisation also destroyed what it described as several "sophisticated facilities" where uranium could be enriched to make it "weapons-useable". Now, the fate of the inspection process that was derailed in 1998 is working its way back to the centre of the Iraq crisis. Flying in over parched earth, where the only shade away from the green ribbon of the banks of the Euphrates was the fleeting shadow cast by our ME-8 chopper, Dr Amin fleshed out the detail of what seemed to be a coy offer by Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister, Tariq Aziz, to accept a return to inspections. The US has argued recently that inspections are meaningless because of Iraqi deception, and Iraq has said more inspections are not an option because the US would use them to acquire targeting information for bombing. But when Mr Aziz was asked about the inspection process, he seemed to be leaving the door open when he said: "It is still under consideration." Amid the remaining missile-gouged walls and tangled steel reinforcing what was the site of the uranium extraction plant, Dr Amin yesterday spread his hands to take in the total destruction: "To talk about this having been rehabilitated to produce uranium is a false pretext. We have invited Mr Blair and Congress to bring their experts to look. That invitation still stands - and they can go anywhere they like." Anywhere? Saddam's palaces? "I said anywhere, but I didn't say the palaces. But let them produce quality evidence on why they want to go wherever they want to go; a satellite picture is not enough, they need to be able to demonstrate why they want to go to places. They can't come in here and dig up a dairy farm to look for a bunker under it unless they can show some evidence. If they were allowed to do that, it would become a never-ending process." A persistent question about the weapons programs that Saddam's officials insist have been abandoned is the fate of their specialist staff. When the Herald asked about the antecedents of the staff at a suspect pesticide factory on Sunday, we were told more than 80 per cent had come from al Muthanna, one of Iraq's old chemical and biological complexes. But when Dr Amin was asked yesterday about the estimated two dozen nuclear specialists known to have worked on nuclear weapons in the past, he said: "I don't know if we had 25 or 100 or 10 nuclear scientists, but none of them is working here. They would now be working in state enterprises to help the people - industry, education, agriculture. I think the IAEA knows where they are." Late in the afternoon the chopper fleet that took Dr Amin's party of about 40 to Akashat, headed back to Baghdad, putting down at the Al Rasheed military complex. And there on the tarmac, as our war-weary old helicopters shuddered to a halt, were another three bedraggled looking aircraft that weren't going anywhere in a hurry - the white-painted UN helicopters that have been sitting idle since the last international inspectors left Iraq in 1998. This story was found at: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/09/04/1031037092697.html ---------- Iraq refutes US and British allegations Baghdad, September 3, INA Director-general of the Iraqi National Monitoring Hussam Mohammed Amin refuted the false allegations released by US and British media and their allies concerning Iraqs actions to reconstruct a banned project. The media claimed that Iraq has being reconstructing a uranium extraction plant at Ukashat Phosphate Compound after 1998. Amin told a news conference that the plant had been producing the yellow salt from which uranium could be extracted up to 1991. He added that the amount in 1991 was about (168) tons of this yellow salt. This entire amount had been investigated by International Agency of Atomic Energy as well as the annual check. He pointed out that the vast destruction of the project in 1991 leave nothing but ruins. There is no project for any banned materials especially for extraction of uranium neither in Ukashat nor at any place in Iraq, Amin said, stressing such US fabrications could never distort facts before the world public opinion. Correspondents of Arab and foreign media and TV networks visited the site and saw firsthand that the site was destroyed since 1991 and there was no activity in the site. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: southnews-unsubscribe@egroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 25 OP: Crippling capability should be enough Rocky Mountain News: Opinion the Editor [letters@rockymountainnews.com] . Letters to the Editor, September 3 September 3, 2002 As part of a project on nuclear weapon proliferation in the late 1980s, I actually constructed a prototype nuclear weapon as a physics student at the University of Colorado. Components for crude nuclear weapons are easy to design and build for a few thousand dollars by anyone with adequate knowledge of physics and access to machine tools. What prevents people from making them in basements is the difficulty in acquiring uranium or plutonium fuel. As such, the Bush administration needs to explain forthrightly how they believe Iraq is obtaining nuclear material. The oft-stated 1- to 3-year timetable implies they believe Iraq is making it inside the country. But if that is the case, the necessary industrial infrastructure should have been identified by now, and the U.S. can (and should) destroy the production facilities without resorting to full-scale war. Israel did that when they bombed Iraq's Osirak reactor 20 years ago. If Iraq is buying material on the black market, then they presumably aren't on any timetable, as one or a few purchases ought to provide enough material to build a weapon immediately. In short, it appears that our administration is trying to make the case for escalation to full-scale war with Iraq by claiming that Saddam is about to complete a working nuclear bomb, but will not (or cannot) provide any evidence that Iraq has requisite weapons-grade fissile material, or is currently making or buying any. Considering the potential political and economic stakes of such a war, the administration needs to publicly provide concrete evidence to back their Iraqi nuclear claims. And then they need to explain why full-scale war is required when targeted strikes on selected facilities might be more expeditious and effective as a means of eliminating an incipient Iraqi nuclear threat. Frank Sanders Arvada 2002 © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 26 Inside Saddam's weapons factory /by Sam Kiley in Western Iraq/ Saddam Hussein opened up what the Americans claim is his secret atomic factory for the first time today. Threat: An aerial view of the phosphate plant at al Qaim. I was the first British journalist to see the al Qaim "uranium processing plant" at Akashat, 280 miles west of Baghdad and just three miles from the border with Syria on the banks of the Euphrates. This is where the Americans say the Iraqi dictator is stockpiling nuclear weapons and where the Iraqis insist they are not. In a public relations move to divide Western opinion before any US-led attack on Iraq, Saddam's top officials took a party of journalists by helicopter to see the plant where US Vice-President Dick Cheney warns Saddam could produce a nuclear weapon "fairly soon". Here - the Americans allege - the Iraqis have stockpiled tons of uranium oxide known as yellow cake. The US claims were prompted by German intelligence satellite images which allegedly show that Iraq is adding to its known hoard of 168 tons of yellow cake at the al Qaim phosphate factory. However, neither I nor other reporters on the tour would have known yellow cake from marzipan. And what we were not shown were at least 70 other buildings in the complex, where 3,500 workers were refining chemicals. My tour of al Qaim came as Tony Blair flew back to Britain to warn that Saddam Hussein poses a genuine threat to Britain. Meanwhile, the Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz is due to meet UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan at the Earth Summit today to discuss the possible return of UN weapons inspectors. But Iraq already has the know-how, the triggers for a device, and at least nine modified Scud missiles, former United Nations weapons inspectors and a defector from Saddam's nuclear programme have warned. All Saddam needs now, they say, is the weapons grade uranium to put in his bomb. And that, it is claimed, is refined at al Qaim. "Nonsense," said General Hassam Mohammed Amin, who is head of Saddam's nuclear programme. "The Bush administration has put these lies out to silence antiwar sentiments being expressed in the US and Europe." Al Qaim had been flattened, he said, adding: "It was bombed heavily by the Americans in 1991, inspected 27 times after that by the UN, which also installed monitoring cameras, and all the yellow cake was locked up in Baghdad and verified by the International Atomic Energy Authority's joint control with Iraq." Our inspection followed a bone-shaking two hour ride on a military helicopter. When we finally arrived, there was nothing to see of the " uranium" plant. Much of Iraq's western desert is quilted with oblong compounds surrounded by earth walls and sentry boxes of a military nature - many of them housing bunkers sunk into the sand and rock. We were not allowed to film them and Iraqi officials with us had no idea what went on inside these lonely forts. At Akashat, the al Qaim phosphate factory spewed smoke into the air from its complex of pipes and tanks where fertiliser is made from raw material mined 100 miles away. Drains poured foul-smelling pink effluent into small lakes while a freight train was loaded with phosphate compounds for delivery to Baghdad. And sure enough, the yellow cake production complex had been bombed. It had been levelled. All that remained were its foundations, sealed by a new layer of concrete to prevent nuclear contamination of the area, and a pile of twisted metal. The 24 nuclear scientists who used to work at Akashat, General Amin said, had been dispersed to continue serving Iraq in the fields of "education, irrigation, that sort of thing". Saddam is known to have kept his nuclear teams, numbering at least 3,000 scientists, together and banned them from travelling out of the country. So, if Iraq is not trying to make an atomic bomb or any other weapons of mass destruction, why not allow the UN back to verify this and take the sting out of American allegations that Iraq poses a global threat as part of the "axis of evil?" General Amin said: "We have repeatedly invited the US Congress to come here with experts and inspect anything they like. "This has been turned down. The UN inspections are part of a political programme. They are open-ended and might mean we never get sanctions (imposed in 1991) lifted." Could Congressmen go anywhere in Iraq they wanted? Into the basements of Saddam's palaces where, some western intelligence agencies claim, he's producing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons? General Amin said: "If we are presented with credible evidence - yes. But we need evidence." In other words, weapons inspectors would have to know what they would find, and where they would find it, before they started looking. These new offers and the raising of the possibility of a return of proper UN weapons inspectors, were timed to drive a wedge between Bush's top officials. ***************************************************************** 27 Navy Begins New Vieques Exercises Las Vegas SUN Today: September 03, 2002 at 13:25:14 PDT By FRANK GRIFFITHS ASSOCIATED PRESS VIEQUES, Puerto Rico- Fighter jets buzzed over Vieques on Tuesday as activists shied away from their usual raucous protests, fearful of stiff jail sentences and fines in a post-Sept. 11 climate. Pilots practiced fly-overs, U.S. Navy spokeswoman Lt. Cmdr. Kim Dixon said, while the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman and 11 other ships would likely practice shelling the bombing range on Wednesday. The exercises, the third since Sept. 11, are expected to last for 23 days. The military has used the prized bombing range on Vieques for more than six decades. Opposition to the exercises grew when a civilian guard was killed after a Navy jet dropped two bombs off-target in April 1999. Since then, only inert bombs have been used. Hundreds of people have tried to thwart the exercises by breaking onto the bombing range, often getting arrested, jailed and fined. But the terror attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon muted the protests. Five men entered Navy land at dawn on Tuesday and were quickly detained, said pro-independence Sen. Fernando Martin. Aside from that, only a dozen activists showed up for lackluster protests. Activist camps - which would have been bustling a year ago before the attacks - were half empty on Tuesday. "I'm personally not willing to risk it," said Elizabeth Roebling, a 55-year-old activist from Asheville, N.C., sitting in a chair with the words "Civil Disobedience" painted on the back. She blamed the poor turnout on tougher jail sentences since the Patriot Act was passed following the terror attacks. Roebling was arrested in June 2001 during bombing exercises and was released two days later. She said getting arrested now could mean several months in jail or a hefty fine. "The Bush administration has made it sound like protesting (since Sept. 11) is un-American," she said. President Bush has promised the Navy will withdraw its forces from Vieques by May 2003. Some remain skeptical though. "My dream is that they leave in 2003, but Bush likes war just as much as his father did," said Elba Perez, a 45-year-old cashier on Vieques. The Navy bombing range covers 900 acres on the eastern tip of Vieques - less than 3 percent of the Caribbean island off the east coast of the U.S. territory. The Navy has said the bombing range is vital to military preparedness, but officials say they are looking for alternative sites. Opponents say the exercises harm the environment and health of Vieques' 9,100 residents. The Navy denies the claim. Gov. Sila Calderon, an opponent of the exercises, has said she will visit the island on Friday. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 28 Councillor arrested over nuclear protest BBC NEWS | UK | Wales | Tuesday, 3 September, 2002, 10:22 GMT 11:22 UK A Welsh councillor who was attempting to damage a nuclear submarine has been bailed by magistrates in Plymouth. Caerphilly councillor Ray Davies, a veteran peace campaigner, and Dr Margaret Jones from Bristol rowed up the River Tamar in Devon to try and enter Devonport dockyard in Plymouth. They were allegedly intending to damage the nuclear-powered submarine Tireless, to prevent it from returning to active duty, and then give themselves up. They were arrested as they tried to cut through a fence surrounding the base before any action was carried out. Both are charged with criminal damage and being in possession of articles likely to cause criminal damage and were bailed by magistrates to appear again on 31 October. --- © MMII | News Sources | Privacy ***************************************************************** 29 Serbian brothers and US allies bring three nuclear bombs to Russia Pravda.RU 12:23 2002-09-03 Should Russia thank IAEA for such presents? A secret shipment of 800 kg of uranium-aluminum alloy, which is 6,000 ingots, was delivered from Yugoslavia to Russia last week. The amount of weapons-grade uranium is 48 kg, which is quite enough to create three nuclear bombs. According to the Washington Post, although the operation to transport uranium from Belgrade’s Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences to Russia’s Dimitrovgard was secret, it was evident all the same. Over 1200 heavily armed Yugoslavian troops and several attack helicopters were involved in the operation. These extraordinary security measures were taken to prevent the uranium from being hijacked on its way to Russia. The day before, Yugoslav scientists closed down an aging nuclear reactor, which is 44 years old and loaded in ingots on a lorry. Early the next day, two more lorries left the scientific center just as a secretly. Officials from the US State Department supervised the operation. It has been reported that many highways leading to the Belgrade airport were closed that morning. Officials from the US Department of Energy and Russia’s Ministry of Atomic Energy supervised the loading of the nuclear cargo. An Il-76 plane belonging to Russia’s Volga-Dnepr airline left the Belgrade airport for the Russian airport of Ulyanovsk-Vostochny at 8:04 a.m. The unloading of the dangerous cargo started at the Russian airport at 3:00 p.m. At night, the dangerous cargo, escorted by special services, was transported using four KamAZ trucks from Ulyanovsk to Dimitrovgard, about 520 miles southeast of Moscow. The second largest city in the Ulyanovsk region became the terminal of a dangerous operation started in Yugoslavia. A scientific research institute of nuclear reactors is situated there. PRAVDA.Ru reported recently that a nuclear power plant is planned to be constructed on its premises. As soon as ecologists reported their plans to construct a nuclear power plant, the dangerous uranium was delivered from Yugoslavia. As reported by the Washington Post, the operation was planned in secrecy for over a year by US specialists, who feared that the Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences could become a tasty morsel for terrorists. The Bush administration considers uranium transportation to Russia to be one of the most important measures taken after the Sept.11 terrorist attacks for the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. It is strange that Americans believe the dangerous uranium will be safe in Russia, in the country which, as the USA thinks, can’t store its nuclear weapons itself. Probably, the problem was considered in a different light, because the uranium transported to Russia was produced on Russian territory some time ago. It took a long time before Russia recognized its responsibility for the nuclear materials produced in the Soviet Union and currently scattered all over the world. US officials say that Russia “has entered a new level of cooperation” when it received the uranium from Belgrade. Technical support for the operation was provided by specialists from the US Department of Energy, Russia’s Ministry of Atomic Energy, and the International Atomic Energy Agency. A private American group, Nuclear Threat Initiative, which is sponsored by Ted Turner, provided most of the financial backing for the operation: $5 million. The US government appropriated $2 million. Ted Turner, in his turn, wonders why the government couldn’t finance such an important operation itself. The government explained that financing designed for nonproliferation purposes was strictly limited. According to the Washington Post, US State Department thanked Russians for their participation in the project: Russia agreed to accept the uranium, although the Russian government previously refused. The Vinca nuclear reactor is one of 350 similar scientific centers in 58 countries of the world, and weapons-grade uranium is used at all of them. The USA believes that such reactors pose a great threat, because they can easily be attacked by terrorists. The Americans were terrified when they saw under which conditions the uranium ingots were stored at the Yugoslav scientific center. The aging scientific center was guarded by a few security officers, which certainly wasn’t enough. The reactor was built in 1958, when Yugoslavia worked on its nuclear program. Yugoslav leader Tito said, “We must have the atomic bomb. We must build it even if it costs us one-half of our income for years." No bomb was built; however, the uranium designed for the bomb remained. It attracted the interest of so-called "pariah states," as the USA calls them. It is even said that Saddam Hussein sent agents to Belgrade. The operation for the neutralization of the uranium became feasible only when Slobodan Milosevic’s government was overthrown. As soon as the dangerous uranium left for Russia, the Yugoslavian government said that Belgrade would no longer be a target for terrorists because of uranium. However, ecologists from the Ulyanovsk region have no reasons so far to breathe a sigh of relief. They think it is rather suspicious that the Dimitrovgrad scientific research institute of nuclear reactors doesn’t reveal the details of the deal, saying it is commercial classified information. Ecologists are not sure whether or not the Yugoslav cargo is classified as fuel or nuclear waste. If the cargo is classified as nuclear waste, this means the deal was performed in defiance of Russian legislation prohibiting the import of nuclear waste to Russia. If the Yugoslav uranium is designed for processing in Russia, where will solid and liquid wastes after recycling go? Ecologists fear that the transaction will be profitable for the scientific institute, but will bring additional burden to the region. Director of the Institute of Nuclear Reactors Alexey Grachev says the fuel is harmless, as it wasn’t used in nuclear reactors. “It can be even touched with one's hands.” In Grachev’s words, Dimitrovgrad was chosen to receive the Yugoslav uranium for two reasons. The International Atomic Energy Agency is working hard to protect dangerous nuclear fuel from falling into the hands of terrorists, which is why nuclear fuel is removed from unsafe territories. Should Russia thank IAEA for such presents and for the recognition that the country is safer than Yugoslavia? Another reason is that the scientific institute needs fuel for its own reactors. The director of the scientific institute says that no nuclear waste was delivered to the Ulyanovsk region at all. However, citizens of the Ulyanovsk region are perfectly sure that the process of making a nuclear dump of Russia has already started. Sergey Nikolayev PRAVDA.Ru Translated by Maria Gousseva Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU [http://www.pravda.ru/] ". When reproducing ***************************************************************** 30 Outside View: Indo-Pakistan nuclear myth* By M.D. Nalapat A UPI Outside view commentary From the Washington Politics & Policy Desk Published 9/1/2002 1:17 PM MANIPAL, India, Aug. 31 (UPI) -- Since the mid-1980s, there has been a vigorous campaign by academics in the United States and Europe to say that a "high" risk of nuclear war exists between Pakistan and India. Most of these scholars are "South Asia experts", a school formed in the crucible of the Cold War, when Soviet-allied India ranged itself politically against the United States, while Pakistan did the opposite, as did post-Deng China. Since the beginning of economic liberalization in the mid-1990s, the rate of economic growth in India has risen from 2 percent during the Jawaharlal Nehru period to nearly 9 percent under Narasimha Rao. Today, because of the inefficiency of the Vajpayee government, the rate of growth has fallen to 5 percent. India can easily achieve a double-digit growth rate, given a better government. During 2001 several conferences on international investment pointed out that India was emerging as a better investment destination than China. The reasons given were that: 1 -- more than 200 million Indians spoke English; 2 -- the country was a democracy with a Western legal and educational system; and 3 -- culturally the Indian people belonged to the same Indo-European family as the West. The fact is that investment into India began to increase, from $1 billion five years ago to nearly $4 billion now. This is still far below China's huge totals, collectively estimated at $300 billion. Were India to get even a fifth of such foreign investment, the country would generate tens of millions of new jobs and emerge as another regional powerhouse, together with Japan and China. Enter the military regime in Pakistan, which has thus far not been accused of a bias in favor of India. The generals there have, for the past six years at least, been threatening India with a nuclear attack. This has understandably generated headlines internationally and energized a slew of "peacemakers" ranging from Secretary of State Colin Powell to British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Each visit by such do-gooders resulted in fresh attention being drawn to the "imminence" of nuclear conflict." As a result, the country's inherent advantages for foreign investment have been blown away and billions of dollars have been lost. That such an outcome does no harm to Pakistan -- an economy into which there is hardly any rush to invest -- perhaps is seen as encouraging by the generals in Pakistan. It certainly does nothing to dissuade them from fresh war rhetoric whenever the atmosphere calms down. In this way, Pakistan ensures that China faces no competition from India in attracting foreign investment. Panic measures such as the quickly withdrawn travel advisory issued by the United States, Japan and the European Union against visits to India have achieved the same result. How realistic is the scenario of nuclear war between India and Pakistan? There is probably less chance of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan than once existed between the Soviet Union and the United States. Despite threats and rhetoric, no government in Pakistan would launch a nuclear attack on India. And, unlike the case of the United States and the Soviet Union where the two sides had roughly equal forces, there is a huge difference between the nuclear capacities of India and Pakistan. Some analysts say what China has given Pakistan is not a nuclear weapon small enough to be loaded onto an aircraft on placed on a missile but a much cruder nuclear device. Such a "bomb" needs to be encased in nearly five tons of concrete and cannot therefore be loaded on to an aircraft or a missile. It is good for a display of nuclear machismo like what was seen in Chagai, Pakistan, in 1999 but useless in war. If it is assumed Pakistan has 25 nuclear weapons -- the upper limit given in the more frenzied media reports -- this is a much smaller arsenal than the reported 95-strong Indian stockpile. Were Pakistan to attack India, 26 million people, at worst, would die or be incapacitated. At most, five of India's 36 major cities could be affected. With a population of 1 billion, this would leave 974 million people to continue with life and 31 of the country's important cities would be unaffected. Even assuming Pakistan possesses a usable bomb -- which I do not believe they do -- the damage to India would be much less, proportional to population, than what the Soviet Union suffered in World War II: 27 million people out of a population of 180 million dead. By contrast, the Indian response to a Pakistani nuclear attack could wipe it out. All nine of the important cities in Pakistan could be destroyed and 65 million people would be dead or incapacitated. As a country Pakistan would cease to exist. This analysis is known to must of the generals in Pakistan, which is why one may reasonably assume they would never launch a first strike against India. Militarily, the use of such weapons is justified only in situations when the armed forces or the territory of the country is about to be conquered. Since the 1980s, Indian military doctrine has moved away from the seizure of Pakistani territory in recognition of the less significant role played by landmass in modern estimates of strategic strength. Not only does India does not have any territorial ambitions on Pakistan, the principal secretary to the prime minister is reported to have told officials in London, Paris and Washington that his government was prepared to permanently concede Pakistan-occupied Kashmir to Islamabad, and would accept the "Line of Control" in Kashmir as the international boundary. It is a commentary on the susceptibility of the media to manipulation that even responsible publications and journalists keep repeating the myth that there is a chance of nuclear war between India and Pakistan. In reality there is no such possibility. Of course, both the generals in Pakistan and the apparatchiks in China must be laughing at the way in which a prospective economic rival of the PRC has been rendered harmless. As for the million-dollar "industry" devoted to "nuclear risk reduction in South Asia," the funds from foundations continue to pour in with each threat and counter-threat by two of the more foolish establishments on the planet. -0- Professor M.D. Nalapat is director of the School of Geopolitics, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, India and consulting editor to the Indian Defense Review. Copyright © 2002 United Press International ***************************************************************** 31 Y-12, ORNL workers not getting fair shake August 29, 2001 Which of the government's Oak Ridge nuclear facilities - the K-25 uranium-enrichment complex, Oak Ridge National Laboratory or the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant - posed the greatest hazard to workers? This type of question has floated about for years, drawing debate and speculation in the Oak Ridge workforce. Interest grew after the U.S. Department of Energy acknowledged (belatedly) that workplace exposures caused health problems and after Congress authorized a compensation program, albeit a limited one, for sick workers. The comparative risk of one facility vs. another is not easy to gauge. Hazards undoubtedly varied according to job title and location, even within the same plant. Indeed, it probably makes little sense to compare one plant to another except in broad overviews. But here's something truly nonsensical: Although thousands of former workers at the Oak Ridge nuclear facilities are eligible for free medical screenings, thousands of others are not. For example, DOE has funded a screening program for hourly workers at the K-25 plant. The DOE has funded a similar program for former construction workers on the Oak Ridge reservation. But, for whatever reason, the federal agency has not coughed up money for a screening program to identify health problems among thousands of retired laborers at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Why? Well, that's not clear. DOE did not respond to repeated questions about whether a grant was available to the Atomic Trades and Labor Council, the umbrella organization that represents union workers at Y-12 and ORNL. Some retired blue-collar workers are upset with the ATLC leadership, pointing out that union leaders at K-25 and the construction trades went to bat early for their workers and got help without a hitch. Carl "Bubba'' Scarbrough, president of the ATLC, said he's doing everything he can to get the $500,000 needed to start a permanent center for health evaluations. He said it's critically important because the medical screening can identify some of the problems before symptoms take hold and improve the chances of recovery. "I've got 40 pages of paperwork I've generated,'' Scarbrough said this week. The union boss said he has tried to push the proposal before the DOE officialdom, but he said the contacts keep changing at agency headquarters in Washington. On the local front, Scarbrough said he's gotten no help at all from DOE or the National Nuclear Security Administration, which oversees the Y-12 defense activities. "DOE has taken absolutely zero action,'' he said. HOT WATER: Some progress has been reported in the evaluation of water quality at the Oak Ridge K-25 plant, but the issue remains as contentious and controversial as ever. Also, the project could be stalled for lack of money. A number of current and former K-25 employees came forward last year with evidence that cross-connections in the water pipelines created the potential for contamination of drinking-water supplies. A sampling program by DOE contractors found that the plant's current water system is safe, and the federal agency sanctioned a project to review the historic water operations at K-25. The investigation team recently issued a progress report that confirmed there were problems, including cross-connections with chemical-laden water systems used for cooling operations or fire-fighting. But the duration of these events or the health implications to workers have not been assessed at this point. Meanwhile, DOE has not committed money beyond the study's second phase, which is nearing completion, and even if the water probe continues there will be plenty of challenges. The Coalition for a Healthy Environment has accused DOE of covering up information and has chastised federal officials for not notifying Rust Engineering workers they probably drank contaminated fire water when working out of trailers at the site. Several activists are pushing for a criminal investigation and want to halt DOE's current demolition of buildings at K-25 until the hazards have been fully evaluated. Senior Writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for the News-Sentinel. He can be reached at 865-482-9213 or at twig1@knoxnews.infi.net. This column is also available on the Web at www.knoxnews.com/editorsview/munger/ Copyright 2002 The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 32 Wamp: DOE funds will reinvigorate OR site By News-Sentinel staff September 1, 2002 Funds that are "years overdue'' will go to help create more than 100 new jobs and boost reindustrialization efforts at a former uranium enrichment complex that's been renamed East Tennessee Technology Park, U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., said. Wamp announced that $1.4 million from the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Worker and Community Transition has been received by the Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee. CROET is the reuse organization for the department's Oak Ridge site. "During the past year I have repeatedly called on top DOE officials at headquarters to fund this commitment, made back in 1998,'' Wamp said. "These funds will make a tremendous difference for the future of reindustrialization.'' DOE officials said the grant will be used to: + Promote reindustrialization at East Tennessee Technology Park, commonly known as the K-25 Site. + Create up to 120 jobs over the next two to three years for Oak Ridge workers hit by DOE downsizing. + Fund research at the National Transportation Research Center. + Allow communities to prioritize economic development efforts, recruit new industries and create industrial parks. Copyright 2002 The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 33 ORNL helps build homeland security The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News -- Tuesday, September 3, 2002 Gary Van Berkel, a researcher in Oak Ridge National Laboratory's Chemical Sciences Division, feeds a boarding pass through the explosives detection device. -- Photo by Jim Richmond/ORNL by Duncan Mansfield Associated Press Can an airplane boarding pass really become the ticket to exposing a suicide bomber? It could with technology developed at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, where scientists say everything from one-celled creatures to cellular phone towers could prove useful in the war on terrorism. Military and civilian researchers have worked hand-in-hand at the 3,800-employee lab since its top-secret inception in the rolling hills of East Tennessee in World War II. Helping to build the first atomic bomb has led to advances in commercial nuclear power, high-strength composite materials for the auto and aircraft industries and isotopes for medicine. Since Sept. 11, Oak Ridge scientists and their Energy Department colleagues across the country have redirected their research to the war on terrorism. "I have been surprised by the relevance of apparently irrelevant technologies to this problem," said Dr. Bill Madia, Oak Ridge lab director. The lab still does plenty of work for the Department of Defense, but Madia says those assignments may not offer the best solutions to preventing, warning or managing attacks on civilians. "We are finding everything from agricultural extension services to software engineers -- hackers -- having the technology we are looking for. They really come from the broadest imagined scientific community," he said. Madia points to the work of biologist Elias Greenbaum and his molecular bioscience group. For four years, the researchers studied the photosynthetic reaction of algae, microorganisms that occur naturally in lakes and rivers, to contaminates. "If you put a large amount of anything, like spring runoff of pesticides in a lake, the algae begin to fluoresce in a way that signals something big has changed in their world. It's a natural signal," Madia said. "Well, when you think about it, that signal also can tell you that somebody has tried to poison your water supply." The researchers created instruments to instantly and continuously monitor these microorganisms for installation, say, on the intake pipe for a municipal water system. Tennessee American Water Co., which supplies Chattanooga and is a subsidiary of the nation's largest water utility, American Water Co., is talking to the lab. "They are interested in either being the demonstration site or actually being a partner in taking this to market," said Dr. Michael Kuliasha, a longtime lab official who was named its homeland security program director three weeks after the terrorist attacks. Lab operators seek $5 million from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency this fall for another demonstration of its homeland security technologies -- an emergency network linking chemical, biological and radiological sensors mounted on existing cell phone towers. Called "SensorNet," this integrated emergency system would identify poisonous gases or radioactivity, then set off an alarm at first-responder dispatch stations, telling them what the poison is, where it is headed and how civilians should respond. The system was developed with support from the weather-watching National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and American Tower Corp., which owns some 10,000 cell tower sites. The system was successfully tested in March in a linkup between Nashville, Knoxville and Chattanooga. Funding this fall will pay for a larger test, probably involving Atlanta. Another lab invention -- the first portable mass spectrometer capable of quickly identifying chemical or biological agents in a battlefield setting -- was used in the SensorNet test. That device, underwritten by the Pentagon at a cost of $48 million over the past five years, is designed to replace sensors used in the Gulf War that were so unreliable the troops ignored them. The battlefield spectrometer is now undergoing field tests in Utah. But the Marines already talk about its potential for protecting civilian populations around their bases. The Oak Ridge lab is an international leader in mass spectrometry -- a powerful analytical technique that can identify unknown compounds at their molecular level. Using that technology, Oak Ridge researchers have devised an airline ticket scanner that can detect the smallest traces of explosives in less than 5 seconds -- a 1,000-tickets-an-hour rate that shouldn't add much to growing airport security delays. "The basic concept is that if you have touched an explosive or you have an explosive with you it is very hard not to get the residue on you somewhere and that eventually gets transmitted to your hands," said Gary Van Berkel, the lab's mass spectrometry group leader. "This device is very, very sensitive," he said. "There is evidence that you can detect second- or third-hand contact." What does that mean? "A guy makes a bomb. He puts it in a suitcase. A second guy picks up the suitcase, then shakes hands with another guy. You check that third guy," Van Berkel said. Van Berkel said his team expects to have the instrument in an airport field test within three months through the government's Safe Skies Alliance, either at Knoxville or Orlando, Fla. Two major mass spectrometry companies, MDS Sciex of Ontario, Canada, and Mass Spec Analytical Ltd. of Bristol, England, work closely with the lab on the project. Though mass spectrometry is far more accurate then the explosives detectors currently common in airports, the machines can be three times as expensive -- at about $250,000 apiece. The Sept. 11 attacks, however, made cost less important, Van Berkel said. Mass spectrometry "is more attractive because it is the technology that will work," he said. Madia said nationally, scientists are discovering thousands of ideas in how to use existing technologies for homeland security. "That is actually going to be one of the big challenges of homeland security," he said. "How do you screen tens of thousands of ideas that may be the Holy Grail of solving the terrorist threat?" [http://www.oakridger.com/contact/index.html] [http://www.oakridger.com] All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 34 Breakthrough - DOE finally takes action The Paducah Sun Paducah, Kentucky Tuesday, September 03, 2002 It took four years and a lot of political muscle to persuade the federal bureaucracy to honor a congressional mandate on the construction of uranium waste conversion facilities in Paducah and Portsmouth, Ohio. A hope is that the government finally is prepared to accept its responsibility for this important part of the cleanup of the uranium enrichment plants. Until recently, the overall cleanup in Paducah, the most contaminated of the two sites, had proceeded at an excruciatingly slow pace. With the awarding of the contract for the construction of the conversion facilities, Paducah residents have reason to believe the Department of Energy is making real progress in eliminating this environmental mess. Last month, when President Bush signed an anti-terrorism bill that included a provision ordering DOE to award a contract for the conversion projects within 30 days, Sen. Mitch McConnell remarked, "It has been a long, hard fight, but now we can finally focus on the real issue — cleaning up this hazardous waste." The awarding of the contract is an important milestone, but experience has taught Paducah residents that very little about the plant cleanup can be considered certain until the actual work begins. McConnell, using his clout as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, played a key role in ensuring the contract was finally awarded. Legislation approved by Congress in 1998 set aside $373 million for uranium waste conversion plants in Paducah and Portsmouth. The purpose of the plants is to convert uranium hexafluoride, or UF6, to a safer form for disposal or reuse. These facilities also are intended to provide jobs to mitigate the impact of layoffs associated with the privatization of the uranium enrichment industry. McConnell and 1st District U.S. Rep. Ed Whitfield have engaged in a long-running battle with the DOE bureaucracy over the conversion plants. The awarding of the contract ensures the engineering work on the project will be completed, but the fight over funding is likely to continue next year. Given the Kentucky congressional delegation's commitment to the project, it's possible the recycling of more than 37,000 cylinders of uranium waste could begin well before the end of the current decade. Many of the cylinders are rusted and leaking, making them vulnerable to fire. In addition to removing an environmental problem, the recycling project will eliminate a serious public safety hazard. The beneficial economic effects of the conversion project should not be underestimated. Hundreds of jobs have been lost in Paducah and Portsmouth since the privatization. Despite the cutbacks at the USEC plant, the Paducah economy is still sound; however, it's difficult for a community to replace manufacturing and technical jobs of this quality. The construction phase of the conversion project will create at least 400 jobs, and each conversion plant will employ about 150 permanent workers. It's also possible the project will generate spin-off work in the commercial reuse of depleted uranium. Local leaders, Gov. Patton and the congressional delegation are working hard to bring new uranium enrichment technology to Paducah. That effort is critical for the local economy; even so, the plant cleanup and the conversion work could end up creating more jobs than a new generation enrichment facility. This should give local leaders and the congressional delegation an additional incentive to stay the course in the ongoing battle to ensure the federal government cleans up the mess it made here. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************