***************************************************************** 06/04/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.141 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 US: NRC Grants intervnor status to Mothers for Peace 2 Koizumi Aide Hints at Change to No-Nuclear Policy 3 US: Tilting at Nuclear Reactors 4 US: NRC Revises Public Meeting Policy NUCLEAR REACTORS 5 Japan Explains Position on Weapons 6 Putin attempts to broker talks on Kashmir conflict 7 Bruce Power consortium to spend $1.1B to upgrade, restart Ontario 8 US: NRC to Hold Public Meetings on Fort Calhoun Station License 9 US: NRC, Companies to Discuss Three Mile Island 2 Organizational NUCLEAR SAFETY 10 US: Home Radiation Detectors Criticized 11 US: Convict hops nuclear train, spurs critics 12 US: Fallout would not harm U.S. population 13 Trail opens against man accused of stealing radioactive material 14 Trail opens against man accused of stealing radioactive material fro NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 15 (en) Anti-Nuke Action -Resistance#12 (AFI) 16 ENERGY DEPARTMENT: Reid targets official's links to companies 17 Nuclear deposit will turn into a green lawn. Maybe 18 US: Nebraska accused of reneging in nuclear dump agreement 19 US: Editorial: EIS omits alternative to Yucca 20 US: Yucca fight gets lift from celebrities 21 US: Nuclear Waste-Dumping Tax Issue Will Go to Voters NUCLEAR WEAPONS 22 US: [generalnews] U.S. to conduct subcritical nuclear test Wed 23 US: Bush Declares 'First Strike' Policy; To Resume Production of 24 India and Pakistan 25 US: Reid wants ethics investigation of Energy Department official 26 US: Nuclear power plants running out of storage space 27 US: Yucca Mountain isn’t only place to store nuclear waste, some of 28 US: Yucca: Where was Clancy on Sept. 11? 29 Pakistan Explains Nuclear Policy 30 U.S.: No one wins a nuclear war 31 China Hopes Japan Will Keep Commitment to Non-nuclear Principles 32 Nuclear clash would batter world financial markets 33 Pakistan Explains Nuclear Policy 34 South Asia's Hair Trigger 35 George Monbiot: Wage peace, not war US DEPT. OF ENERGY 36 US To Construct New Plutonium Pit Production Plant 37 Editorial: Probe of top DOE official is warranted 38 Special Training to prevent Weapons of Mass Destruction 39 DOE: No help given to fight claims 40 What do community members want in the new DOE manager? 41 Breeder Reactor site eyed for development OTHER NUCLEAR 42 Trust in government (drops to 40%) a matter of focus 43 Top Bush Administration Energy Official Touts Wind Power ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 NRC Grants intervnor status to Mothers for Peace Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 18:41:28 -0700 NRC for on-site dry cask storage. We are doing so in order to protect our children, our grandchildren, our great-grandchildren and all the generations to come. We are exited to announce that the NRC has granted the petition for intervenor status!! Molly Johnson, area coordinator Grandmothers for Peace/San Luis Obispo County Chapter Nuclear Regulatory Commission Grants Mothers for Peace Petitioners right to address Safety Issues For Immediate Release June 1, 2002 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has granted the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace intervenor status. The Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club, Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo Cancer Awareness Now, Cambria Legal Defense Fund, Santa Margarita Area Residents Together, Grandmothers for Peace/San Luis Obispo County Chapter, Central Coast Peace and Environmental Council, Surfrider of San Luis Obispo and Ventura and the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation joined the Mothers for Peace Petition to Intervene and were granted Joint Petitioner status. The San Luis Obispo Petitioners demonstrated to the NRC that their participation in licensing proceeding for PG&E's nuclear waste expansion project are "concrete and particularized" and "actual or imminent", not conjectural or hypothetical." "SLO Petitioners are certain that San Luis Obispo County would also meet the criteria for Intervention status and sincerely hope that SLO Supervisors will take the opportunity to reconsider their decision to intervene and fully protect all residents of the county" stated Rochelle Becker, representative for the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace. Central Coast Congresswoman Capps is still waiting to hear from the NRC regarding her request for a 30 day extension for filings to legally intervene. The NRC ruled that the Mothers for Peace Petitioners showed that the proposed action [PG&E's radioactive waste expansion] will cause "injury in fact" to the petitioner's interest...that petitioners will personally suffer a "distinct and palpable" harm, that the injury can fairly be traced to the challenged actions and that the injury is likely to be redressed by a favorable decision in the proceeding. In addition, the Petitioners satisfactorily demonstrated their standing to participate and properly identified specific aspects of the subject matter of the proceeding. Issues addressed in the Petition to Intervene included: * Safety implications of PG&E's bankruptcy on proposed high level radioactive waste storage site * Safety of proposed casks for high level radioactive waste containment * Safety of proposed transport routes * Emergency preparedness * Seismic issues * Alternative sources of energy production For more information or to support the San Luis Obispo Intervenors contact: www.mothersforpeace.org or call 773-3881 San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace PO 164 Pismo Beach, CA 93448 (805) 489-7420 beckers@thegrid.net www.mothersforpeace.org ***************************************************************** 2 Koizumi Aide Hints at Change to No-Nuclear Policy The New York Times June 4, 2002* *By HOWARD W. FRENCH* TOKYO, June 3 ? A senior official has said Japan might someday possess nuclear weapons, creating a furor here and enraging the country's neighbors. The official, Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda, the most senior aide to Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, told reporters on Friday that Japan might one day break with its so-called three non-nuclear principles, a decades-old policy officially forswearing weapons of mass destruction. "The principles are just like the Constitution," he said. "But in the face of calls to amend the Constitution, the amendment of the principles is also likely." The principles say that Japan, the only country ever attacked with nuclear weapons, will never make them, possess them or allow them on Japanese territory. Mr. Fukuda was speaking to reporters on the condition that he not be identified, but the harshly critical reactions from Japan's neighbors and calls from opposition parties for the resignation of the official who made the comments prompted Mr. Fukuda to step forward today and acknowledge his statements. "I only said there is a chance the government could take another look at the three non-nuclear principles in the future," said Mr. Fukuda, known as Mr. Koizumi's right-hand man. "There is absolutely no chance that this cabinet will discuss revising these principles." Mr. Koizumi said the issue had been "blown out of proportion." The prime minister, whose government has been on the political defensive and losing support for weeks, said no action would be taken against Mr. Fukuda. "Why is this causing such a stir?" Mr. Koizumi said. "It makes me wonder because even I myself have never said I would review this policy." But Mr. Koizumi's remarks did not placate Japan's neighbors. "At the present time when peace and development have become the main themes of the times and continued progress is being made in international nuclear disarmament, it is shocking to hear remarks like this from a senior Japanese official," a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, Kong Quan, said, according to the New China News Agency. South Korea also criticized Mr. Koizumi's government today. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company ***************************************************************** 3 Tilting at Nuclear Reactors (washingtonpost.com) [Reliable Source] The Reliable Source can be reached at grovel@washpost.com [grovel@washpost.com] , or c/o The By Lloyd Grove Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, June 4, 2002; Page C03 Cause celeb Mike Farrell, who plays veterinarian Jim Hansen in the NBC series "Providence" when not campaigning against the death penalty and other perceived evils, will be on Capitol Hill today buttonholing senators about the proposed storage of 77,000 tons of nuclear waste in a federal facility at Nevada's Yucca Mountain. Mike Farrell, going up on the Hill to come down on Yucca Mountain. (NBC File Photo) Farrell is against it. But the radioactive waste storage plan, which overwhelmingly passed the House last month, may be a done deal in the Senate. "'Done deal' is sort of a political euphemism for 'don't bother to be a participatory citizen because the special interests have made their deal and the senators have been bought off and the deal is done,' " the 63-year-old actor told us yesterday as he drove to LAX to catch his flight to Washington. "But I'm not about to give up and turn the country over to the corporate interests. So I'm going to speak to some senators, some I know personally and some I don't, about this issue, which has not been thoroughly enough examined." Farrell -- who is presenting lawmakers with an anti-Yucca Mountain letter signed by 50 showbiz types, including fellow "M*A*S*H" alumnus Jamie Farr, embattled comedian Paula Poundstone and actor-producer Rob Reiner -- said he's worried that the material can't be transported safely and that trucks and trains are vulnerable not only to terrorists but also to accidents. Farrell added that until the storage controversy is resolved, the dangerous stuff should be kept next to the power plants that produced it. "I think the people who are creating the waste have the responsibility to find a way to safely deal with it," he said. "If they cannot do that, then they need to stop producing it." THIS JUST IN . . . • We never thought Fox News star Brit Hume was a bus-to-work kind of guy, but yesterday the Georgetown resident had an unhappy encounter with Washington's public transportation system. During morning rush hour, a Metro bus collided with his 1999 Infinity. After our witness, D.C. trade journalist Robert Whiddon, alerted us to the mishap, a calm and composed Hume told us that the big lumbering bus wedged his sedan to a halt during a dicey turn from P Street NW into Dupont Circle. Car damage was limited to a scraped fender. "Everything's fine, except for the whiplash and the neck brace and the terrible pain I have endured, to say nothing of the mental cruelty I'm suffering," said Hume, who hastily added: "I'm kidding." • As predicted weeks ago in this space, Slate magazine founder Michael Kinsley and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation co-chairman Patty Stonesifer became husband and wife over the weekend, tying the knot in a tiny ceremony at Stonesifer's weekend house on Washington state's Camano Island. A Kinsley friend told us yesterday that aside from an unidentified officiant and the bride and groom, only Stonesifer's two children from a previous marriage, daughter Sandy and son Matt, were present. We hear that after a honeymoon spent on Vancouver Island, the newlyweds will settle in a luxury loft in downtown Seattle. Meanwhile, we hear that media maven Jim Romenesko caused some upset yesterday when he linked on his Web site to a few humorous Slate-staff-produced wedding reports that were meant for Kinsley's eyes only. After Romenesko declined Slate editor Jacob Weisberg's request to remove his link, the online magazine removed the stories instead. • In more nuptial news, members of Kuwait's extended royal family hosted a fancy dinner at the Ritz-Carlton Saturday to celebrate the union of Sheikh Nawaf al-Sabah, the Princeton-educated son of Kuwait's Gulf War-era ambassador to Washington, to Sheikha Maryam al-Sabah, the daughter of the ambassador's successor. Nawaf told the college classmate-heavy crowd that he knew he and Maryam would get along when he learned that they both had the same room at the official ambassadorial residence and even slept in the same bed -- "the one nearest to the door." • The New Mitchell Plan: Former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, whose name adorns peace initiatives in Northern Ireland and the Middle East, is moving back to Washington from New York with wife Heather, a sports agent, and their two young children, Andrew and Claire. The Post's Daniela Deane reports that the couple paid $4.35 million for a spanking-new, 9,000-square-foot house in D.C's Wesley Heights neighborhood. Since retiring from the Senate in 1995, Mitchell has been a rainmaker at the law firm Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard, McPherson and Hand, and also sits on the corporate boards of the Walt Disney Co., Federal Express, Staples Inc. and Starwood Hotels and Resorts. • Anybody want to be in a Chris Rock movie and make $50 a day? On June 12, from 6 to 9 p.m., potential extras are invited to bring snapshots to the Bethesda Yacht Club, where the folks from Washington's Central Casting company will take applications for non-speaking parts for "Head of State," a political comedy scheduled to start filming in July. © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 4 NRC Revises Public Meeting Policy NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 69 - 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] No. 02-069 June 3, 2002 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has revised its public meeting policy to enhance and clarify the opportunity for public participation. The policy changes, which were announced in broad form in January, are in response to suggestions made at an April 2001 public meeting. The revised policy continues NRC's longstanding practice of providing the public with substantial information on its activities and of conducting business in an open manner, while balancing the need for the NRC staff to exercise its regulatory and safety responsibilities without undue administrative burden. It sets out three categories of public meetings and describes for each the type of information that will be available, the ways the public is invited to participate and staff follow-up actions. Category 1 meetings are typically held with one licensee to discuss specific regulatory issues. The public is invited to observe the business portion of the meeting and is provided an opportunity to ask questions of the NRC staff before the meeting is adjourned. Category 2 meetings are typically held with a group of industry representatives, licensees, vendors or non-governmental organizations to discuss issues which could apply to several facilities. These meetings provide an opportunity for the public to not only observe and gain information, but also to participate by providing the NRC with feedback on the analysis of the issues, alternatives and/or decisions. Category 3 meetings are typically held with representatives of non-governmental organizations, private citizens, interested parties or various businesses or industries. The objective of these meetings is to provide the public an opportunity to work directly with the NRC to provide a range of views, information, concerns and suggestions regarding regulatory issues. Meeting agendas, background documents and meeting summaries will be available in NRC's Agency-wide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) and at NRC's web site for certain categories of meetings. The policy also provides guidance on teleconferencing, visitor security and other administrative issues. The policy applies to NRC staff-sponsored and conducted meetings. It does not apply to Commission meetings or meetings sponsored by NRC offices that report directly to the Commission, to meetings between NRC staff and representatives of State governments, or to meetings conducted by outside groups that NRC staff members attend. NRC's web page at http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/meeting-faq.htm l contains links to the revised policy and frequently asked questions about public meetings. For further information on NRC's public meeting policy, contact Mindy Landau or Ramin Assa at 301-415-8703 or 301-415-8709, respectively. ***************************************************************** 5 Japan Explains Position on Weapons Las Vegas SUN June 04, 2002 TOKYO- Hoping to quell concern over a senior official's statement that Japan might someday arm itself with nuclear weapons, the government told its Asian neighbors Tuesday that the comments mark no change in the country's non-nuclear policy. Japan's government has been on the defensive since Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda told reporters in Tokyo late last week that geopolitical changes in the future could prompt the Japanese people to choose to possess nuclear weapons. Fukuda and Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi quickly stressed that the remarks were merely hypothetical and that the government had no intention of giving up its long-standing policy of neither possessing nor developing nuclear arms. Fukuda on Tuesday said that position had been conveyed to South Korea and China. Japan's Asian neighbors, who bore the brunt of its military aggression in the last century, are particularly concerned by any moves by Japan to beef up its military. "I believe they sufficiently understood the true meaning of what I said," Fukuda said. "I think all the countries understand that we have no intention of changing our policy." The remarks also hit a sore nerve at home. The public in Japan, the only country ever attacked with nuclear weapons, is strongly against their possession. In the western city of Hiroshima, where 140,000 people were killed by a U.S. atomic bomb dropped on Aug. 6, 1945, nearly 100 people protested Fukuda's comments in the city's Peace Park, which is memorial to the victims. Opposition lawmakers likewise criticized the Fukuda's comment as inappropriate, with some calling for him to step down. Koizumi has backed his aide saying the remarks were misunderstood. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 6 Putin attempts to broker talks on Kashmir conflict Independent.co.uk By Anne Penketh 03 June 2002 President Vladimir Putin of Russia will appeal to the Pakistani President and the Indian Prime Minister to hold face-to-face peace talks, as he seeks to join the growing number of would-be mediators in the India-Pakistan conflict. "I think President Putin can persuade India to join a dialogue," Pakistani President, General Pervez Musharraf, said yesterday on his way to a regional summit in the Kazakhstan capital, Almaty, which is also to be attended by the Russian and Indian leaders. But when he arrived in Almaty yesterday, the Indian Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, was still rejecting the idea of a meeting with the Pakistani leader, who will arrive in the city later today. The 16-nation regional security summit runs until tomorrow. Mr Putin is the first head of state to talk to both leaders. While Russia may not have much leverage with Pakistan, which has traditionally been closer to the US, it is a major supplier of military hardware to India, which buys $1bn (£690m) in weaponry each year. But Mr Putin faces an uphill struggle, as India has consistently refused outside mediation on the dispute with Kashmir, which Delhi considers to be a bilateral issue. India's ambassador to Kazakhstan, Vidya Sagar, said that the regional security conference was "not a forum to discuss India-Pakistan issues" and that there would be no talks "at any level". Pakistan, meanwhile, wants outside intervention to help resolve the simmering dispute, which has provoked two of its three wars with India. More heavy hitters are on their way to the region. The US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, and Richard Armitage, the Deputy Secretary of State, are expected to deliver a strong message in the coming days amid concern that Pakistan's intention to redeploy soldiers from the Afghan-Pakistani border to Kashmir would adversely affect the US "campaign against terrorism". In 1966, Russia's mediation put an end to the second war between India and Pakistan over Kashmir. However, diplomats say that the two situations cannot be directly compared because of the wider implications of the present crisis for the "war on terror". Mr Putin consulted US officials in Moscow before his departure for Almaty. Even if he fails to persuade the leaders to hold direct talks, his intervention could helpMr Rumsfeld's visit, in which he is to hold separate talks with the two leaders. The US was reported to be willing to share intelligence information with both sidesto satisfy India's demand for proof that Pakistan was closing the training camps for militants on its side of the Line of Control dividing Kashmir. Mr Vajpayee said that although there was "no plan" for talks with General Musharraf at the Almaty summit, he would give "serious consideration" to a meeting at a later stage "if we see the result on the ground" of General Musharraf's pledge to stop cross-border attacks over the long-running dispute. ***************************************************************** 7 Bruce Power consortium to spend $1.1B to upgrade, restart Ontario nuclear reactors June 4, 2002 Bruce Power consortium to spend $1.1B to upgrade, restart Ontario nuclear reactors CEO fires back at critics of 18-year lease arrangement Paul Vieira Financial Post The head of the British-led consortium running the Bruce nuclear facility in southern Ontario says the group will invest $1.1-billion to refurbish and bring all its reactors back into production. "From where I stand, this deal has always been a winning arrangement for both Bruce Power and the province," Duncan Hawthorne, chief executive of Bruce Power, said yesterday in a speech to the Canadian Nuclear Society Conference. "Much has been made about the value of the long-term deal we struck ... to lease the Bruce site. Some critics say we are simply milking a cash cow and suggest we are doing nothing more than sitting back and counting our profits. Nothing could be further from the truth." Mr. Hawthorne's comments come days before Ontario's auditor, Erik Peters, is scheduled to deliver a so-called value for money on the 18-year lease arrangement signed last year between Ontario Power Generation Inc. and the Bruce Power consortium. Under the deal, Bruce Power (a consortium controlled by British Energy PLC) made an upfront payment of $625-million and, for the next 18 years, will make annual payments to OPG -- some of which are fixed, some of which vary with electricity prices and productions. The annual payment for 2002 is expected to be $150-million. Critics, however, say the province essentially allowed OPG to give away the Bruce facility. The Bruce Power nuclear facility, the largest in North America, consists of two complexes: Bruce A and Bruce B, each containing four reactors. Bruce B is currently operating, while Bruce A has been mothballed since 1998. Besides the $625-million payment, Mr. Hawthorne said Bruce Power will spend $800-million to replace turbines and complete upgrades on the four reactors at the Bruce B generating station and $340-million to restart two units at the Bruce A generating station -- which, when completed, will add 1,500 megawatts of power to Ontario's supply. "Before Bruce Power took the helm, the site had four of its eight reactors in a laid-up state and no detailed plans to restart them," Mr. Hawthorne said. "It was only through our vision, and the willingness of our partners to invest so heavily in our future, that Bruce A will once again supply power to Ontario consumers." [pvieira@nationalpost.com] Copyright © 2002 National Post Online | Privacy Policy | ***************************************************************** 8 NRC to Hold Public Meetings on Fort Calhoun Station License Renewal NRC: Press Release Region IV - 2002 - 27 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington TX 76011 www.nrc.gov No. IV-02-027 June 4, 2002 CONTACT: Breck Henderson Phone: 817-860-8128 Cellular: 817-917-1227 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov [opa4@nrc.gov] The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold public meetings Tuesday, June 18, on the environmental review related to the application of Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) to renew its operating license for Fort Calhoun Station, a nuclear power plant near Blair, Nebraska. Members of the public are invited to attend and bring to NRC's attention environmental issues it should consider in its review of the proposed license renewal. The meeting will be held at the Days Hotel Carlisle, 10909 M Street, Omaha. Two similar sessions will be held, one in the afternoon and one in the evening. The first will be from 1:30 to 4:30 p.m., and the second will be from 7 to 10 p.m. Additionally, the NRC will host informal discussions one hour before the start of each session at the Days Hotel. Those who wish to present oral comments at the June 18 meetings may register in advance by contacting Thomas Kenyon by telephone at (800) 368-5642, extension 1120, or by e-mail to Ft_Calhoun_EIS@nrc.gov [Ft_Calhoun_EIS@nrc.gov] no later than June 12. Registration for comments will also be accepted within 15 minutes of the start of each session. The opportunity for late-registering individuals to provide comments may be limited by the time available. At the meetings, NRC staff will describe the environmental process for license renewal, after which members of the public will be given the opportunity to present their comments on what environmental issues the NRC should consider during its review. Under NRC regulations, the original operating license for a nuclear power plant is issued for up to 40 years. The license may be renewed for up to an additional 20 years if NRC requirements are met. The current operating license for Fort Calhoun Station will expire on August 9, 2013. OPPD submitted its application for license renewal in January. As part of its application, OPPD submitted an environmental report. That report is available for public review at the NRC Public Document Room located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's document system, referred to as ADAMS. ADAMS is accessible at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html, which provides access through the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room (PERR) link. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . The application can be viewed on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati ons/ft-calhoun.html. In addition, the W. Dale Clark Library, located at 215 South 15th Street, Omaha, NE 68102, and the Blair Public Library, located at 210 South 17th Street, Blair, NE 68008-2055, have agreed to make the environmental report available for public inspection. NRC assesses the scope and impact of environmental effects that are associated with license renewal at nuclear power plant sites in its "Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants," (NUREG-1437). NRC is gathering information at the June meeting for a supplement to the generic environmental impact statement that will be specific to the Nebraska plant. It will contain a recommendation regarding the environmental acceptability of the license renewal action. At the conclusion of the information-gathering process, the NRC staff will prepare a summary of the conclusions reached and significant issues identified and will send a copy to each person who participated. The summary will also be available for public review in the NRC's Public Document Room in Rockville, Maryland, the W. Dale Clark Library and Blair Public Library. The NRC staff will then prepare a draft environmental impact statement supplement for public comment and will hold a public meeting to solicit comments. After consideration of comments received on the draft, the NRC will prepare a final environmental impact statement supplement. Members of the public may also submit written comments on the scope of the Fort Calhoun Station's supplement to the generic environmental impact statement. Comments should be postmarked by July 10, and sent either by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Mailstop T-6-D-59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 or by e-mail to the same address as above: Ft_Calhoun_EIS@nrc.gov [Ft_Calhoun_EIS@nrc.gov] . ***************************************************************** 9 NRC, Companies to Discuss Three Mile Island 2 Organizational Changes NRC: Press Release Region I - 2002 - 41 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 www.nrc.gov No. I-02-041 June 3, 2002 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: [opa1@nrc.gov] Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of the Three Mile Island Unit 2 nuclear power plant on Tuesday, June 4, to discuss organizational changes involving the permanently shutdown facility in Middletown, Pa. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. in the Public Meeting Room at the NRC Region I office in King of Prussia, Pa. Before the meeting is adjourned, NRC staff will offer interested members of the public an opportunity to ask questions regarding the topic. In December 1999, GPU Nuclear Corp. sold Three Mile Island Unit 1, the operating reactor at the site, to AmerGen. At that time, AmerGen also entered into an agreement to provide services for Three Mile Island Unit 2, which ceased operations following an accident there in March 1979. However, GPU Nuclear retains responsibility for Unit 2. Company officials will discuss in detail the various organizational changes and any impact they may have on the facility. ***************************************************************** 10 Home Radiation Detectors Criticized Las Vegas SUN June 04, 2002 NEW YORK- A California company has sold hundreds of $149 home radiation detectors since it began advertising them on cable TV channels last week, its co-owner says, but experts say the devices would be of little use in a true nuclear emergency. The nine-employee company's Web site warns of the possibility of gamma radiation from so-called "dirty" radiological bombs, as well as "nuclear spills or meltdowns, terrorist attack on nuclear power plants, accidents or sabotage. "With the recent increase in terrorism you and your family are at more risk than ever," the Web site states. "The nuclear power plant near you may be the next TERRORIST TARGET!" The site juxtaposes photos of a nuclear explosion's mushroom cloud, cooling towers of a nuclear plant and the flaming twin towers of the World Trade Center - felled by jetliners, not a nuclear explosion. "We want to give awareness to people that crazy things happen," said Jack Khorsandi, the chief financial officer and co-owner of Homeland Protection Inc., the West Hollywood, Calif.-based company selling the devices. "The chance that people have a suitcase bomb, it's there," said Khorsandi, who said his company had sold hundreds of the detectors since the ads began running last week on channels with heavy news content including CNN. "There's never been the thought that such a crazy thing could happen to our country. It's a kind of wake-up call." At the federal Office of Homeland Security, spokesman Gordon Johndroe noted that environmental monitoring for radiation already takes place near the country's nuclear power plants, as well as at U.S. ports of entry. He said the office is not looking to purchase or distribute radiation detectors among the U.S. public. "We have no information that indicates that terrorists have been successful in obtaining nuclear or radiological devices," Johndroe said. In a true nuclear emergency, anyone within earshot of the detector's alarm would already be afflicted by radiation, said Jon Wolfsthal, an associate with the nonproliferation project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "If anything, it sounds like a way to exploit the fears of the American public as opposed to protecting them," he said. "I wouldn't plunk down $149 of my own money on one of these things." Recent stories in the media have examined the possibility of terrorist use of nuclear weapons. During the post-Sept. 11 period of anthrax mailings that killed five and sickened 13 people in the United States, a number of home anthrax detection kits emerged that critics said sought to capitalize on public fears. On the Net: http://www.raditect.com [http://www.raditect.com] All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 11 Convict hops nuclear train, spurs critics [St. Petersburg Times Online: World&Nation] [http://www.tampabay.com/] Environmentalists, who brought the escapee's March adventure to light, say it proves it is risky. The industry says it proves it is safe. By LOUIS HAU © St. Petersburg Times published June 4, 2002 A small-time criminal escaping from a state-run boot camp in North Carolina hopped aboard a passing freight train a few months back, only to hop off again when he realized he had picked the worst possible ride. The train was loaded with state troopers and armed security guards. The convict and a fellow escapee were soon back in custody. All that security was necessary because the train was carrying highly radioactive spent fuel from a nuclear power plant. The incident happened in March, but it is coming to light now through the efforts of environmentalists. They call it new evidence of the risks involved in disputed plans to haul the accumulating waste from the nation's nuclear power plants to a proposed waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Only one nuclear power company in the United States sends its waste fuel on train trips to a storage site: Progress Energy Inc., the parent of Florida Power of St. Petersburg. Like most nuclear power facilities, Florida Power's nuclear plant in Crystal River stores its spent fuel on site. But that's not true of two plants in the Carolinas run by Progress subsidiary Carolina Power &Light. CP's Brunswick plant in Southport, N.C., and its H.B. Robinson plant in Hartsville, S.C., have run out of storage space for used fuel rods. So about 10 times a year, CP loads spent fuel rods from one plant or the other on a train and carts them to its third plant, the Shearon Harris facility in New Hill, N.C. The Harris site was originally designed for four nuclear reactors, with all the storage that would require, but only one reactor was built. The waste is hauled over 207 miles of track from the Brunswick plant and over 132 miles of track from the Robinson plant for storage. Although the incident with the train-hopping escapees did no damage, critics say it proves the danger of carrying the waste by train. "It was disturbing," says Pierre Sadik, a staff attorney for U.S. PIRG, the Washington, D.C., lobbying arm for state Public Research Interest Groups. "It means that shipping nuclear waste is a risky proposition. I don't know what other conclusion you could reach." Low-level radioactive waste, such as irradiated gloves and rags used by plant workers, poses little risk to public health and is often shipped to off-site disposal sites. But spent nuclear fuel rods emit lethal amounts of radiation that require extraordinary security and storage precautions. Progress Energy says the train-hopping incident demonstrated that its security precautions worked properly. "We're confident that we're doing everything possible to keep those shipments secure," Progress spokesman Keith Poston said. "The federal government obviously concurs or else they wouldn't let us continue shipping." He said the train-hopper "never posed a threat to the shipment" or "we would have employed deadly force if necessary." Poston adds that "there are no plans at all" to ship nuclear waste from Florida Power's Crystal River plant before the opening of a federal waste repository. If capacity at Crystal River runs low before that, he says, the company would build additional storage capacity on site. The train-hopping incident didn't surface until it was publicized by a Durham, N.C., environmental group, NC Warn, which is seeking an immediate suspension of the shipments. "While not an attack, this incident proves CP cannot fully protect against terrorist attack," the group said in a letter last month to North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley. "If these people had intended to, they were in a position to cause a serious radiation release harming many members of the public and causing millions of dollars in property damage." Gordon Thompson, executive director of the Institute for Resource and Security Studies in Cambridge, Mass., says he's more concerned about the risk of terrorist attack than accidents or derailments. A truck, train or barge carrying high-level nuclear waste is a more vulnerable target for terrorism than a nuclear power plant simply because it isn't protected by a security perimeter like a wall or fence, Thompson says. He adds that a terrorist action on a shipment of high-level nuclear waste would most likely be focused on destroying the shipment to spark a fire that would release radiation. According to federal regulations, each transportation cask used to move spent high-level nuclear fuel must be able to survive four tests in succession: a 30-foot free fall, which is the equivalent of a 120-mph crash into a concrete bridge abutment; a puncture test, during which the container must fall 40 inches onto a steel rod 6 inches in diameter; a half-hour exposure to a 1,475-degree Fahrenheit fire that engulfs the structure; and submergence under 200 meters of water for one hour without collapsing, buckling or leaking. But Sadik of U.S. PIRG says that real-life circumstances could overwhelm even containers that pass these tests. For example, he notes that many routes to Yucca Mountain include rail and highway bridges that span heights in excess of 30 feet. But the Washington-based Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear power industry's leading trade group, stands firm on the safety of nuclear waste shipments. Spokeswoman Thelma Wiggins says that there has never been a documented instance in the United States of injuries, deaths or environmental damage caused by the release of radioactivity during the shipment of such materials. "The bottom line is, the containers have held up," Wiggins says. In April, Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn vetoed President Bush's earlier designation of Yucca Mountain as the site of a centralized nuclear waste repository, under procedures set by Congress. The House of Representatives has since voted to override Guinn's veto and the Senate is expected to vote on the matter in July. ***************************************************************** 12 Fallout would not harm U.S. population (June 4, 2002) KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS WASHINGTON - A nuclear war between Pakistan and India could dwarf any catastrophe in world history, killing up to 12 million people in South Asia, but the radioactive fallout likely would not harm Americans half a world away. In fact, because of the combined effects of distance, dispersion and dilution, the increased amount of radiation in U.S. air would be barely measurable, health experts say. "As concerned as we need to be for the Indian and Pakistani populations, the concern for ourselves here is not proportionate to the (tiny) risk," said Cham Dallas, a University of Georgia toxicologist. He is helping the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention coordinate medical response to possible nuclear attacks on the United States. "The effects here in the United States will be minimal." Other experts say there would be no real U.S. risk. "In terms of health effects, I think the risks are vanishingly small," said former National Cancer Institute director Arthur Upton, a leading authority on the health effects of radiation. "I don't think one can say it's a public health threat." That's because by the time the radiation travels across the globe, it would spread out in the air so much that it would register only a minuscule increase over normal background radiation, Upton said. Ordinary "background radiation" - which emanates from space, seeps up from Earth's core and is ingested in food - exposes the average American to about 100 millirems of exposure per year, he said. (A millirem is a unit of absorbed radiation; one millirem is the amount absorbed by the average TV viewer over one year.) A nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India would add less than one millirem a year to the average American's exposure, Upton predicted. America would benefit as well from prevalent weather patterns at this time of year. The South Asia wind is quite stagnant during the summer, said Tony Barnston, forecast operations chief at the International Research Institute for Climate Prediction in New York. But if India and Pakistan exchanged nuclear bombs in winter, winds would blow east much faster and radiation could reach the U.S. West Coast in less than a week, he said. Still, a Pakistan-India nuclear exchange would set a new standard for human horror: A Pentagon intelligence report estimates that the dead could total 9 million to 12 million, based on population centers that could be targeted. Copyright © 2002 Cape Cod Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 13 Trail opens against man accused of stealing radioactive material from German nuclear installation Tue Jun 4,10:06 AM ET FRANKFURT, Germany - A German man accused of stealing radioactive material from a nuclear reprocessing facility argued his innocence at the opening of his trial Tuesday, telling the court, "I am not a thief, nor do I have terrorist tendencies." Joao Manuel Martins Albuquerque, 47, told a state court in the western city of Karlsruhe he had removed several radioactive rags and section of pipe full of radioactive liquid in order to test security measures at the plant. "I wanted to know if it was possible to smuggle out radioactive material," said Albuquerque, who had worked since 1997 at the plant at Karlsruhe, not far from the French border. Prosecutors have charged Albuquerque with illegally handling and releasing radioactive substances, as well as causing bodily harm. He is believed to have removed the substances between January 1999 and March 2001. Albuquerque was arrested last July after a routine urine test revealed unusually high levels of radiation. A search of his apartment also turned up high levels of radioactivity. According to prosecutors, Albuquerque was able to smuggle the materials out by packing them in newspaper and leaving them at a turnstile before passing through the security control. Once he was through, he retrieved the packages and left the premises. He stored the materials in his apartment until the urine test raised the authorities' suspicion, at which point he called his girlfriend and asked her to dispose of them. Police later found the rags in a clothes donation box and the pipe buried near their home. The man's girlfriend and daughter also suffered high levels of exposure to radiation. Their identities were not released. About 200 tons of spent fuel from German nuclear power plants was reprocessed at the plant in Karlsruhe between 1971 and 1990. Research work was later carried out there. Work to dismantle the plant has been going on since 1996. The trial is expected to last until June 21. (me-swg) Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. ***************************************************************** 14 Trail opens against man accused of stealing radioactive material from German nuclear installation * /Tue Jun 4,10:06 AM ET/ FRANKFURT, Germany - A German man accused of stealing radioactive material from a nuclear reprocessing facility argued his innocence at the opening of his trial Tuesday, telling the court, "I am not a thief, nor do I have terrorist tendencies." Joao Manuel Martins Albuquerque, 47, told a state court in the western city of Karlsruhe he had removed several radioactive rags and section of pipe full of radioactive liquid in order to test security measures at the plant. "I wanted to know if it was possible to smuggle out radioactive material," said Albuquerque, who had worked since 1997 at the plant at Karlsruhe, not far from the French border. Prosecutors have charged Albuquerque with illegally handling and releasing radioactive substances, as well as causing bodily harm. He is believed to have removed the substances between January 1999 and March 2001. Albuquerque was arrested last July after a routine urine test revealed unusually high levels of radiation. A search of his apartment also turned up high levels of radioactivity. According to prosecutors, Albuquerque was able to smuggle the materials out by packing them in newspaper and leaving them at a turnstile before passing through the security control. Once he was through, he retrieved the packages and left the premises. He stored the materials in his apartment until the urine test raised the authorities' suspicion, at which point he called his girlfriend and asked her to dispose of them. Police later found the rags in a clothes donation box and the pipe buried near their home. The man's girlfriend and daughter also suffered high levels of exposure to radiation. Their identities were not released. About 200 tons of spent fuel from German nuclear power plants was reprocessed at the plant in Karlsruhe between 1971 and 1990. Research work was later carried out there. Work to dismantle the plant has been going on since 1996. The trial is expected to last until June 21. (me-swg) Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 15 (en) Anti-Nuke Action -Resistance#12 (AFI) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 22:38:47 -0500 (CDT) ________________________________________________ A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E http://www.ainfos.ca/ ________________________________________________ ANTI-NUKE ACTION NOBODY WITH MORE THAN TWO BRAIN CELLS doubts the need to close down Sellafield. The only question is how? This article is aimed at bringing to attention what we regard as the most significant anti-Sellafield action of recent times. Most significant in that it actually had a direct impact on British Nuclear Fuels. On the 14th of February about 180 people took part in the blockading of the two main access roads to the Sellafield plant, disrupting the arrival of it?s workforce. This followed on from a protest at British Nuclear Fuels Headquarters the day before and a smaller blockade last December. The actions were organised by Irish environmentalist group Gluaiseacht, and are only the beginning. It Can Be Done Success can be achieved. The anti-nuclear movement in Germany, where about a third of electricity is generated from nuclear power plants, has not only stopped the State?s nuclear programme but has reversed it - the German government is now committed to closing down it?s nuclear industry. That phasing out is to happen very slowly, over decades, and only if they don?t make a U-turn first, but nonetheless it is a first step. The successes of the German anti-nuclear movement flow from two things: firstly direct action, for instance the blockading of railways, roads, and train stations in the path of shipments of nuclear waste (often on their way to Sellafield).Secondly the participation of all sections of the community, not just an activist elite. This isn?t something peculiar to Germans, there is only one reason that there isn?t a nuclear industry on this side of the Irish sea, that?s because ordinary people stopped the government from building nuclear power plants in Wexford in the late 70?s/early 80?s. Then a widespread network of independent groups around the country protesting at E.S.B. offices, a series of free festivals in Wexford, and finally the threat to occupy the construction site, saw the government?s plans quietly shelved. We could wait for the politicians to sort it out for us: but it?s been supposedly at ?the top of the agenda? for years now without any impact, the only thing changing is Sellafield is getting bigger. It?s taken them 50 years to come up with a anti-nuclear civil defence programme, and when they do it?s a fiasco. So a cynic might say they?re happy with their bunker in Athlone and screw the rest of us. We say it?s time to fight back. ******************************************************* >From the pages of Resistance#12, regular monthly bulletin of the Anarchist Federation Ireland. To read, or download in PDF format, go to: http://www.afireland.cjb.net To subscribe to Resistance, contact: ireaf@yahoo.ie _____ ******** ****** The A-Infos News Service ****** News about and of interest to anarchists ****** COMMANDS: lists@ainfos.ca REPLIES: a-infos-d@ainfos.ca HELP: a-infos-org@ainfos.ca WWW: http://www.ainfos.ca/ INFO: http://www.ainfos.ca/org -To receive a-infos in one language only mail lists@ainfos.ca the message: unsubscribe a-infos subscribe a-infos-X where X = en, ca, de, fr, etc. (i.e. the language code) ***************************************************************** 16 ENERGY DEPARTMENT: Reid targets official's links to companies Tuesday, June 04, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Senator says undersecretary who oversees nuclear waste projects may have conflicts By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid has targeted Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's point man on the Yucca Mountain Project and challenged whether the executive has violated conflict-of-interest laws in overseeing nuclear waste projects. Reid, D-Nev., has called for an ethics investigation of Undersecretary Robert Card, who was an official in two companies involved in nuclear waste decontamination at weapons plants before he joined the Bush administration in May 2001. "It appears that Mr. Card has worked on matters involving his former employer in violation of the conflict-of-interest guidelines, and in violation of federal statutes governing conflict of interest," Reid said in a May 28 letter to Amy Comstock, director of the Office of Government Ethics, an agency that investigates conflicts within the executive branch. "Until these questions are answered, the integrity of Mr. Card's decisions will be in doubt, including those related to Yucca Mountain," said Reid, who made the letter public Monday after The Washington Post published a story about it. Abraham has defended Card and said DOE lawyers have reviewed conflict charges and have found no basis for them. "Undersecretary Card has not been involved in any fashion directing work of contracts actions as it relates to CH2M Hill and Kaiser Hill," DOE spokesman Joe Davis, referring to Card's former employers, said Monday. No specific allegations have been made regarding Card's oversight of the Yucca Mountain Project. Davis said neither CH2M Hill nor Kaiser-Hill has been involved in the Nevada program. Davis said Yucca project opponents are mounting "last-minute character assassination in the desperate hope they can influence an upcoming vote on Yucca Mountain." The Senate is expected to vote this summer whether to authorize the site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas for a nuclear waste repository. Card, 49, worked for 20 years at CH2M Hill Co., a Colorado-based environmental consulting and engineering firm. In 1996 he became chief executive of Kaiser-Hill Company LLC, a venture that won a multibillion-dollar contract to clean up the Energy Department's nuclear weapons plant at Rocky Flats outside Denver. Kaiser-Hill and CH2M Hill hold five other DOE contracts including nuclear waste removal from the government plant at Hanford, Wash. As undersecretary, Card oversees DOE's environmental programs. Questions about his relationships with his former companies have occurred since he joined the government. Some were reported by the Wall Street Journal in a February story that Reid cited in his call for an investigation. In February, Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., began investigating Card. Her aides were overwhelmed by the volume of information provided by the Energy Department, and she passed the task to the larger Democratic staff of the House Government Reform Committee. A panel spokesman did not respond to a call Monday. Reid said Monday that new information brought to his staff has raised questions about Card. "The main thing we have been given is the fact that he has been more hands-on than he has led people to believe," Reid said. "Whether that is valid or not we have to see." Reid declined to provide further details. "I think we're going to leave this to the ethics people. They will have to follow up on this," he said. "People aren't going to accept what I have to say." Reid said he is not pursuing a vendetta against Card, who has urged members of Congress to approve Yucca Mountain. "I say to that I have responsibilities separate and apart from Yucca Mountain. I am a subcommittee chairman, and that's my job," said Reid, who leads a Senate panel on nuclear regulations. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 17 Nuclear deposit will turn into a green lawn. Maybe Pravda.RU ¹ Jun, 03 2002 The citizens of the Arkhangelsk region have considered this area extremely dangerous. Going to the Mironov Mountain was a bad sign. Ten years ago, people did not even realize that they were growing their carrots and potatoes next to a real radioactive dump. This area (that used to be of top secrecy but was then then forgotten) gave birth to many legends and horrible rumors. Nuclear technologies were being developed in the early 1960s, and there were a lot of unpredictable and unclear things about the nuclear wastes. The site for constructing a complex of buildings to store nuclear waste was chosen in September of 1957. The site was located 12 kilometers from the city of Severodvinsk. This would never be done nowadays, for it is generally believed now that such a site must be located not less than 50-70 kilometers from a settlement. The storage for nuclear waste was built with the use of the latest technologies of that time. However, the construction of several objects on Mironov Mountain was not completed: fire-fighting, ventilation, drainage and other systems were not finished. The objects were put into effect in December of 1961 and in October of 1962. The storage was filled with nuclear waste very quickly until 1968, the peak of the nuclear opposition between the USA and the USSR. No one discussed the question of whethere the country was in need of nuclear subs or not; they were built at all costs. The operation of the storage was allegedly stopped at the end of 1968, but the construction of nuclear submarines continued, and more waste kept arriving until 1979 (no spent uranium was stored there fortunately). By this year, the place was filled with 1840 cubic meters of nuclear waste of low and medium activity. The nuclear graveyard was recollected only in 1990, when the geological exploration concern detected the increased level of gamma-emission. When the storage was opened in 1991, it was discovered that it was filled with water. If water linking into the storage, then there must be a way for it leave the storage. Therefore, it happens that radiation was spreading to every spring with the underground water. In 1992, the storage was put in operation again. In 1994, there was a complex engineering examination performed and a contract signed with a scientific institute of St.Petersburg for developing technical solutions in order to shut the storage down. Radio Liberty shocked the world with its message of 1995: “Mushroomers found a secret deposit of nuclear wastes. The storage is in a dilapidated condition; it is not known what will to happen with it in the future.” After that, the nuclear storage was provided with security: its “roof” was covered with another layer of asphalt, and dosimetric control was performed on regular basis. Everyone is sure now - both independent ecologists and officials – that everything is the fault of the people of the 1960s, when the storage was built and filled. Today, the situation is as follows: the Ministry for Atomic Power assigned six million rubles to Sevmash Enterprise in 2002 (this enterprise is in charge of the deposit) within the scope of the targeted federal program “Radiation and Nuclear Security of Russia.” The storage will be equipped with additional system of isolation and impervious protection. Specialists of Sevmash Enterprise say that the nuclear deposit is not dangerous at present moment. There has been a contract concluded with a scientific institute of St.Petersburg that has already offered four variants for abolishing the storage. Sevmash agreed upon the fourth variant that was called “Green Lawn.” The storage will be opened in a special way,;hard wastes will be reloaded into containers, and liquids will be processed and then prepared for shipment. The soil will be decontaminated, grass will be sown and barriers will be lifted. However, the leakage continues in spite of the fact that the works have already been started. Furthermore, it has recently been discovered that the condition of the Mironov Mountain nuclear storage is the best in comparison with 26 other objects of this kind in Russia. Andrey Mikhailov PRAVDA.Ru Severodvinsk Translated by Dmitry Sudakov Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU [http://www.pravda.ru/] ". When ***************************************************************** 18 Nebraska accused of reneging in nuclear dump agreement The Nando Times: Updated: June 4, 2002 6:33 a.m. EDT By KEVIN O'HANLON, Associated Press LINCOLN, Neb. (June 3, 2002 10:22 p.m. EDT) - Former Gov. Ben Nelson ordered subordinates to try to derail efforts to build a regional radioactive waste dump in Nebraska, despite the state's entering a compact to host the facility, a lawyer charged. The allegation came Monday as a trial began in a federal lawsuit accusing Nebraska of wrongly refusing to issue a license in 1998 for the storage site near Butte, along the South Dakota border. Lawyers for the state said the rejection was "based on sound science and compelling facts." The dump was intended to store low-level radioactive waste from Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana. Such waste includes contaminated tools and clothing from nuclear power plants, hospitals and research centers. Besides telling aides to "create noise and difficulties" and stall the project in court or administratively, attorney Alan Peterson said Nelson, now a U.S. senator, enlisted the help of grass-roots opponents of the dump. "They became his allies," Peterson said. Brad Reynolds, who is leading Nebraska's defense team, rejected allegations that Nelson and other officials conspired to thwart the dump. "The answer, your honor, is not simply 'No,' it's 'Hell, no,'" Reynolds told U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf. "That bad faith card will not play." Rather, Nebraska denied the license because of pollution concerns and a high water table near the proposed site, the defense said. The trial began the same day that four Southeastern states and a regional commission charged with building a similar dump sued North Carolina, asking for $90 million in sanctions. In 1999, North Carolina withdrew from a regional pact and ceased work on a planned waste site south of Raleigh. In Nebraska, taxpayers could be ordered to pay up to $200 million if the state loses its case. The lawsuit there was filed by utilities that generate radioactive waste. They were later joined by the four other states slated to use the dump. Nebraska joined Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana in 1983 in forming a regional waste compact. The other states voted in 1987 to locate the dump in Nebraska. In 2000, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said there appeared to be evidence that Nebraska officials tried to thwart plans to build the storage site. The court also rejected the state's argument that it is protected from such lawsuits under the U.S. Constitution's 11th Amendment, which gives states immunity from most lawsuits seeking monetary damages. The court upheld a ruling that Nebraska had protection from the utilities, but not the other states. In the Southeast, North Carolina was originally among eight states that made up a waste compact. South Carolina dropped out in 1995, and the group now includes Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, Tennessee and Virginia. North Carolina officials have said the state was not treated fairly by the group, and they were within their rights to withdraw. But the other states and the Southeast Compact Commission allege the state violated the law that created the compact. "North Carolina did not live up to its promise," commission chairman James Setser said Monday. Copyright © 2002 Nando Media ***************************************************************** 19 Editorial: EIS omits alternative to Yucca Las Vegas SUN June 04, 2002 PECO Energy of Philadelphia is part of Exelon Corp. of Chicago, the country's largest producer of nuclear energy. PECO is also part of an agreement signed two years ago with the Energy Department calling for the federal agency to take ownership in 2004 of nuclear waste piling up at PECO's two nuclear power plants in southeastern Pennsylvania. Interestingly, the agreement doesn't mean that PECO's nuclear waste would be crisscrossing state borders on its way to some remote storage site. Rather, it means that dry storage space would be built on site. The agreement mirrors what the state of Nevada advocates -- let the nuclear plants store their waste on site until there's a better solution than Yucca Mountain, where ground water infiltration and (geologically) frequent earthquakes make a mockery of the site as a solution. Because the PECO agreement means the utility's 1.5 million electricity ratepayers would no longer be pitching in to pay for Yucca, other utilities have sued the Energy Department in federal court. That's unfortunate, but more unfortunate is that this agreement was never mentioned in the Energy Department's Environmental Impact Statement filed in February on Yucca Mountain. The purpose of an EIS is to analyze every option, so that lawmakers will have all the information before deciding. The Energy Department's excuse is that the PECO agreement would not work everywhere because of the expense. In our view, the agreement should have been included so that lawmakers could have decided for themselves. In weighing the true cost of Yucca Mountain, after all, lawmakers might want to consider the potential cost of a transportation accident or the cost of contamination in the event of an earthquake. Additionally, lawmakers might have wanted to consider that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has calculated that on-site, dry storage would be safe for the next 100 to 150 years -- plenty of time to find a safer solution than Yucca. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 20 Yucca fight gets lift from celebrities Las Vegas SUN June 04, 2002 By Benjamin Grove WASHINGTON -- A band of 70 celebrities led by former "M*A*S*H" star Mike Farrell today joined the fight against Yucca Mountain, one day before a Senate panel is likely to approve it. "It's now or never, in some instances," Farrell said. "Now is the time to say (to Congress): It's time to do your job." Farrell chatted with reporters in the Capitol today before planned meetings with six senators: Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.; Richard Durbin, D-Ill.; Russell Feingold, D-Wis.; Tom Harkin, D-Iowa; Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.; and Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich. Stabenow and Leahy have said they support Yucca; the others are likely to oppose it. Farrell brought a letter signed by 70 other personalities, mostly actors and musicians, including actors Richard Dreyfuss, Anthony Edwards, Melissa Gilbert, Danny Glover, Camryn Manheim, Carl and Rob Reiner, Tim Robbins, Bradley Whitford and Farrell's former "M*A*S*H" co-stars Jamie Farr and Loretta Swit. Others on the list: singer and actor Harry Belafonte, singer Barbra Streisand and disc jockey Casey Kasem. Farrell, who now stars in NBC's "Providence," said his opposition to nuclear power started 30 years ago, when he actively opposed the construction of a California nuclear plant. He has followed the Yucca issue largely in the media, he said. Farrell said he decided to come to Washington to use his familiar face to lobby against the controversial Nevada nuclear waste dump on the eve of a Yucca vote by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. The full Senate is expected to vote -- and likely approve Yucca -- next month. Farrell said it took him only a week or so to enlist the help of fellow celebrities by e-mail, phone and fax. "These are just people but they happen to be celebrities," Farrell said. "For some reason, people seem to pay attention to celebrities." Farrell, a longtime human rights and environmental activist, said he objected to Yucca, because he believes it is not a safe place to build a national repository for high-level nuclear waste. He also believes that shipping waste from nuclear plants and other temporary waste storage sites to Nevada risks accidents and terrorist attacks. "A crash or terrorist attack involving even one of these shipments through any one of our communities could be catastrophic, yet the Department of Energy's Yucca Mountain recommendation lacks a detailed plan for ensuring the safety of these shipments," the celebrities' letter said. Farrell advocates securing waste where it is, mostly stored in cooling pools and in dry, above-ground casks at nuclear power plants. Nuclear industry officials say that is not a permanent solution, and point to a government promise to haul the waste away to Nevada. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., chatted with Farrell for a few minutes in a small office in the Capitol, thanking him for his help. The environmental group Public Citizen helped Farrell organize the trip. Farrell said he hoped to talk to more senators, and planned to urge other celebrities to do the same. "(Senators) are under a lot of pressure from the administration to go their way," Farrell said. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 21 Nuclear Waste-Dumping Tax Issue Will Go to Voters The Salt Lake Tribune -- Tuesday, June 4, 2002 BY JUDY FAHYS Utahns will have a chance this fall to vote on a law to ban the dumping of "hotter" nuclear waste in the state and to increase taxes on the low-radioactivity waste already permitted. Proponents of the "Radioactive Waste Restriction Act" estimated Monday they had gathered nearly twice as many signatures as necessary to qualify for the statewide ballot in November. "We won't be sure until final tallies are done," said Jason Groenewold, spokesman for the Healthy Environment Alliance Utah, a member of the coalition pushing for the waste-tax bill. Proponents say the tax proceeds would go to schools and homeless Utahns. But Envirocare of Utah, the company most directly affected by the waste law, insists increased taxes would put it out of business. "It's a great opportunity for the people of Utah to be given the power to decide if we want our state to be the dumpsite for the nation's nuclear waste," said Groenewold. "By signing the initiative, Utahns will be saying loud and clear that, ' No, we do not want to become the nation's nuclear waste dump.' " Backers of a ballot measure to outlaw taxes-by-initative abandoned their campaign last month and announced plans to focus instead on derailing the waste tax. A third petition campaign, to ban concealed weapons in schools and churches, failed to get the 76,180 signatures necessary to qualify for the ballot. Waste-tax proponents said their petition campaign collected a total of 130,000 signatures and had strong support in every county. Utah lawmakers balked at raising the tax three times in a decade before imposing the current tax of 10 cents a cubic foot in 2000. Proponents point out the taxes for two comparable facilities face much higher taxes, $20 per foot in Washington state and $235 in South Carolina, but opponents contend the comparison is misleading. © Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune ***************************************************************** 22 [generalnews] U.S. to conduct subcritical nuclear test Wed Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 22:55:35 -0500 (CDT) U.S. to conduct subcritical nuclear test Wed Tuesday, June 4, 2002 at 17:30 JST WASHINGTON The United States will conduct a subcritical nuclear test Wednesday at an underground test site in Nevada, the Energy Department said Monday. The test, the 17th of its kind and the fourth under the administration of President George W. Bush, will be part of the so- called Oboe series of relatively small-scale subcritical nuclear experiments, the department said. (Kyodo News) To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: generalnews-unsubscribe@egroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 23 Bush Declares 'First Strike' Policy; To Resume Production of Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 21:51:18 -0500 (CDT) [All ads are inserted by Topica without our consent. Ignore them.] IN THIS MESSAGE: * Bush Declares 'First Strike' Policy * To Resume Production of Nuclear Warhead Triggers --------------------------------------------------------------- June 2, 2002 U.S. Must Act First to Battle Terror, Bush Tells Cadets By ELISABETH BUMILLER WEST POINT, N.Y., June 1 President Bush told nearly 1,000 graduates at the United States Military Academy here today that the cold war doctrines of containment and deterrence were irrelevant in a world where the only strategy for defeating America's new enemies was to strike them first. "If we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long," the president said, speaking at the commencement of the 204th graduating class of West Point, the nation's oldest military academy. "We must take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans and confront the worst threats before they emerge." In a toughly worded speech that seemed aimed at preparing Americans for a potential war with Iraq, Mr. Bush added, "The only path to safety is action. And this nation will act." He did not mention Iraq by name, but warned that "even weak states and closed groups could attain a catastrophic power to strike great nations." Nonetheless, a senior administration official said after Mr. Bush's speech that "he has no war plans on his desk," and that he had not yet settled on a course of action in Iraq. Mr. Bush's speech, delivered in a football stadium under a cloudless sky to long gray lines of somber, white-gloved graduates, was a forceful distillation and refinement of the war themes of the Bush presidency since Sept. 11. But coming only four days after the president's return from Europe and Russia, the speech also reached for new themes of building up relations between the superpowers and conducting an American foreign policy more focused on human rights. "America stands for more than the absence of war," Mr. Bush said. "We have a great opportunity to extend a just peace by replacing poverty, repression and resentment around the world with hope of a better day." His remarks were also a personal and at times emotional appeal to the graduates, whose West Point predecessors include Ulysses S. Grant, Dwight D. Eisenhower and Douglas MacArthur, the veterans of more conventional American wars. "History has also issued its call to your generation," Mr. Bush said. "In your last year, America was attacked by a ruthless and resourceful enemy. You graduate from this academy in a time of war, taking your place in an American military that is powerful and is honorable." As he spoke, parents and friends of the graduates continued to flow into Michie Stadium, made late by traffic that had backed up for hours on the narrow, winding roads leading into West Point. But the views along the way of the Hudson River, mist-shrouded in the early morning, were breathtaking, and the mood in the stadium on a warm June morning was festive. Mr. Bush frequently invoked the history of an institution established in 1802 by Thomas Jefferson at a sharp bend in the Hudson, where command of the point once meant control of movement between Canada, New England, the Great Lakes and the American interior. West Point said today's graduates made up its 204th class because no classes graduated in 1810 or 1816 and there were two graduating classes in 1861, 1917, 1918, 1922 and 1943. "The United States Military Academy is the guardian of values that have shaped the soldiers who have shaped the history of the world," Mr. Bush said. Looking directly at the graduates, he added: "I am proud of the men and women who have fought on my orders. The nation respects and trusts our military, and we are confident of your victories to come." Many of the graduates today were women, 144 out of 958, and some are almost certain to be sent to Afghanistan within the year. Although the cadets were not the first in a generation to graduate at a time of war in the spring of 1999, the United States was bombing Kosovo they were the first since Pearl Harbor to have confronted an attack on American soil. Many of them know graduates from recent classes who have served in Afghanistan. "In defending the peace, we face a threat without precedent," Mr. Bush said. "The attacks of Sept. 11 required a few hundred thousand dollars in the hands of a few dozen evil and deluded men. All of the chaos and suffering they caused came at much less than the cost of a single tank." The president also spoke of a future in which the United States would aggressively promote human rights around the world. The 20th century, he said, "ended with a single surviving model of human progress, based on nonnegotiable demands of human dignity, the rule of law, limits on the power of the state, respect for women and private property and free speech and equal justice and religious tolerance." America, he said, cannot impose that vision on other countries, but it can provide financial aid and support for the countries that accept it. "In our development aid, in our diplomatic educational assistance, the United States will promote moderation and tolerance and human rights," he said. He added that "the requirements of freedom apply fully to Africa and Latin America and the entire Islamic world." The cadets met Mr. Bush's remarks with serious faces and then standing applause. In his weekly radio address, broadcast after he spoke at West Point, Mr. Bush said that in providing the "ultimate service" to the nation, the graduating cadets set an example that civilians could follow. He renewed his call for every citizen to volunteer 4,000 hours of public service, spread over a lifetime, and urged Congress to expand federal volunteer programs. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company ============================================= June 2, 2002 U.S. Will Resume Production of Nuclear Warhead Triggers By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON, June 1 The federal government has announced plans to resume production of plutonium "pits," which are used to trigger nuclear warheads, the Energy Department has announced. The department halted production of the softball-size plutonium triggers in 1989. "We need to have the capacity to manufacture certified pits to maintain the safety, security and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent into the future," Secretary Spencer Abraham of the Energy Department said on Friday. Design work is beginning for the manufacturing plant, which is expected to cost $2.2 billion to $4.4 billion, depending on its production capacity, said a statement from the National Nuclear Security Administration, which is part of the Energy Department. The plant, to be built at a weapons facility, would start production by 2020. The announcement from the Energy Department said the site-selection process would begin in September. The department relies on refurbishing triggers, as they are needed, from disassembled warheads. That limited production, done at the Pantex facility near Amarillo, Tex., cannot meet long-term needs, officials said. A recent study by the Bush administration urged construction of a pit-production plant, and some members of both the House and Senate have expressed concern that the lack of a such plant could jeopardize future readiness of the country's nuclear weapons stockpile. Plutonium triggers were last produced at the Rocky Flats facility in Colorado. That plant is being cleaned of radioactive waste. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company ___________________________________________________________ FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance under- standing of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed with- out profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. _____________________________________________________________________________ __ _____________________________________________________________________________ __________________ SolidarityInfoServices Solidarity4Ever, LaborLeftNews, BayAreaNews, Labor4Justice and other lists for social justice activists and others who want in- depth coverage of issues, insightful analysis, thought-provoking commentary and notice of important social change events. News - Analysis - Commentary in Service to Social Justice What you need to know, not just to understand the world ... but to change it! ____________________________________________________________ While subscriptions are free, contributions to support this work are gratefully accepted. Make checks payable to SolidarityInfoServices 1737 Allston Way, Berkeley, CA 94703. If what you receive is useful, tell others; if not, tell us. _____________________________________________________________ ========================================================== Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Get the latest weather, sports, and lifestyle news you can't afford to miss, all at a price you can afford to pay! Click now! http://click.topica.com/caaacQXb1dc1Ab2zMgDf/TopOffers ========================================================== ______________________________________________ Solidarity4Ever is distributed by SolidarityInfoServices, which gathers the news you can use to understand and change the world. _________________________________________________ This is a read-only list, but if you have an item you want posted, send it to the list moderator at SolidarityInfoServices@igc.org, who will determine whether it is appropriate for redistribution. You can temporarily suspend delivery by sending a request to the same address. Notify the moderator at the time you want delivery resumed. You can also manage this function yourself by going to the list at www.igc.topica.com/lists/Solidarity4Ever where you will have to register with Topica in order to administer your own subscription. _______________________________________________ ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: map@pencil.math.missouri.edu EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?b1dc1A.b2zMgD Or send an email to: solidarity4Ever-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================ ***************************************************************** 24 India and Pakistan Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 21:56:14 -0500 (CDT) Institute for Public Accuracy 915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa@accuracy.org ___________________________________________________ Monday, June 3, 2002 Interviews Available: India and Pakistan PERVEZ HOODBHOY, hoodbhoy@lns.mit.edu, http://www.chowk.com Professor of physics at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, Pakistan, Hoodbhoy said today: "Nuclear affairs are now being guided by wishful, delusional thinking. The most frightening delusion is India's trivialization of Pakistan's nuclear capability.... Lacking any desire for political settlement ... jihadists in Kashmir [are attempting to] provoke full-scale war between India and Pakistan, destabilize Musharraf, and settle scores with the U.S.... Many observers have noted that attacks on Indian civilians coincided with the visits of high officials from Western countries. Could the upcoming visits by Richard Armitage and Rumsfeld provide a trigger for the next atrocity and a nuclear war?" MOHAN RAO, rao@econs.umass.edu Rao, a professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, has just returned from India. He said today: "In both India and Pakistan much of the rhetoric is aimed at a domestic audience. It's a race to the bottom. In Pakistan there's been a series of dictatorships while in India there's been more of a tradition of democracy, but there's been a growth of extremist ideology in both. In India, the BJP Hindu fundamentalist party has used fascist ideology and violence to mask narrow economic agendas. It has used the Kashmir question to galvanize the population. Now, the BJP is benefitting from the silent majority seeing a benefit from cooperating with the U.S. and the anti-Islamic rubric of the 'war on terrorism.' The U.S. is asserting its power overtly with money and covertly with intelligence...." RAHUL MAHAJAN, rahul@tao.ca, http://www.nowarcollective.com Author of "The New Crusade: America's War Against Terrorism," Mahajan said today: "The 'you're with us or you're with the terrorists,' 'axis of evil,' 'ready for preemptive action' rhetoric, combined with bellicose U.S. actions, not just in Afghanistan, but also towards Iraq -- less directly towards Venezuela, Cuba, Somalia, potentially others -- has naturally created a climate in which non-superpower states argue that they can take similar license as the U.S. already has -- Sharon in Israel, Vajpayee in India.... The governments of India and Pakistan do have an interest in a limited war -- a border skirmish with hundreds or thousands of deaths -- to help stabilize both governments domestically. They have no interest in all-out war of a conventional kind, let alone nuclear." M. V. RAMANA, ramana@princeton.edu, http://www.sciam.com/2001/1201issue/1201ramana.html, http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/5409/nuclear.html Research staffer at the Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton University, Ramana is coauthor of a recent Scientific American article, "India, Pakistan and the Bomb." He said today: "From what we know, India and Pakistan have not yet deployed their nuclear weapons.... Even under these circumstances, if India launched attacks across the line of control in Kashmir, it could result in a full-scale war, possibly leading to nuclear war.... The new U.S. nuclear posture review calls for expanding the role of nuclear weapons. That could act as a model for India and Pakistan in terms of thinking about using nuclear weapons on the battlefield. Despite the rhetoric around the recent accord between Bush and Putin, the U.S. and Russia still have thousands of nuclear weapons deployed, many on hair-trigger alert. As part of its efforts at defusing the India-Pakistan crisis and urging India and Pakistan to not deploy their nuclear weapons, the U.S. should follow what it preaches by de-alerting its missiles." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 ***************************************************************** 25 Reid wants ethics investigation of Energy Department official Associated Press [online@rgj.com] 6/3/2002 05:00 pm Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., is calling for an ethics investigation into whether an Energy Department official improperly helped two nuclear waste companies that once employed him. An Energy Department spokesman said Reid's allegations amount to his latest attempt to kill the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. Reid, the Senate's second-ranking Democrat, said Undersecretary of Energy Robert Card, who runs the department's nuclear waste cleanup programs, appears to have worked on issues involving his former companies _ Kaiser-Hill Co. and CH2M Hill _ in violation of Bush administration conflict-of-interest rules and federal statutes. In a letter sent last week, Reid asked the Office of Government Ethics to investigate. "As a senator who is particularly concerned about the stewardship, integrity and objectivity of the nation's nuclear policy decision-making process, I am troubled by the unanswered ethical questions relating to a central figure in this important process,"Reid wrote to Amy Comstock, the ethics office director."Until these questions are answered, the integrity of Mr. Card's decisions will be in doubt, including those related to Yucca Mountain." Card testified last month in favor of the Yucca Mountain project, but the actions being questioned involve his former employers'contracts to clean up nuclear waste in Hanford, Wash., and ship radioactive waste from the Rocky Flats nuclear arsenal in Denver to the Energy Department's Savannah River facility in South Carolina. South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges, a Democrat, who has clashed with the Energy Department on the shipment of plutonium to his state, also has raised questions about Card's involvement in projects. Reid, citing a Wall Street Journal article published in February, said Card, as an Energy Department official, has been made decisions"regarding multibillion dollar federal contracts"held by Kaiser-Hill and CH2M Hill. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham denied that Card has a conflict of interest. "The department's legal counsel reviewed all the critics'charges and found no basis to them,"Abraham said in a statement. Joe Davis, an Energy Department spokesman, said Card removed himself from working on issues involving the two companies. Davis said Reid's letter was timed to influence the Senate's upcoming debate and vote on whether to store 77,000 tons of the nation's nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, 95 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "The project's opponents have failed with their fear campaign,"Davis said."Now they're engaging in character assassination." © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 26 Nuclear power plants running out of storage space By Doug Abrahms [online@rgj.com] 6/3/2002 10:33 pm Jay Kurowski/RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL WASHINGTON — From New York to Arizona, nuclear power plants are running out of room in the spent-fuel pool. By 2004, about 30 power plants across the nation will run out of storage space in the ponds used to cool and store used nuclear fuel, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group. And the vast majority of the nation’s 104 commercial atomic reactors will hit this same problem by 2010 — the earliest date that the proposed nuclear waste facility could open at Yucca Mountain near Las Vegas. “We begin running out of space at the end in 2003,” said Sheri Foote, a spokeswoman for Arizona Public Service Co. The company owns the Palo Verde nuclear plant about 45 miles outside of Phoenix. “Our hope is the government will ultimately be taking this stuff from us.” Until then, U.S. power plants are busy planning and building above-ground storage sites next to their nuclear plants to keep radioactive material for decades. Workers at the Palo Verde plant are pouring concrete for the first of possibly several pads that will house spent nuclear rods for more than a decade, Foote said. Today, most of the 50,000 tons of used nuclear fuel rods nationwide is in ponds next to power plants, with water cooling the uranium before the material eventually gets carted away. Nuclear waste is safer in the cooling ponds than it would be transporting it to Yucca Mountain but would ultimately be the safest in the long-term repository. But since a high-level nuclear waste dump never has been built, the cooling ponds have turned into longer-term storage that are reaching their maximum. “The pools were basically built for about 20 years storage,” said Rick Kimble, a spokesman for the Southern Co., which operates six nuclear plants at three sites in Georgia and Alabama and has started the process to build dry-cask storage for its nuclear waste. The radioactive material is pulled out of the ponds and stored it in what looks like large soda cans about 16 feet tall. These cylinders are made of several inches of steel and concrete, and sit upright on concrete pads at least 3 inches thick. A big argument for building Yucca Mountain is that the used fuel rods are piling up at power plants across the country and a national waste dump must be built so fuel too weak for nuclear reactors can be stored there. The Senate is set to vote on Yucca Mountain within the next two months, and its approval would allow the Energy Department to file an application for the nuclear waste dump with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. But Nevada representatives are flipping around that argument: Since most power plants will run out of storage long before Yucca Mountain can open, why not leave the nuclear waste in place next to the power plants until a better long-term solution is developed? Scientists are looking at possibilities to reprocess the uranium that could be workable in 10 or 20 years, said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. That solution could eliminate the huge costs of building Yucca Mountain and the high risks of accidents or terrorist attacks while transporting the nuclear waste to Nevada, he said “We’re already doing (on-site storage of nuclear waste),” Ensign said. “There’s no risk to this.” But the Department of Energy and most electric companies disagree. Nothing prohibits the Energy Department from removing the nuclear waste from Yucca Mountain in later years if scientists figure out a better way to handle the material, said Kimble of the Southern Co. “All they’re doing is storing it underground,” he said. “It make sense to have a central repository.” Prairie Island nuclear plant in Red Wing, Minn., is in a unique time crunch. A state law has limited the amount of nuclear waste it can store on-site, and the power plant will reach its maximum in 2007, said Scott Northard, director of nuclear asset management for Xcel Energy. Xcel, which owns the plant, is one of several power companies trying to build a nuclear waste dump on the Skull Valley Goshute reservation in Utah to serve as temporary storage until Yucca Mountain is finished. If Xcel cannot start shipping its spent nuclear rods by 2007 or get the state government to push back its deadline, the company may be forced to shut down Prairie Island, which provides 20 percent of the electricity in the region, Northard said. Because Prairie Island’s future is so uncertain, the utility is getting bids from companies to replace electricity that would be lost if plant were forced to close, he said. Vermont Yankee nuclear plant about 10 miles from Brattleboro, Vt., will run out of room in 2008 and no decision has been made about what to do with the waste after that, spokesman Rob Williams said. “All of those issues could be avoided if (the Department of Energy) lives up to its obligation as charged by Congress to identify a site for disposal, which they have done, and begin removing fuel from the country’s nuclear power plants,” he said. “(If the agency doesn’t), it puts a burden on the utilities whose main focus is producing electricity.” © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 27 Yucca Mountain isn’t only place to store nuclear waste, some of its foes say By Doug Abrahms [online@rgj.com] RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL 6/3/2002 10:35 pm WASHINGTON — An alternative to building a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain does exist, Nevada representatives say, but the Department of Energy doesn’t want to talk about it. In 2000 the department signed an agreement with Peco Energy of Philadelphia that will turn over control of the utility’s nuclear waste at its Peach Bottom power plant in Pennsylvania to the federal government. Peco would store its nuclear waste on-site in casks and manage the facility, but the Energy Department takes ownership of the radioactive material. The utility gets the nuclear waste off its hands while the Energy Department can rid itself of a mounting liability for missing its 1998 deadline to start removing used fuel from commercial reactors, said Joe Egan, a lawyer working for the state of Nevada. Several utilities have sued the Energy Department for not living up to its agreement to take control of the spent nuclear fuel from commercial reactors. “It solves all these problems and avoids the transportation of this stuff to a site that no one knows … will be suitable for deep geologic disposal,” said Egan, a former nuclear engineer who is working to stop Yucca Mountain. But the Energy Department failed to mention this agreement in its massive environmental impact report on Yucca Mountain filed in February, he said. The agreement with Peco, a subsidiary of Excelon Co., is not a long-term solution to the buildup of high-level nuclear waste across the nation, said Joe Davis, an Energy Department spokesman. The department considered the Peco option but found leaving the material at U.S. reactors would cost more in the long term than building Yucca Mountain. The agency did not mention this contract by name in its final report to Congress. Part of the Peco deal allows the Peach Bottom plant to skip paying into the nuclear waste fund, which is supposed to cover the cost of Yucca Mountain. Nuclear power plants pay 0.1 cent per kilowatt-hour generated into the fund, which has collected about $17 billion to date. Because of this financing issue, electric companies and many state utility commissions generally oppose the Peco agreement and say it could derail plans to build a national nuclear waste dump. Several power companies sued the Energy Department in 2000 in federal appeals court seeking to overturn the deal, and the court is expected to make a decision this summer. “If all utilities were to enter into similar settlements, there would be no revenue flowing to the (fund) and the repository could never be built,” Laura Chappelle, chairwoman of the Michigan Public Service Commission, said at a House hearing on Yucca Mountain in April. But Robert Loux, executive director of Nevada’s Agency of Nuclear Projects, said the Energy Department does not want to highlight this option to Congress or public because the department wants to build Yucca Mountain. “It’s a deliberate strategy to make sure there’s no alternative to Yucca Mountain,” he said. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 28 Yucca: Where was Clancy on Sept. 11? Tuesday, June 04, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal COLUMN: Steve Sebelius Today's topic: Nuclear waste. Only kidding. You can read on safely. How about nuclear weapons instead? They're like nuclear waste, only there are already some in Nevada -- not at distant Yucca Mountain, but just up the road at Nellis Air Force base. Don't worry, however; the Air Force keeps them locked up pretty good. This, sadly, is not the case in other countries, at least if you believe the latest Tom Clancy book-cum-movie, "The Sum of All Fears," which hit theaters on Friday. Clancy, by way of explanation, is a terrific researcher, whose novels ring with the accuracy of a man who knows precisely what he's talking about. And, while he's not the world's greatest writer, his imagination exceeds that of the entire national security apparatus. It was Clancy, after all, who first envisioned the modern use of a jumbo jet as a weapon. At the tail end of "Debt of Honor," he writes about a Japanese airline pilot distressed that America has won yet another war against his country. He flies his 747 directly into the Capitol during a joint session of Congress, just as the president is overseeing a vote to install Clancy's Everyman hero, former CIA analyst Jack Ryan, as vice president. (As a result, Ryan becomes president, a post he's held for a few novels now.) In his book "The Sum of All Fears," Clancy envisioned Arab terrorists plotting a nuclear attack on the United States, a scenario that's become even more frightening in the days since the Sept. 11 attacks. The terrorists find an unexploded Israeli nuclear bomb (made with plutonium either stolen from or given by the United States, depending on which conspiracy theory you believe) and fashion a small "suitcase" nuke, which is smuggled into the United States and detonated at the Super Bowl. But the makers of Clancy's movie version turned out to have a little foresight, too. Instead of Arab terrorists -- a perfectly acceptable villain these days -- the film's authors chose right-wing, anti-immigrant, neo-Nazi Europeans as the bad guys. They extol Hitler's vision, if not his execution, as they gather for tea in tony Vienna. They join forces with white supremacists and Aryan Nations in the United States, latter-day Nazis in Germany and disaffected whites of South Africa in a loose, Internet-connected coalition trying to provoke a nuclear war between America and Russia. Once that's done, a neo-fascist coalition can take over what's left of the world. And to build the bomb, they hire Russian scientists who would probably get a raise if they went to work at Wal-Mart (although they'd still not get any health benefits). It's not exactly the most environmentally friendly plot in the world, but it works. At least on film. But filmgoers can't miss the obvious parallels (NBC likes to call it "ripped from the headlines") to modern-day Europe, where anti-immigrant nationalism is on the rise, despite the joining of the Continent into a single union with a single currency. In Denmark, Austria, Germany, France, Portugal and Italy, right-wing, anti-immigrant politicians have made headlines. They're the European versions of America's Pat Buchanan, only people there take them seriously. It wouldn't be cricket to give away the ending of the movie version of "The Sum of All Fears," but it differs greatly from the book, and tellingly so. In Clancy's version, the American president, in a fit of rage, decides to retaliate against the Arab chieftain's village with a nuclear strike. Ryan, then the deputy director of intelligence for the CIA, flatly refuses to confirm the order, staving off disaster and toppling a presidency. (Never fear; Ryan's no peacenik. He kills people in "Patriot Games" and "The Hunt for Red October" and later sends some CIA clandestine-ops people to take out another Arab bad guy who menaced the United States with an airborne strain of the Ebola virus.) But such an ending couldn't possibly work in post-Sept. 11 America, could it? We're conditioned to support the president no matter what, to let our differences end at the water's edge. Our president, George W. Bush, and his vice president, Dick Cheney, never miss an opportunity to suggest that patriotism should preclude criticism, or scrutiny, or anything resembling dissent. A movie depicting a president as angry enough to kill thousands, or millions, with a nuclear strike just to get one terrorist? Unacceptable. Then again, there's that whole matter of battlefield nukes. As the FBI and the CIA struggle to explain why the clues learned before Sept. 11 weren't harnessed to stop Sept. 11, maybe it's time they look to popular fiction, like Clancy's. He was foresighted enough to see airplane attacks, underpaid Russians helping to build nuclear weapons for terrorists and audacious radical Arab plots to strike America. Maybe the CIA should hire Clancy (although some have suggested his do-no-wrong portrayals of military and law enforcement types show he's already on the payroll). Now, what was that business about airborne Ebola? Better stock up on gas masks. Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist. His column runs Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. Reach him at 383-0283 or by e-mail at ssebelius@reviewjournal.com. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 29 Pakistan Explains Nuclear Policy /Tue Jun 4,11:10 AM ET/ /By LAURINDA KEYS, Associated Press Writer/ ALMATY, Kazakhstan (AP) - Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf refused Tuesday to renounce first use of nuclear weapons, as efforts to bring him together with his Indian counterpart and defuse tensions over Kashmir appeared to fail. Trying to keep diplomatic efforts alive, Russian President Vladimir Putin met separately with the Indian and Pakistani leaders at an Asian summit in Kazakhstan and, according to Musharraf, invited them to Moscow for possible talks. The discussions would try to prevent the conflict from exploding into a fourth full-scale war between the nuclear-armed neighbors. Musharraf accepted the invitation, but the timing of the proposed meeting was vague and it wasn't even clear whether Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee would agree to go. Tuesday morning, the two leaders angrily blamed each other for more than five decades of conflict, exchanging stony stares across a table while their troops fired at each other in the disputed Kashmir region. In New Delhi, a senior Indian government official told The Associated Press on Tuesday that India was paying close attention to diplomatic pressure being applied by Washington and other capitals. The Americans had persuaded India's government to show restraint, at least for now, the official said on condition of anonymity. Musharraf, when asked to state Pakistan's nuclear policy and explain why it will not renounce first use of nuclear weapons as India has, said: "The possession of nuclear weapons by any state obviously implies they will be used under some circumstances." He said, however, that it would be irresponsible for a leader to discuss such things, and that Pakistan's "deeper policy" is for denuclearization of South Asia. Earlier Tuesday at the summit, Vajpayee said: "Nuclear powers should not use nuclear blackmail." On Monday, the Indian Defense Ministry said India "does not believe in the use of nuclear weapons." Russia and China pressed India and Pakistan to enter face-to-face talks, but the effort failed to bring Musharraf and Vajpayee together for a direct meeting. "India is continually threatening Pakistan for an attack and also refusing dialogue," Musharraf said after meeting with Putin. "Everyone was desiring a meeting between me and Mr. Vajpayee," Musharraf said. "I think the whole world is disappointed that we two did not talk and meet here." Vajpayee said Tuesday he is willing to have a dialogue with Pakistan but that there must first be a halt to cross-border terrorism, which India says is carried out in its part of Kashmir by Pakistan-based Islamic militants who have been fighting for 12 years. After meeting both leaders, Putin said they showed "positive signs" and that neither intends to use force to solve their problems. India repeated its policy of no first use of nuclear weapons, Putin said earlier, while Musharraf "said on the territory of Pakistan there won't be militants. This is what the whole world eagerly awaited from the two leaders." But with no breakthrough in sight, some of the 1 million Indian and Pakistani soldiers posted along both sides of the 1,800-mile frontier unleashed fresh artillery and gunfire at each other in Kashmir on Tuesday. There were no immediate reports of casualties, but eight civilians died in shelling Monday. Earlier Tuesday, as Musharraf sat about 15 feet across from the Indian leader at a long, horseshoe-shaped table in the Kazakh city of Almaty, Musharraf insisted his country did not want the conflict to erupt. "We do not want war. If war is imposed on us, we will defend ourselves with the utmost resolution," he said. "The people of South Asia continue to pay a heavy price for the refusal by India to resolve the Kashmir dispute in accordance with resolutions of the United Nations and the wishes of the Kashmiri people." In response, Vajpayee rejected Musharraf's repeated assurance that "Pakistan will not allow its territory to be used for any terrorist attacks outside or inside its boundaries." Vajpayee said violence in India's portion of Kashmir and infiltration of Islamic militants from Pakistani territory had not decreased since Musharraf first made that assurance Jan. 12. "We have seen in the following months that cross-border infiltration has increased, violence in Jammu and Kashmir has continued unabated and terrorist camps continue to operate unhindered across our borders," Vajpayee said of India's northernmost state. "We have repeatedly said that we are willing to discuss all issues with Pakistan, including Jammu and Kashmir. But for that, cross-border terrorism has to end." Vajpayee and Musharraf both sat with pursed lips and stony stares as the other spoke. With the 14 other delegates, they signed a declaration condemning "all forms and manifestations of terrorism" and promising "to strengthen cooperation and dialogue." When delegates mingled and greeted each other as the conference ended, the two stood on opposite sides of the room and did not interact. Vajpayee and Musharraf met separately with several leaders at the summit, including Putin and Chinese President Jiang Zemin. "We cannot but be concerned about the explosive situation in the relations between Pakistan and India, which threatens to destabilize the situation in the whole Eurasian continent," Putin said, adding that world leaders would make every effort to defuse the crisis. India says Islamic militants crossing the frontier from Pakistan have carried out terror attacks, including a deadly assault on the Indian Parliament in December and on an Indian army base in Kashmir last month, which left 34 dead, mostly wives and children of army officers. Pakistani Information Minister Nisar Memon insisted Monday that the militants had not come from his nation's part of Kashmir and said his country had stepped up monitoring of the Line of Control, the 1972 cease-fire line dividing the Himalayan region between India and Pakistan. Both nations claim all of it and the dispute has caused two of their three wars since independence from Britain in 1947. Secretary of State Colin Powell, meanwhile, said he encouraged Musharraf this weekend to "restrain all activity across the Line of Control." Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld is expected in the region this weekend, and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage is due to visit Pakistan and India this week. Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 30 U.S.: No one wins a nuclear war USATODAY.com - 06/04/2002 - Updated 01:35 AM ET By Bill Nichols, USA TODAY WASHINGTON — When Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld travel to India and Pakistan this week, they'll hand leaders of both countries something frightening to think about: a U.S. study estimating that as many as 12 million people would die instantly if the longtime adversaries were to launch a nuclear war. Prelude to war? + U.S. presses India to promise no war + U.S. envoy: Pakistan wants to avoid war [http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/06/06/india-pakistan.htm ] + Bush phones India, Pakistan [http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/06/05/bush-india.htm] + India, Pakistan trade nuke talk + Pakistan: Nukes may be used, agrees to summit + India, Pakistan both lay claim to terror fight + Russia pressures Pakistan on eve of summit [http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/06/03/india-pakistan.htm ] + U.S. firms don't push India evacuations + Asian security summit may be futile + U.N. orders workers' families out of Pakistan [http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/06/01/pakistan.htm] + Americans urged to leave India + India says border with Pakistan is stable ----------------------------------------------------------------- Graphic + View history, military forces of Pakistan and India ----------------------------------------------------------------- Multimedia + Video: Kashmir residents prepare for the worse + Video: Rumsfeld expresses concern + Video: Leaders meet at Kazakhstan summit ----------------------------------------------------------------- As horrific as that death count might seem, Armitage and Rumsfeld will stress that the number is low, because it doesn't include tens of millions of Indians and Pakistanis who could die later from radiation exposure, U.S. State Department officials say. Beyond such mind-numbing casualties, the first nuclear exchange in history would decimate the economies of both nations and probably trigger a collapse of world financial markets that could spur a worldwide depression, experts predict. Destruction and famine would send millions of refugees to neighboring countries. The U.S. war on terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan would end. The world would face a humanitarian crisis far greater than anything it has seen before. On Monday, both sides played down talk of nuclear war. India said it does not believe in the use of nuclear weapons. At an Asian summit in Kazakhstan, Russia and China tried to broker a meeting between Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. Around the world, however, governments still feared the worst. Experts say no computer model can prepare the world for the nightmare it has feared since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima 57 years ago. "It's really a great unknown," says Tom Zamora Collina, an analyst for the Union of Concerned Scientists. The average person "doesn't have a clue what this would mean," he says. To head off a nuclear war that might result from the conflict over the disputed Himalayan region of Kashmir, the Bush administration wants to show Musharraf and Vajpayee how bad things could get. "The problem is once the iron starts to be exchanged between the two sides, then reason and logic seem to go out the window," Armitage said Monday on CNN. The U.S. government fears that citizens of both countries, which first tested nuclear weapons in 1998, don't grasp the repercussions of a decision to go nuclear. In the West, schoolchildren learn about the devastating effects of the U.S. atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945. "But that's not the case in South Asia," says Zia Mian, a nuclear expert at Princeton University. "There's never been a major movie about what would happen in a nuclear war. Even educated people often think about this in the abstract." In Islamabad, retired Pakistani army lieutenant general Naseer Akhtar says both sides "don't understand the power of the bomb." U.S. military and intelligence officials, along with private analysts, have run detailed studies and war-game scenarios in recent years to simulate a nuclear exchange in South Asia. The degree of devastation depends on the number of weapons used, their explosive power, where they are set off and climate conditions. But U.S. officials say they hope the data they are bringing to India and Pakistan will make the idea of nuclear war so chillingly real that both sides will do anything to avoid it. How it starts U.S. officials say a war likely would begin in Muzaffarabad, a city on the Pakistani side of the "Line of Control" that divides Kashmir. Indian ground forces would attack Muzaffarabad, which is believed to be the hub for Pakistan-backed Islamic guerrillas seeking independence from Indian control in the region. India, a largely Hindu nation, controls two-thirds of Kashmir, which is predominantly Muslim, as is Pakistan. More than 30,000 people have died in Kashmir since 1989, when Muslim guerrillas began seeking independence. Pakistan's likely response would be to use mechanized units to counterattack and try to keep Indian forces from overrunning Kashmir and invading Pakistani territory, says Sam Gardiner, a retired U.S. Air Force colonel who has run more than 20 India-Pakistan war-game scenarios. India would try to repel Pakistan's counterattack, Gardiner says, which would bring the conflict to the point U.S. officials fear most. India's military force of 1.3 million troops dwarfs Pakistan's 612,000 soldiers. At some point, Pakistan would retreat in the face of an unstoppable Indian invasion. Musharraf might decide he could save his nation only by striking the enemy with a nuclear bomb. If Indian troops approached the Pakistani city of Lahore, near the Kashmiri border, "then they have divided Pakistan," Gardiner says. "Pakistan then might use a nuclear weapon in Pakistan against Indian forces. Then India responds against Pakistani nuclear delivery forces. Then things get very bad very quickly." Making matters worse: Nuclear missiles launched by either country would take only three to four minutes to hit major cities. Either side would have seconds to react — and South Asia has nothing close to the fail-safe mechanisms Washington and Moscow developed at the height of the Cold War. Pakistan and India have set up a hotline between Islamabad and New Delhi, similar to the one developed by the United States and Russia. But Maleeha Lodhi, Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, said on Fox News S unday that the hotline isn't working. Catastrophic damage Both countries have small nuclear arsenals: Pakistan has about 50 nuclear weapons, and India has about 100, Pentagon officials say. Most have the approximate destructive power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, where 100,000 people died instantly. But Pakistan and India, which have cities packed with tens of millions of people, would suffer far more casualties than Japan did in 1945. The Pentagon study Rumsfeld and Armitage will be bearing predicts a range of 9 million to 12 million deaths and 2 million to 7 million injuries in the immediate aftermath of an attack. Matthew McKinzie, a staff scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, has helped run two India-Pakistan nuclear war studies. In one, five major Pakistani cities and five in India were targeted. Nearly 3 million deaths and 1.5 million injuries were predicted. A second scenario targeted 12 Indian and 12 Pakistani cities. McKinzie concluded that such an exchange would kill 30 million people. McKinzie's studies factor in the three main ways a nuclear bomb kills: shock waves from the explosion, the resulting fireball and fallout affecting an area as far as 125 miles from the blast. McKinzie's data also track immediate deaths. Experts lack reliable models for predicting longer-term radiation-caused cancers and sickness that would plague South Asia for decades. India and Pakistan are entering the monsoon season, which analysts say would make nuclear fallout worse because a heavy cloud cover would trap radiation and return it to earth through a process called rainout. "You're looking at a very devastating impact on both countries," McKinzie says. Many experts say radiation fallout from any nuclear exchange probably would not pose an immediate danger beyond South Asia. Two days after a nuclear explosion, the initial radiation from the blast would be 1% of its original strength and take weeks or months to settle elsewhere around the globe, analysts say. Other nuclear experts are less certain about long-term international fallout effects. Scientists are still studying the impact of the nuclear accident at Chernobyl in 1986. That accident, in the former Soviet Union, spewed fallout over much of Europe. Among the lingering effects: a much higher rate of thyroid cancer in children in the affected area. Thyroid cancer throughout Ukraine, for example, increased tenfold. Computer models have predicted that neighboring Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Nepal would see long-term agricultural and health effects from fallout, as might nearby countries China and Iran. Humanitarian crises, geopolitical fallout The larger crises affecting the world would be humanitarian, agricultural and economic, experts say. Refugees would overwhelm the region. "Once people get afraid of what they can't see, will they burn the food because they can't eat it? Then a famine will result," says Mian, the Princeton researcher. The world would soon witness the worst humanitarian crisis ever. "You've got highly dense populations in just a few places, and if they choose the obvious places to hit, then it's really bad," Collina says. "I would think the health response, disaster relief effort would have to involve the entire world." "It would make any humanitarian disaster in the history of the world pale in comparison," says Roy Farrell, president of Physicians for Social Responsibility. "There is no effective medical response to a nuclear explosion." The destruction of Pakistan's and India's agricultural systems — which experts say would last a generation — also could trigger an economic swoon across Asia. An India-Pakistan war game conducted by the U.S. Naval War College in 1998 found that a nuclear exchange would cause world markets "to go into a tailspin, driving capital out of emerging markets to seek safe haven in the United States. Leading governments and international financial institutions would be pressed to resolve the resulting financial crisis." A paper on the game by former assistant deputy secretary of State Paul Taylor predicted "severe shortages of food and potable water could exceed the capacity of relief organizations to respond and might even stress international markets." A conference of international donors would be required to mobilize the billions of dollars needed for relief. The prices of certain commodities, especially foods, could skyrocket and could trigger a global recession." Rumsfeld and Armitage will stress that India and Pakistan would become international pariahs for using nuclear weapons. State Department officials have told both sides that the billions in economic aid they've received in recent years would halt. Both countries would likely be shunned by international political and financial organizations. Tourism and business travel would end. Another immediate effect: an end to the U.S. war on terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Radiation likely would make the region uninhabitable for U.S. troops. Worse, U.S. officials worry that the resulting chaos of a nuclear war would turn South Asia into the kind of lawless societies in which terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda thrive. In addition, a nuclear war would almost certainly result in a breakdown in security for India's and Pakistan's remaining nuclear stockpiles and make them prime targets for terrorist raids. Will the countries listen? To avoid that crisis, the Bush administration is praying that Indian and Pakistani leaders will hear their grim predictions this week for what they are — an outline for their countries' virtual demise. But South Asia experts worry that the passionate dispute over Kashmir, which has prompted two India-Pakistan wars in 55 years, could lead to irrational acts. There is a sense in both nations that they can survive a nuclear exchange: Life would go on. Many ordinary citizens seem relaxed and unafraid. In India, there are few preparations for nuclear war. "There's no concept of nuclear shelters," says Vikram Misri, political officer in the Indian Embassy in Islamabad. In Pakistan, the nation's newfound nuclear capability is a source of pride. Camouflage-painted dummy missiles are planted at some major intersections around the country. At least one bus in Islamabad has a large missile painted on its side with the Urdu-language message, "I love Pakistan." U.S. officials hope they can change that attitude but fear that it is too ingrained. Gardiner said he recently got an e-mail from an Indian acquaintance that read, "If we want to have a nuclear war — let us." Contributing: Mannika Chopra in India; Chris Woodyard in Pakistan. © Copyright 2002 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. ***************************************************************** 31 China Hopes Japan Will Keep Commitment to Non-nuclear Principles Xinhuanet 2002-06-04 19:11:15 ¡¡BEIJING, June 4 (Xinhuanet) -- Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said here Tuesday that he hopes the Japanese government will keep its commitment to its non-nuclear principles. Liu made the remark at a regular press conference. ¡¡¡¡Japanese Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi reportedly said Monday that it was not wrong for a senior Japanese official to say"there is no constitutional problem over Japan possessing nuclear weapons." Today, with peace and development the main trend and the progress made in international nuclear disarmament, Liu said, suchremarks by the Japanese officials were "shocking". Up to now, the Japanese government had abided by its three non-nuclear principles, namely, the non-possession, non-production andnon-importation of nuclear weapons, Liu noted. The remarks by senior Japanese officials violated those solemn commitments and principles made previously to the international community and had prompted widespread protests inside Japan and aroused grave concern in neighboring Asian countries and among allpeace-loving people worldwide, he added. "We are sure that the Japanese people can proceed from their fundamental interests and make their own correct judgments and choices accordingly," he said. The Japanese government has, Liu added, clarified its official stance on the issue of nuclear weapons to China and other relevantcountries via diplomatic channels on Tuesday, stressing that it would adhere to the three non-nuclear principles. Enditem Copyright © 2000 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 32 Nuclear clash would batter world financial markets USATODAY.com - 06/03/2002 - Updated 10:05 PM ET By James Cox, USA TODAY With India and Pakistan on the brink of war, a nuclear strike by either nation would devastate financial markets and could trigger a global economic crisis, experts say. The two countries "are relatively small players in the global economy and don't control any key commodities," says Jay Bryson, global economist for First Union. "But once you get into (investors') confidence shattering, you're in a whole different ballgame." India, the world's second-most-populous country, accounts for a mere 1.2% of global output. Pakistan, the sixth-most-populous nation, represents just 0.2% of world GDP. Neither is much of a market for exports. Neither sits on vital energy reserves or straddles a key waterway. But a nuclear blast could kill millions and create an unmanageable humanitarian crisis in South Asia. The tremors, in the short term, almost certainly would create turmoil in: + Stocks. Nuclear war would spark a sell-off and send the world's stock markets tumbling 10% to 15%, says Nariman Behravesh, chief economist at DRI-WEFA. Investors everywhere would pour out of stocks and drain money from emerging markets. They would flee many currencies for the dollar and snap up less volatile investments, such as U.S. Treasuries, economists say. In the USA and Europe, investors would wait for a return to calm and try to identify multinational companies likely to take big earnings hits as a result of lost business in India, Pakistan and other affected Asian countries. + Oil. Crude prices, now around $25 a barrel, would shoot to $40 a barrel, says Walter Molano, research chief at BCP Securities. One fear is that Arab oil producers might withhold crude from the market to gain political leverage for Muslim Pakistan. But even without a supply disruption, oil prices probably would react to such a major shock, says David Hale, global chief economist at Zurich Financial Services. "Oil is always a politically sensitive commodity." + Gold. Prices could top $400 an ounce — up from Monday's $326.70 — Bryson says. Many market watchers and economists say they would expect markets to bounce back quickly. A recovery could take place even in the face of continued economic impact: International airline and shipping traffic would have to be rerouted. Food and medicine prices could spike as critical supplies were diverted to India and Pakistan for humanitarian relief. Whether or not the crisis spiraled into a world recession might depend more on the psyche of investors and consumers than on lost markets, resources and production, says Ian Bremmer, head of political risk consultant Eurasia Group. Nuclear confrontation isn't likely, Bremmer says. "But the images of charred remains and cities flattened would have an impact on consumers' perception of safety and riskiness in the world." It would be proof, Hale says, "that we've overcome a very major taboo — never using nuclear weapons. You don't know how people are going to react when they see dark emotional forces like nationalism and religious zealotry are still powerful." Contributing: Bill Nichols. © Copyright 2002 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. [http://www.gannett.com] --> ***************************************************************** 33 Pakistan Explains Nuclear Policy Foreign Nationals Leave India Over War Fears (AP) Trying to keep diplomatic efforts alive, Russian President Vladimir Putin met separately with the Indian and Pakistani leaders at an Asian summit in Kazakhstan and, according to Musharraf, invited them to Moscow for possible talks. The discussions would try to prevent the conflict from exploding into a fourth full-scale war between the nuclear-armed neighbors. Musharraf accepted the invitation, but the timing of the proposed meeting was vague and it wasn't even clear whether Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee would agree to go. Tuesday morning, the two leaders angrily blamed each other for more than five decades of conflict, exchanging stony stares across a table while their troops fired at each other in the disputed Kashmir region. In New Delhi, a senior Indian government official told The Associated Press on Tuesday that India was paying close attention to diplomatic pressure being applied by Washington and other capitals. The Americans had persuaded India's government to show restraint, at least for now, the official said on condition of anonymity. Musharraf, when asked to state Pakistan's nuclear policy and explain why it will not renounce first use of nuclear weapons as India has, said: "The possession of nuclear weapons by any state obviously implies they will be used under some circumstances." He said, however, that it would be irresponsible for a leader to discuss such things, and that Pakistan's "deeper policy" is for denuclearization of South Asia. Earlier Tuesday at the summit, Vajpayee said: "Nuclear powers should not use nuclear blackmail." On Monday, the Indian Defense Ministry said India "does not believe in the use of nuclear weapons." Russia and China pressed India and Pakistan to enter face-to-face talks, but the effort failed to bring Musharraf and Vajpayee together for a direct meeting. "India is continually threatening Pakistan for an attack and also refusing dialogue," Musharraf said after meeting with Putin. "Everyone was desiring a meeting between me and Mr. Vajpayee," Musharraf said. "I think the whole world is disappointed that we two did not talk and meet here." Vajpayee said Tuesday he is willing to have a dialogue with Pakistan but that there must first be a halt to cross-border terrorism, which India says is carried out in its part of Kashmir by Pakistan-based Islamic militants who have been fighting for 12 years. After meeting both leaders, Putin said they showed "positive signs" and that neither intends to use force to solve their problems. India repeated its policy of no first use of nuclear weapons, Putin said earlier, while Musharraf "said on the territory of Pakistan there won't be militants. This is what the whole world eagerly awaited from the two leaders." But with no breakthrough in sight, some of the 1 million Indian and Pakistani soldiers posted along both sides of the 1,800-mile frontier unleashed fresh artillery and gunfire at each other in Kashmir on Tuesday. There were no immediate reports of casualties, but eight civilians died in shelling Monday. Earlier Tuesday, as Musharraf sat about 15 feet across from the Indian leader at a long, horseshoe-shaped table in the Kazakh city of Almaty, Musharraf insisted his country did not want the conflict to erupt. "We do not want war. If war is imposed on us, we will defend ourselves with the utmost resolution," he said. "The people of South Asia continue to pay a heavy price for the refusal by India to resolve the Kashmir dispute in accordance with resolutions of the United Nations and the wishes of the Kashmiri people." In response, Vajpayee rejected Musharraf's repeated assurance that "Pakistan will not allow its territory to be used for any terrorist attacks outside or inside its boundaries." Vajpayee said violence in India's portion of Kashmir and infiltration of Islamic militants from Pakistani territory had not decreased since Musharraf first made that assurance Jan. 12. "We have seen in the following months that cross-border infiltration has increased, violence in Jammu and Kashmir has continued unabated and terrorist camps continue to operate unhindered across our borders," Vajpayee said of India's northernmost state. "We have repeatedly said that we are willing to discuss all issues with Pakistan, including Jammu and Kashmir. But for that, cross-border terrorism has to end." Vajpayee and Musharraf both sat with pursed lips and stony stares as the other spoke. With the 14 other delegates, they signed a declaration condemning "all forms and manifestations of terrorism" and promising "to strengthen cooperation and dialogue." When delegates mingled and greeted each other as the conference ended, the two stood on opposite sides of the room and did not interact. Vajpayee and Musharraf met separately with several leaders at the summit, including Putin and Chinese President Jiang Zemin. "We cannot but be concerned about the explosive situation in the relations between Pakistan and India, which threatens to destabilize the situation in the whole Eurasian continent," Putin said, adding that world leaders would make every effort to defuse the crisis. India says Islamic militants crossing the frontier from Pakistan have carried out terror attacks, including a deadly assault on the Indian Parliament in December and on an Indian army base in Kashmir last month, which left 34 dead, mostly wives and children of army officers. Pakistani Information Minister Nisar Memon insisted Monday that the militants had not come from his nation's part of Kashmir and said his country had stepped up monitoring of the Line of Control, the 1972 cease-fire line dividing the Himalayan region between India and Pakistan. Both nations claim all of it and the dispute has caused two of their three wars since independence from Britain in 1947. Secretary of State Colin Powell, meanwhile, said he encouraged Musharraf this weekend to "restrain all activity across the Line of Control." Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld is expected in the region this weekend, and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage is due to visit Pakistan and India this week. Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 34 South Asia's Hair Trigger The New York Times Opinion *June 4, 2002* Tensions between India and Pakistan eased slightly yesterday but remain dangerously high. This latest crisis demonstrates the urgency of getting Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons and the policies governing their use under much firmer control than they now are. In the four years since the two countries unwisely began their nuclear arms race, each has built up a stockpile of usable warheads, shortened the launch times of its missiles and talked recklessly about potential nuclear exchanges. India is thought to have about 40 operational Hiroshima-size atomic bombs and Pakistan around 20, deliverable to each other's major cities by military aircraft or missiles. Liquid-fuel missiles can be readied for launch in about six hours. The solid-fuel variety both countries are developing can be launched more quickly. Once the warheads are on their way, warning times would be less than eight minutes. The Pentagon estimates that a nuclear exchange could instantly kill 12 million people and injure 7 million more. India, which is much the stronger military power, says it would not be the first to use nuclear weapons. Pakistan makes no such disclaimers. Instead it repeatedly proclaims its readiness to go nuclear in response to a decisive Indian conventional attack. Pakistan's nuclear weapons are theoretically under the control of the country's top military commander, Gen. Pervez Musharraf. India's, like America's, fall under the authority of the elected civilian leadership. Unfortunately, India's current political leaders have shown little sense of responsibility or restraint. The internal and mutual constraints that prevented American and Soviet nuclear weapons from being used during the cold war seem conspicuously absent on the South Asian subcontinent. Military miscalculation and diplomatic non-communication have become a way of life between India and Pakistan, leading to three full-scale wars and innumerable crises since the two became independent states in 1947. Now that both have nuclear weapons, this has to change. Pakistan must no longer wink at the infiltration of armed terrorists into Indian-controlled Kashmir. Missile tests ought not to be conducted in the midst of military crises. The existing hot lines should be used to provide advance notice and explanations of troop and weapons movements. Petulance is a luxury these nuclear rivals can no longer afford. ***************************************************************** 35 George Monbiot: Wage peace, not war Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Conflict in Kashmir could vaporise millions, but the world's 'moral leaders' are looking away George Monbiot Tuesday June 4, 2002 The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk] There is something dreamlike about our contemplation of the drift to war in Kashmir. While India and Pakistan move their missiles into position, in Britain our concerns are focused on the evacuation of our own citizens, the destination of the likely refugees, and the possibility that the Indian cricket team might be prevented from visiting England at the end of this month. That 12 million people could be vaporised if the war begins in earnest is viewed as regrettable, but nothing to do with us. In the United States, the sense of detachment is even more palpable. On Sunday, President Bush told the nation that "we cannot put our faith in the word of tyrants, who solemnly sign non-proliferation treaties, and then systematically break them. If we wait for threats to fully materialise, we will have waited too long." But he was talking not about India or Pakistan, but about rogue states which might one day attack the US. He mentioned "South Asia" once, but only as an example of a region whose leaders had been recruited to his cause. In waging war, Bush and Blair were tumid with moral leadership and purpose. In waging peace, they display only vapidity and irresolution. Deputies are dispatched on half-hearted missions to ask the two governments to negotiate, but no one is proposing the measures necessary to prevent what could become the most lethal conflict since the second world war. The "moral imperatives" so often invoked during the bombing of Afghanistan turn out to be nothing more than old-fashioned power politics. Now, with few clearly formulated domestic interests at stake, the new world order's moral leaders are looking the other way. Even if Britain, the US and the other western powers had no prior involvement in this conflict, our moral duty to help develop an effective international response would be unquestionable. But we are up to our necks in it. The subcontinent's dispute is our dispute, and to turn away from it could constitute the greatest collective dereliction since the failure of both the German people and the allied powers to intervene in the Holocaust. In 1947, the Maharajah of Kashmir, a Hindu installed by the British, decided neither to seek independence nor to join Pakistan, despite the fact that the majority of his people were Muslims, but to surrender the territory to India. The British governor-general, Lord Mountbatten, insisted only that a referendum or plebiscite of the Kashmiri people be conducted. This never happened, and Britain, which could have asked the UN to demand that the promise was kept, left India and Pakistan to tear the place apart. More recently, both states have drawn strength from the effective licence granted to them by the US. In 1998, President Clinton announced a "quantum leap" in US relations with India, which the government there interpreted as a permit to resume nuclear testing. Last year, the nuclear sanctions levied on Pakistan were lifted in return for its cooperation in the war on terror. President Bush described General Musharraf (who enjoys the same degree of democratic legitimacy as Saddam Hussein) as a "man of great courage and vision", and promised a new $200m aid package. Musharraf relaxed his grip on the militants slipping into India. But at least the US has blocked new arms sales to India and Pakistan. The United Kingdom, by contrast, has done everything in its power to promote them. Blair, who refuses to dirty his own hands, has sent the defence secretary and the deputy prime minister to Delhi to sell Hawk aircraft. The UK has continued to supply the spare parts for the Jaguar jets (built under licence from the British company BAE), which India may use to drop the bomb. Our moral leader deputes his officials to explain that if we don't do it, someone else will. More pertinent still, the nuclear weapons programmes in both India and Pakistan were initiated with the help of the west. As the Nuclear Control Institute has documented, both programmes emerged from the civilian industry, which was kickstarted with the help of the US "Atoms for Peace" scheme. India's first nuclear device used plutonium produced by a Canadian research reactor and extracted in a reprocessing plant built with the help of the US. Germany supplied tritium, beryllium, heavy water plants and reprocessing components; France delivered uranium and fast-breeder technology; Norway sold heavy water; the US provided enriched uranium and several commercial reactors; and the UK distributed fuel, furnaces and the country's first research reactor. Pakistan's heavy water plants came from Canada and Belgium; its uranium enrichment technology, beryllium, tritium, furnaces and milling machines from Germany; its research reactor from the US; and its reprocessing technology from France and the UK. All of these components have potential uses in nuclear weapons programmes; most appear to have been deployed for this purpose by India and Pakistan. Britain and the US point out that much of the new nuclear material the enemies are using comes from China. This is true, but China also appears to believe it has a licence to operate. In 1998, Clinton approved a US-China nuclear cooperation agreement, despite intelligence briefings showing that China was supplying both Iran and Pakistan with nuclear components, in direct contravention of this treaty. Within a month of the signing of the agreement, China began shipping heavy water to Pakistan, in far greater quantities than its civilian programme could have used. The agreement stood. There are plenty of instruments the international community could use to prevent a nuclear war. It could explain to India and Pakistan that if either nation escalates even the conventional conflict, its leaders could expect to face a war crimes tribunal. It could not only discontinue all arms sales but also apply punitive sanctions to any company assisting the weapons industry in either nation. Most importantly, it could send peacekeepers to hold the lines apart and supervise disarmament. Blair and Bush should both be in Kazakhstan right now, helping Putin to knock heads together. But there is no peace industry commensurate with the world's war industry. There are no vested interests to appease, no campaign contributions to be gained from preventing rather than encouraging the use of weapons. As a result the hundreds of thousands of peacekeepers whose deployment is required in Kashmir do not exist. While wars are plotted in loving detail, there is no global peace plan for the territory, despite 55 years of conflict. In the new world order of which Bush and Blair have spoken, international support for a war pursued for domestic purposes is a moral imperative. Preventing two nations from vaporising each other's civilians is a moral luxury, rather less pressing than the jubilee tea parties or the next visit by the Indian cricket team. Faced with the frightening and complicated task of waging peace rather than war, moral leadership turns to moral flight. · www.monbiot.com [http://www.monbiot.com] [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 36 US To Construct New Plutonium Pit Production Plant Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 22:32:49 -0500 (CDT) US To Construct New Plutonium Pit Production Plant The US Department of Energy (DoE) announced on 31 May that it will resume production of plutonium pits, which are used to trigger nuclear warheads. Plutonium pits were last produced at the Rocky Flats Facility in Colorado, but the DoE halted production in 1989. A statement from the National Nuclear Security Administration stated that design work is beginning for a manufacturing plant, which is expected to cost between $2.2 billion and $4.4 billion, depending on production capacity. The plant will be built at a weapons facility and is anticipated to begin production by 2020. According to the DoE, the site selection process will begin in September. US Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham stated, "We need to have the capacity to manufacture certified pits to maintain the safety, security and reliability of the US nuclear deterrent into the future." According to the New York Times, a recent study by the Bush administration urged that a pit production plant be constructed. Some members of Congress have also expressed concern that the lack of a plutonium pit production plant could jeopardize the future readiness of the US nuclear arsenal. (source: New York Times, 1 June 2002) ***************************************************************** 37 Editorial: Probe of top DOE official is warranted Las Vegas SUN June 04, 2002 Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., has joined other officials who are questioning the ethics of Undersecretary of Energy Robert Card, the man who is Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's top aide on the Yucca Mountain project. Reid, the Senate's second-highest ranking Democrat, is doing the right thing by calling for an Office of Government Ethics investigation to see if Card violated conflict-of-interest rules by helping out two nuclear waste cleanup companies where he once worked as an executive. Card did divest his holdings in the two companies -- CH2M Hill Co. and Kaiser-Hill Co. -- that have contracts with the Energy Department. But a Wall Street Journal story in February said that Card was involved in a number of decisions affecting CH2M Hill's contract to clean up nuclear waste in Hanford, Wash., including the settlement of fines that involved poor performance. Even if you buy Card's explanation that he had no input on decisions affecting his former employers, no one would seriously believe that those Energy Department employees who dealt with Card's former employers wouldn't have felt some pressure to please their boss. Questions surrounding Card's ethics point to another issue as well, which is that many former industry executives are now in key policy-making positions in the Bush administration. Whether it's the endorsement of Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste dump or the push for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, it's evident that the Bush administration has taken a decidedly pro-industry bent with little regard to the consequences to the environment or public safety. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 38 Special Training to prevent Weapons of Mass Destruction June 3, 2002 Contact: Robert Leinbach Public Information Officer 455-7338 What: WMD Training When: Tuesday, June 4, 2002, at 9:30 til 11:00 AM Where: Station #14, 3260 Topaz (near DI and Eastern) Fire personnel are receiving specialized training and equipment to help them respond more effectively to Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) incidents. Emergency responders attending the two hour class gain valuable information relating to the nature and dangers of situations they may encounter. "In the classroom we give them information to raise their level of danger awareness, and we also give them new protective suits and a book they will carry with them on their vehicles", says Fire Protection Engineer Richard Brenner. Training is scheduled from 9:00 til 11:00 AM and you are welcome to sit in on the class, examine training materials and safety equipment, and interview members of the department. WMD training has been on-going within the department for a number of years. This particular class was designed by the National Fire Academy and is being taught by a department training specialist who recently attended the train-the-trainer course at the Emmitsburg, MD facility. ***************************************************************** 39 DOE: No help given to fight claims The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News -- 06/04/02 by Paul Parson Oak Ridger staff The Department of Energy won't be reimbursing contractors for contesting claims filed under state worker compensation systems, according to a high-ranking federal official. Harry Williams, president of the Coalition for a Healthy Environment, said during a public meeting Monday night in the Oak Ridge Mall Cumberland Room that he would hold Beverly Cook, DOE's assistant secretary for Environment, Safety and Health, to her word. Cook suggested that the reimbursement misunderstanding arose because some congressional leaders were given inaccurate copies of a May 8 "draft" set of rules that applies to thousands of workers exposed to toxic substances at DOE facilities run by contractors. These workers were not included in the year-old Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program -- a federal effort that provides medical care and a payment of $150,000 to sick workers or their survivors, if the workers were exposed to cancer-causing radiation or to silica or beryllium, which are linked to lung diseases. Congress told the Energy Department to help workers file claims under state worker compensation programs, which often have high burdens of proof for occupational diseases. The agency also is supposed to instruct its contractors not to fight the claims, but some congressional leaders have pointed out that the draft rules allow contractors to contest the findings of medical panels tasked with determining on-the-job exposures. More than 200 people showed up Monday night to express dissatisfaction over the federal government's attempts to compensate job-sickened nuclear workers. Officials with DOE and the Labor Department, which administers the compensation program, organized the meeting at the request of U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-3rd District. Regarding state worker compensation, Janine Anderson, also with the Coalition for a Healthy Environment, and several other people stressed that these programs are not designed to handle the types of illnesses that can stem from DOE-related exposures. These programs also have rules and regulations that vary from state to state. Janet Michel, a longtime crusader for sick worker compensation, emphasized several times that it was wrong for the government to put a "$150,000 price tag" on her life or other nuclear workers when millions are going to the families of the victims and survivors of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. "It's an insult," said Michel. The first 30 minutes of Monday night's meeting was allocated to presentations on the compensation program from representatives of those agencies involved with it. Peter Turic with the Labor Department said as of May 30, 4,902 Oak Ridge-related claims had been filed and 534 had been paid. Among the specified medical conditions claimed locally, cancer totaled 3,678 cases followed by beryllium sensitivity, 221, and chronic beryllium disease, 123. Close to 20 people shared their concerns about the compensation program during the last hour-and-a-half public comment portion of the meeting. Some people felt that DOE and the Labor Department should have allowed for more time. In response to the meeting's being cut off at 8 p.m., one man stood up on a chair and announced that a group of sick workers would be holding their own public forum/rally at 4 p.m. on Saturday, July 15. The event will be held in the parking lot of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program's Oak Ridge field office, located at 800 Oak Ridge Turnpike. Several congressional leaders had representatives at Monday night's meeting, including Wamp, U.S. Sens. Fred Thompson and Bill Frist, both R-Tenn., and U.S. Rep. Bob Clement, D-5th District. Clement recently issued a statement on the problems associated with the compensation program for job-sickened nuclear workers. "The delays and the deviation from the intent of the legislation have caused many sick workers and their families to throw their hands up in disgust," said Clement. "Promises were made, but promises are not being kept. Still the plight workers are facing since the passage of [the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program] persists, and unless something is done, these frustrations will continue into the future. "With the passage of this important legislation, Congress made it very clear that those workers afflicted by illnesses because of their work at DOE installations deserve compensation. While an important foundation was established with its passage and certain sub-groups of workers have received their benefits, still the overall number of claims are falling through the cracks. This is unacceptable Š ." Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or pparson@oakridger.com [pparson@oakridger.com] . All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 40 What do community members want in the new DOE manager? The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News -- 06/03/02 by Paul Parson and R. Cathey Daniels Oak Ridger staff Scientists at Oak Ridge National Laboratory could create the perfect manager for the Department of Energy's local operations with a specific formula of traits. Harness the charisma of the lab's director, Bill Madia, and fuse it with community activism, good listening skills and a dedication to cleaning up Oak Ridge. It's an experiment that could blow the lid off the whole cloning issue, but it's probably a little too farfetched to happen. Instead, DOE headquarters will select the right person to permanently take charge of its Oak Ridge Operations office. However, the federal agency may get a little assistance in doing so. Oak Ridge Mayor David Bradshaw said he was taken by surprise when Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham recently requested information on the type of manager Oak Ridgers would like to oversee DOE operations here. "I told him that in my opinion the UT-Battelle team is a super example of what a partner to the city ought to be," said Bradshaw. Bill Madia comes immediately to mind. He comes to our council meetings, he has shouldered the responsibility for an endowment for the museum, he has chosen to live here in Oak Ridge -- he's the kind of manager I think we want to see in our city." Bradshaw added that the new manager should be someone who understands the important role the city plays as a partner with DOE, understands the historic mission and the future potential in Oak Ridge, has experience within the Oak Ridge Operations office as well as experience in other key assignments and understands and is engaged in the dynamics of the community. Although Madia hesitated to consider himself a role model for managers, the ORNL director provided a gracious laugh and said he was flattered by Bradshaw's comments. Madia did suggest that the new manager should know how to function within the DOE system and be an advocate for Oak Ridge's three specific missions -- science, national security and environmental management. "There isn't a site as large and complex as the Oak Ridge site," said Madia, who acknowledged that there would be a learning curve for the Oak Ridge Operations chief. Madia did say that Mike Holland was doing a good job as Oak Ridge's interim manager. Holland, who came from DOE's Brookhaven Area Office in New York, was assigned to temporarily run the show when Leah Dever was detailed in April to the Office of Science within DOE headquarters. Dever became the first woman manager of DOE's Oak Ridge Operations office in July 1999 after she replaced Jim Hall. When questioned about the search for a new Oak Ridge manager, DOE spokesman Joe Davis provided this response: "Mike is the temporary manager. As we have said, we will be looking for an experienced, highly qualified individual dedicated to keeping our relationship with Oak Ridge, Roane and Anderson counties strong." Meanwhile, other community members have their own thoughts on the type of person who should permanently fill Dever's shoes. U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-3rd District, said the new Oak Ridge manager should be competent and have a good work reputation. Not only should this individual have good political instincts, but he or she must be willing to listen to community members' concerns and comments, the congressman added. Jenny Freeman, executive director of the East Tennessee Environmental Business Association, said the new Oak Ridge manager will have to be an "unusual" individual. "He or she needs to have the ability to lead and integrate the very complex and differing missions of Oak Ridge Operations, namely the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Environmental Management program," said Freeman. "He or she should be broad enough to be able to pay attention to both programs. "Since the Environmental Management program is an administration and a DOE headquarters priority, and since its budget is larger than the lab's, the new manager should be well-versed in cleanup issues, from both a technical standpoint as well as from a political and contractual standpoint. "Finally," Freeman said, "I'd like to have someone at the helm who is active in the community, who is visible and accessible, and who makes his or her managers accessible and accountable." Susan Gawarecki, executive director of the Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee, said she hopes the new manager can develop and implement a plan for interfacing with local governments. Her organization closely monitors DOE's Oak Ridge operations. In addition, Gawarecki said the new manager should be as open and upfront as possible about DOE matters and meet occasionally with stakeholders and be responsive to their concerns. Paul Parson and R. Cathey Daniels can be contacted at (865) 482-1021 or oakridge@oakridger.com [oakridge@oakridger.com] . All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 41 Breeder Reactor site eyed for development The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News -- 06/04/02 by Libby Reel for the Oak Ridger The idea of turning the former Clinch River Breeder Project Site over to Oak Ridge and Roane County for industrialization has progressed beyond the discussion stage. Tennessee Valley Authority is already conducting engineering studies which could result in a transfer by December 2002. Roane Alliance Chief Executive officer Mike Smith presented an evaluation report on the project during a Roane County Industrial Board meeting Monday morning at Roane Alliance in Kingston. The report is part of an engineering study being conducted by TVA Economic Development Technical Services. The report makes clear in its wording that it is "only a tool in the planning process of deciding whether or not to develop this property. Other factors beyond the scope of this plan should be taken into consideration before any final decisions are made on the property's development potential." Of the original 1,300 acres, approximately 1,200 acres are available for development. "TVA is very interested in doing something with this site," Smith said. "A quick analysis showed slope is a major issue; so, they are looking at ways to make development affordable by subdividing it into smaller lots." Smith indicated slopes could be an up side if the government at some point were to consider the terrain for military training. Utilities would not be a problem, Smith said. "Plenty of electricity, water and sewer services are already coming to that site." Smith described a possible conglomerate in which the city of Oak Ridge and the county of Roane might be joint owners of the property from the start, sharing the full costs and benefits of marketing and development. Roane County Industrial Recruiter Gary Human added, "This would be the next logical step in continuing our economic partnership with the city of Oak Ridge." The state of Tennessee is also involved in the talks. Smith indicated some Tennessee Industrial Infrastructure Program money might be available to assist with the infrastructure. At this point, this is still a concept. More meetings are planned between TVA and the government entities. In the meantime, TVA will continue studying options for the site. Libby Reel can be contacted at (865) 376-3788 or at nuzreel@earthlink.net [nuzreel@earthlink.net] . All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 42 Trust in government (drops to 40%) a matter of focus The Herald editorial board is: Published June 3, 2002 Recent reports of declining public trust in the federal government are, in a word, unconvincing. A survey by the Brookings Institution's Center for Public Service found overall trust in government (people who believe the government will do the right thing at least most of the time) down to 40 percent. It had been 57 percent last fall soon after the Sept. 11 attacks. A co-author of the report, G. Calvin Mackenzie, says it is a diminishing of the "rally-round-the-flag" effect that follows a threat to government or a way of life. "We love government more when government is threatened. But that's like desert rain. It evaporates very quickly," he said. We suggest an alternative view. Government is more like a house. It can have a good roof at the same time it has deplorable plumbing. After Sept. 11, there was overwhelming consensus that the U.S. had very superior armed forces and an effective, focused president. That doesn't mean we thought the people in the Department of the Interior or the Occupational Safety and Health Organization were all that great. It's just that our focus, like the president's, was on the biggest goal: To stop terrorism. The best way to do that was to back the armed forces - those who put their lives on the line for democracy - and the administration's strategy. Asking about individual government departments might render altogether different views. What's your opinon? Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 43 Top Bush Administration Energy Official Touts Wind Power energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: June 3, 2002 PORTLAND, OR -- U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy David Garman addressed the WINDPOWER 2002 conference today, highlighting President Bush's national energy policy and focusing on wind energy policy and research. WINDPOWER 2002, the annual conference and exhibition of the U.S. wind energy industry, is co-sponsored by the American Wind Energy Association and the U.S. Department of Energy. "Our investments in wind energy so far are paying off," said Garman. "Thanks to the hard work of many of you at this conference and research and development efforts of the Energy Department's Wind Power Program, together we have lowered the cost of wind energy from approximately 80 cents per kilowatt-hour in current dollars in 1980 to as little as 4 cents per kilowatt-hour today." In order to make wind energy more competitive in the near term, the Bush administration has called for a five-year extension of the production tax credit and for the reauthorization of the Renewable Energy Production Incentive. Both measures are included in energy legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. In order to bring wind energy resources to marketplace, the Department of Energy is working on a number of efforts that include: + research and development of lower speed wind turbines that are suitable of entire nation; + addressing many of the regulatory issues at the federal level that might hinder deployment of wind power; + educating state energy officials and local developers about the benefits of wind energy; and + increasing the federal government's purchases of wind-generated electricity to hasten the development of the market. The mission of the Energy Department's Wind Energy Program is to enable the U.S. wind energy industry to complete the research, testing and field verification needed to develop advanced wind energy technologies. Media Contact: Tom Welch, 202/586-5806 Release No. PR-02-094 ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************