***************************************************************** 07/05/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.171 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 UK: 'Murky finances' of nuclear legacy 2 Irish seek support over nuclear row 3 Greenpeace calls for closure of nuclear plant 4 Rebranding of the nuclear industry could be the first step to privat 5 Canada: Nuke delays may drain grid, coffers 6 Japan Defends Nuclear Fuel Decision 7 North and South Korea are facing the biggest crisis in bilateral rel NUCLEAR REACTORS 8 US: Government asks why damaged Ohio nuclear plant stayed open 9 US: Politics probed in nuke plant shutdown NUCLEAR SAFETY 10 [radiation-survivors] File - radbooks.txt 11 Soldiers' Bosnia health claims dismissed 12 UK: New force to protect nuclear sites NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 13 'Better waste disposal, before nuclear expansion' 14 US: Vitrification plant a huge undertaking 15 Japan to ship MOX fuel to Britain; protestors ask court to stop tran 16 US: Top teachers union takes stance against dumpsite 17 US: Group seeks DOE quake assessment records 18 US: NLV council approves anti-Yucca resolution 19 US: Bands join anti-Yucca effort 20 US: Utah chambers join fight against Yucca 21 US: Exclusive: EPA Not Ready for a Big Hit 22 SELLAFIELD WORKERS DONATE £10,000 23 US: Salt Lake Chamber Opposes Yucca Mountain Facility 24 New Zealand tracks nuclear fuel shipment 25 Despite concerns, Japan defends sea transport of nuclear fuel to Bri 26 US: Pros, cons of nuclear waste plan are debated 27 UK: Beach owner sues over radioactive waste 28 Taxpayers' £20bn bill for nuclear clean-up 29 Rejected cargo of nuclear fuel on way to Sellafield * 30 Japan: Nuke institute to appeal ruling on uranium soil 31 Rejected cargo of nuclear fuel on way to Sellafield * 32 AU: Protest over Pacific shipment of nuclear waste 33 US: Air Force Mum on N-Storage 34 Nuclear Fuel Leaves Japan for U.K. 35 £44bn nuclear clean-up black hole revealed NUCLEAR WEAPONS 36 UN optimistic despite Iraqi doubts on inspections 37 The Warpath: Pressures Build on Iraq 38 NZ: Security tight as nuke ship sails 39 Still Cagey About the Kursk US DEPT. OF ENERGY OTHER NUCLEAR 40 WNA NEWS BRIEFING 02.27 | 26 June - 2 July 2002 ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 UK: 'Murky finances' of nuclear legacy BBC News | UK | Thursday, 4 July, [Cooling towers at dusk ] Ministers do not know final figure of BNFL's liabilities By the BBC's Tim Hirsch Environment correspondent Thursday's government White Paper, entitled Managing the Nuclear Legacy, is a brave attempt to shed some light on the murky finances of dealing with Britain's post-war radioactive waste burden. But in doing so, it exposes how confused they have been, and how difficult it is to unravel exactly how much we have been paying. And we will still have to pay for dismantling the nuclear plants built between the 1940s and the 1970s. Part of the problem is that in the enthusiastic fervour of this brave new technology, the pioneers of nuclear power kept poor records. [general view of Sellafield plant, Cumbria] Government says tax payer always funded nuclear waste clean-up This means as engineers start to dismantle old radioactive structures in places like the Sellafield complex in Cumbria, they often have little idea of what exactly they are dealing with. In addition, the accounts of the state-owned British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) were for many years in a state of confusion. It is only recently the true scale of its financial crisis has become apparent. In the past year alone, BNFL's estimate of its liabilities has soared from around £35bn to the astonishing figure of £40.5bn revealed on Thursday. And officials frankly admit they have no idea how much further this figure will rise - but rise it certainly will. With the establishment of the new Liabilities Management Authority (LMA), not the most catchy title for a new institution, this will no longer be BNFL's problem - it will be ours, the taxpayer. 'Finance shortfall' The government argues it always has been. It claims the change will simply make the costs of cleaning up our nuclear legacy more transparent, and more cost-effective as competition is introduced. But one big question raised by Thursday's announcement is why more money has not been set aside to deal with these huge costs for the future. BNFL has a fund known as the Nuclear Liabilities Investment Portfolio designed to help with clean-up costs. But this stands at only £4bn, leaving a huge shortfall to be met by the taxpayer in coming decades. Under the announcement, part of the clean-up will be funded by profits from BNFL's commercial operations on the Sellafield site. This will in future be in the hands of the LMA. Reviving nuclear industry But with real doubts about the future viability of nuclear fuel reprocessing, it is not at all clear there will be any profits. All of this comes as the government comes close to a decision on whether to attempt to revive the nuclear industry. It is looking at incentives to enable new power stations to be built, once the current generation comes off stream over the next 20 years. The implications for the future of the industry are double-edged. On the one hand, it provides some certainty for BNFL and frees it of the huge historic burden it has had to carry. On the other, it brings home the true cost of the nuclear industry's past. And it could make the prospect of new stations even less attractive to the public, whatever reassurances are given about the ability of new technology to minimise waste. ***************************************************************** 2 Irish seek support over nuclear row BBC News | ENGLAND | Friday, 5 July, 2002, 11:13 [Pacific Pintail] Ireland says the shipments are "hugely dangerous" The Irish Government is trying to get international support to stop two ships carrying nuclear waste passing through the Irish Sea. The government is concerned that the ships - on the way to the Sellafield processing plant in Cumbria - present an "unacceptable risk" to the environment. The consignment began its six-week voyage to Sellafield under armed guard on Thursday, after being turned away from Japan. Greenpeace protesters have said the latest consignment contains enough plutonium to produce 50 nuclear bombs. I think it is unacceptable to everybody Irish Environment Minister Martin Cullen Irish Environment Minister Martin Cullen said: "This type of shipment is totally unacceptable to the world at large and the international community. "We have been putting enormous pressure, both legal and diplomatic, on the United Kingdom authorities with regard to the whole issue of Sellafield. "There are two legal cases running, and what Ireland has to do now is bring on board the international community on this "The world has got to ask - have we got to get involved in these hugely dangerous shipments moving around the world? "I think it is unacceptable to everybody." Vulnerable cargo Japan's Kansai Electric Power company rejected the waste after finding that data for a 1999 shipment from the UK had been falsified. Mr Cullen said he was maintaining "close contact" with London amid fears that the shipment could be a target for terrorists to attack or hijack. The cargo is a potentially weapons-usable mix of plutonium and uranium oxides, known as MOX. According to Greenpeace, which is monitoring the ships' movements, the vessels are "slow, lightly-armed and vulnerable to attack". Mr Cullen, who is being pressed to intensify protests to the UK over the development, said: "The shipment of such materials through the Irish Sea represents an unacceptable risk to the environment of Ireland and the health and economic well-being of its population." ***************************************************************** 3 Greenpeace calls for closure of nuclear plant The News Staff - 7/5/2002 A Greenpeace official on Thursday said the organization will recommend the Laguna Verde nuclear plant be shut down for repairs in order to guarantee its safety. Cecilia Navarro Gonzalez said the controversial plant in the southeastern state of Veracruz should close for at least two years to undergo comprehensive repairs, /Notimex /reported. Navarro also insisted on the need to promote an all-encompassing emergency plan. "Local residents must be asked what they know about evacuation routes ... where they are and what condition they're in" in case of an emergency. ©Copyright 2002 TheNewsMexico.com ***************************************************************** 4 Rebranding of the nuclear industry could be the first step to privatisation Scotsman.com *Friday, 5th July 2002* /Jason Beattie/ BRITAIN?S nuclear industry is to be rebranded as part of a major overhaul, announced by the government yesterday, which could pave the way for a new generation of nuclear power plants. Under plans unveiled by Brian Wilson, the energy minister, responsibility for cleaning up Britain?s nuclear waste, at a cost of £48 billion, will be transferred from British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) and the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) to a new organisation called the Liabilities Management Authority (LMA). The changes would also see BNFL, a company widely distrusted by the public, renamed as New BNFL, effectively preparing it for part-privatisation. Environmental groups claimed the remodelled BNFL, no longer burdened by the loss-making business of decommissioning and decontamination, was being groomed to take forward a programme of new nuclear reactors. As if to confirm their fears, a leaked report acquired by the New Scientist magazine revealed that the Department of Trade and Industry was considering speeding up the licensing procedure for new nuclear power stations. Officials want to avoid the planning and safety wrangles which delayed the building of the last nuclear power station in Britain, at Sizewell, Suffolk, in 1995, by 15 years. Unveiling the White Paper, Managing the Nuclear Legacy, Mr Wilson said that cleaning up the legacy of Britain?s early nuclear industry was "one of the most important and demanding managerial, technical and environmental challenges facing the UK over the next century". The £48 billion cost - up by £6 billion from the previous estimate last November - of the decades-long programme would be met by the LMA and funded by the taxpayer. Copyright [http://www.canoe.ca/copyright.html] © 2002, Canoe, a ***************************************************************** 6 Japan Defends Nuclear Fuel Decision Las Vegas SUN July 05, 2002 TOKYO- Japan defended its decision Friday to transport nuclear fuel to Britain by sea, denying criticism that the shipment was vulnerable to terrorist attack or could be used for making nuclear weapons. The shipment of 560 pounds of rejected reactor fuel, a mixture of plutonium and uranium known as MOX, left the Japanese port of Takahama on its two-month journey Thursday. The radioactive material was being taken back to its maker in Britain on the Pacific Pintail, a cargo ship armed with deck-mounted machine guns. The route the ship and another armed companion vessel will take, and other security details, have not been made public. "We have done everything necessary to secure the shipment, and we are confident about it," said Tetsuya Kitajima, a spokesman for Kansai Electric Power Co. That did not stop protesters from demanding the shipment be halted. A small group of demonstrators rallied at the port where the ship embarked on its trip Thursday. On Friday, two Greenpeace protesters scaled the roof of the Japanese embassy in Canberra, Australia and unfurled a banner criticizing the shipment. The protesters - about a dozen in all - parked a truck carrying a large cardboard imitation nuclear bomb in front of the building. Kansai Electric imported the fuel in 1999 for an experimental nuclear power program. But the fuel's maker, British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., later admitted it had falsified quality records and agreed to ship the fuel back to Britain. The original shipment to Japan was widely criticized by environmental groups and government officials in Australia, New Zealand and some Pacific island nations. Opponents said not enough was done to ensure the safety of the cargo, and urged Japan to provide military escorts. They also say the shipments are an attractive target for terrorists. "This type of shipment is totally unacceptable to the world at large and the international community," Irish Environment Minister Martin Cullen said. "The shipment of such materials through the Irish Sea represents an unacceptable risk to the environment of Ireland and the health and economic well-being of its population." Though not weapons grade, the fuel is dangerous because it could still easily be transformed for use in nuclear weapons, Greenpeace activist Shaun Burnie said Friday. "It's no more complicated than making designer drugs," he said. But Japanese officials and an independent nuclear expert strongly denied that. Yutaka Ikoma, an official with the government's Resources and Energy Agency, which oversees nuclear policy, said it is virtually impossible to use the material for bombs. "Plutonium for reactor use and weapons use is completely different," he said. "Weapons-grade plutonium must be more than 90 percent pure, this fuel is only about 4 or 5 percent (pure)." Naomi Shono, a physics professor at Hiroshima Jogakuin University, said it would theoretically be possible to use the plutonium for weapons. "But the money and technical skill that it would be required make that possibly extremely unrealistic," he said. Resource-poor Japan aims to use MOX fuel at up to 18 nuclear reactors, out of a total 52 commercial plants, by the year 2010. A group of 10 power utilities plans to build its own $967 million MOX fuel processing plant in northern Japan by 2009. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 7 North and South Korea are facing the biggest crisis in bilateral relations since policies of detente began two years ago, says Simon Tisdall Guardian Unlimited | Archive Search Naval row clouds Korean sunshine Simon Tisdall Guardian Unlimited Thursday July 4, 2002 South Korea, buoyed by World Cup euphoria, has been brought down to earth with a bang this week by a sudden crisis in its relations with the North. The catalyst was last weekend's maritime clash between patrol boats belonging to the two rival navies in which four South Korean sailors and perhaps 30 North Koreans were killed. Both sides have blamed each other for the sea battle that took place around the disputed maritime boundary west of Seoul - although it does seem to have been provoked by the North's infringement of territorial waters. Analysts disagree about whether this provocation was deliberate and whether, for instance, the North's eccentric leader, Kim Jong-il, would have been aware of it in advance. Such skirmishes, on land and at sea, were once a regular feature of life in the divided peninsula. Yet this was the most serious incident to occur since the South Korean president, Kim Dae-jung, launched his "sunshine" policy of detente and made an unprecedented visit to the northern capital, Pyongyang, in June 2000. The sense of shock felt in Seoul was thus all the greater for the unexpectedness of this sudden deterioration. But growing strains in this always tense relationship were already apparent well before the naval battle. Despite the optimism spawned by the Pyongyang summit, many of the confidence-building measures discussed then have failed to materialise. In particular, a promise by Kim Jong-il to make a return visit to Seoul has not been kept. Oddly, the reclusive North Korean leader, who favours sunglasses and flared, Elvis-style jump-suits, did find time to make a well-publicised tour of Russia last year, travelling by train for fear of entrusting his life to an aircraft. Quite what Russia's reforming president, Vladimir Putin, made of him is not a matter of public record. This negative shift in bilateral sentiment has not been helped by the vacillating policy pursued by the Bush administration since it took office in January 2001. One of George Bush's first interventions in foreign affairs was to freeze US contacts with North Korea and order a review of the Clinton era policy of offering assistance to the North in return for controls on its nuclear power programme. That alarmed both Kim Dae-jung and US secretary of state Colin Powell - who between them managed to talk Bush around. Fitful contacts with the North resumed. Then came September 11 and in the wake of that, Bush's decision not only to label North Korea a rogue state but also a member of an exclusive club - the "axis of evil". The US president expressed particular concern about North Korea's chemical and biological weapons programmes, about which little in fact is really known, and its ballistic missile programme. This perceived latter threat not only to the South (where the US has 36,000 troops) but to Japan and the US itself is part of the rationale behind America's national missile defence programme and its abrogation of the ABM treaty with Russia. Even so, Powell's state department persevered in trying to build on the opening achieved in June 2000. This month a senior US official, assistant secretary of state James Kelly, was due to visit Pyongyang. After the weekend's naval clash, that visit has been postponed again. Despite this lack of progress over the past two years, and despite the fact that North Korea maintains the world's largest standing army, the International Institute for Strategic Studies was able to note in its 2002 military balance report that "stable relations" continued between the North and South. Now, however, there is a clear danger of retrogression. Kim Dae-jung has warned of serious consequences should the North mount further provocations, some of the South's aid programmes and technical cooperation programmes have been put on hold, and the South Korean military has revised its rules of engagement, allowing it to adopt a more aggressive posture. Pressure on Kim Dae-jung to do more may grow as South Korea moves towards a presidential election in December. But Pyongyang has shown no sign of backing down from its initial claim that the naval battle was the fault of the South. It all amounts to a rude awakening for South Koreans momentarily carried away by their team's success in the World Cup finals. But, strange to say, football could yet help provide an answer. The South Korean national side has invited the North to play a match at the Seoul stadium on September 8. The (South) Korean Football Association says the game should go ahead despite the latest fighting, the bloodshed and the threats. They say it will be a friendly. simon.tisdall@guardian.co.uk [simon.tisdall@guardian.co.uk] [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 8 Government asks why damaged Ohio nuclear plant stayed open Las Vegas SUN July 04, 2002 OAK HARBOR, Ohio (AP) - Federal officials are investigating whether senior Nuclear Regulatory Commission staffers succumbed to politics or industry pressure when they let FirstEnergy Corp. operate the Davis-Besse nuclear plant six weeks past a scheduled shutdown date. George Mulley, NRC deputy assistant inspector general for investigations, told The (Toledo) Blade for a story on Thursday that his office is examining if anything other than scientific or technical information influenced the decision. In December, some NRC staff members argued that the agency should have issued what would have been its first emergency shutdown order for a U.S. nuclear plant since 1987. "We want to know if the decision was based on a technical review - not on political or industry pressure," Mulley said. FirstEnergy spokesman Todd Schneider said on Thursday that the company and the NRC agreed to a Feb. 16 refueling shutdown date so the NRC could inspect the plant. The NRC originally wanted to do the inspection at the end of December, while FirstEnergy hoped the agency would wait until the plant's original scheduled refueling shutdown in April, Schneider said The two sides then reached an agreement for the date in February, Schneider said, adding that FirstEnergy did not place any "undue pressure" on NRC officials to influence their decision. In March, inspectors discovered that boric acid had nearly eaten through a 6-inch thick steel cap that covers the reactor vessel at Davis-Besse, located near Toledo in this city along Lake Erie. It was the most extensive corrosion found on a U.S. nuclear reactor and led to a nationwide review of all 69 similar plants. Reviews found no damage in other plants but did reveal a need for more inspections. Mulley said the NRC inspector general's office also wants to determine why the agency was admittedly caught off guard by the extent of corrosion on Davis-Besse's reactor head during an inspection that occurred after the February shutdown. The inspector general wants to know whether that discovery came as a surprise because of a regulatory breakdown within the NRC, Mulley said. "After we got into this thing, it became apparent we have two separate issues," he said. A report from the NRC inspector general's office is expected this fall, he said. Meanwhile, the NRC's criminal investigative arm is interviewing 33 current and former Davis-Besse employees. Other than to confirm it is one of several investigations under way, NRC spokesman Jan Strasma declined to comment to The Blade. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 9 Politics probed in nuke plant shutdown - The Tribune Chronicle - Your Mahoning Valley News Source Friday, July 05, 2002 [http://www.tribune-chronicle.com The Associated Press OAK HARBOR - Federal officials are investigating whether senior Nuclear Regulatory Commission staffers succumbed to politics or industry pressure when they let FirstEnergy Corp. operate the Davis-Besse nuclear plant six weeks past a scheduled shutdown date. George Mulley, NRC deputy assistant inspector general for investigations, told The (Toledo) Blade for a story on Thursday that his office is examining if anything other than scientific or technical information influenced the decision. In December, some NRC staff members argued that the agency should have issued what would have been its first emergency shutdown order for a U.S. nuclear plant since 1987. ''We want to know if the decision was based on a technical review - not on political or industry pressure,'' Mulley said. FirstEnergy spokesman Todd Schneider said on Thursday that the company and the NRC agreed to a Feb. 16 refueling shutdown date so the NRC could inspect the plant. The NRC originally wanted to do the inspection at the end of December, while FirstEnergy hoped the agency would wait until the plant's original scheduled refueling shutdown in April, Schneider said The two sides then reached an agreement for the date in February, Schneider said, adding that FirstEnergy did not place any ''undue pressure'' on NRC officials to influence their decision. In March, inspectors discovered that boric acid had nearly eaten through a 6-inch thick steel cap that covers the reactor vessel at Davis-Besse, located near Toledo in this city along Lake Erie. It was the most extensive corrosion found on a U.S. nuclear reactor and led to a nationwide review of all 69 similar plants. Reviews found no damage in other plants but did reveal a need for more inspections. Mulley said the NRC inspector general's office also wants to determine why the agency was admittedly caught off guard by the extent of corrosion on Davis-Besse's reactor head during an inspection that occurred after the February shutdown. The inspector general wants to know whether that discovery came as a surprise because of a regulatory breakdown within the NRC, Mulley said. ''After we got into this thing, it became apparent we have two separate issues,'' he said. A report from the NRC inspector general's office is expected this fall, he said. Meanwhile, the NRC's criminal investigative arm is interviewing 33 current and former Davis-Besse employees. Other than to confirm it is one of several investigations under way, NRC spokesman Jan Strasma declined to comment to The Blade. www.tribune-chronicle.com [http://www.tribune-chronicle.com] 240 Franklin St. S.E. | Warren, Ohio 44482 330.841.1600 (local) | 888.550.TRIB (toll-free) ***************************************************************** 10 [radiation-survivors] File - radbooks.txt Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 00:53:33 -0500 (CDT) Exposure: Victims of Radiation Speak Out In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Chugoku Newspaper,Kirsten McIvor (Translator),Foreword by Robert J. Lifton / Paperback / Kodansha America, Inc. / April 1996 Our Price: $12.00 -------------------- Radiation Injury and the Chernobyl Catastrophe, Vol. 2 In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . N. Dainiak,O. A. Aleinikova,W. J. Schull,L. Karkanitsa / Paperback / AlphaMed Press / March 1997 Our Price: $49. ---------------------- Demanding Democracy after Three Mile Island In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Raymond L. Goldsteen,John K. Schorr / Hardcover / University Press of Florida / August 1991 Our Price: $49.95 --------------------- Radiation and Health Thormod Henrikson David H. Maillie Retail Price: $32.00 Our Price: $25.60 You Save: $6.40 (20%) Readers' Advantage Price: $24.32 Join Now Not Yet Available:Preorder Now This book will be available on September 2, place your advance order now and we will ship it when it arrives! Format: Paperback, 1st ed., 240pp. ISBN: 0415271622 Publisher: Taylor & Francis, Inc. Pub. Date: September 2002 --------------- www.barnesandnoble.com books.. The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests Martha Stephens Format: Hardcover, 350pp. ISBN: 0822328119 Publisher: Duke University Press Pub. Date: January 2002 --------------- The Plutonium Files: America's Secret Medical Experiments in the Cold War Eileen Welsome Format: Paperback, 592pp. ISBN: 0385319541 Publisher: Dell Publishing Company, Incorporated Pub. Date: October 2000 --------------------------------------------- The Human Radiation Experiments: Final Report of the President's Advisory Committee Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments Ruth R. Faden (Editor) Format:Textbook Hardcover, 1st ed., 620pp. ISBN: 0195107926 Publisher: Oxford University Press, Incorporated Pub. Date: March 1996 ------------------------------------------- Effects of A-Bomb Radiation on the Human Body Itsuzo Shigematsu H. Sasaki C. Ito N. Kamada M. Akiyama Hideo Sasaki (Editor) Nanao Kamada (Editor) Mitoshi Akiyama (Editor) Chikako Ito (Editor) Brian Harrison (Translator) B. Harrison (Translator) Format:Textbook Hardcover, 1st ed., 432pp. ISBN: 3718654180 Publisher: Gordon & Breach Publishing Group Pub. Date: April 1995 ----------------- Effects of Atomic Radiation: A Half-Century of Studies from Hiroshima and Nagasaki In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . William J. Schull / Hardcover / Wiley, John & Sons, Incorporated / August 1995 Our Price: $89.95 -------------------------------- Effects of Ionizing Radiation: Atomic Bomb Survivors and Their Children (1945-1995) In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Leif E. Peterson (Editor),Seymour Abrahamson (Editor) / Hardcover / National Academy Press / November 1997 Our Price: $79.95 --------------------------- Hereditary Effects of Radiation: UNSCEAR 2001 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annex In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Staff of United Nations / Paperback / United Nations / November 2001 Our Price: $39.20, You Save 20% ----------------------------- Low Level Radiation and Immune System Damage: An Atomic Era Legacy In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Joseph J. Mangano / Hardcover / Lewis Publishers / August 1998 Our Price: $54.95 ----------------------- Multiple Exposures: Chronicles of the Radiation Age In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Catherine Caufield / Paperback / University of Chicago Press / May 1990 Our Price: $18.00 -------------------- Radiation in Medicine: A Need for Regulatory Reform In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Institute of Medicine,Gary Penn (Editor),Kate-Louise D. Gottfried (Editor) / Paperback / National Academy Press / January 1996 Our Price: $49.95 ------------------------------- Radiation Therapy of Benign Diseases: A Clinical Guide In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Stanley E. Order,S. S. Donaldon / Hardcover / Springer-Verlag New York, Incorporated / June 1998 Our Price: $139.00 -------------------------------- 147. Guidelines for the Radiation Protection of Workers in Industry (Ionising Radiations): Requirements for Control of Exposure to Radiation of Workers in Specific Installations In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Labour Office International / Paperback / International Labour Office / November 1989 Our Price: $8.00 -------------------------- 151. Handbook of Radiation Effects In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Andrew G. Holmes-Siedle,Len Adams / Hardcover / Oxford University Press, Incorporated / August 2001 Our Price: $110.00 ---------------------------------- Potential Radiation Exposure in Military Operations: Protecting the Soldier before, during and After In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . Institute of Medicine Staff, Institute of Medicine, Instit,Susan Thaul (Editor),Heather O'Maonaigh (Editor) / Paperback / National Academy Press / May 1999 Our Price: $34.95 ----------------- Radiation & Human Health In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . John William Gofman / Hardcover / Sierra Club Books / June 1982 Our Price: $29.95 ---------------------- Radiation Protection of Workers in Mining and Milling of Radioactive Ores In Stock:Ships within 24 hours . UNIPUB (Editor) / Paperback / Bernan Associates / January 1983 Our Price: $35.00 ---------------------- More books on radiation at this website. http://www.radiation.org/fourwalls.html ------------ Newletter avaiable from NARS www.radiationsurvivors.org National Association of Radiation Survivors PO BOX 1587 Marysville CA 95901-1587 800-798-5102 They put out a great newsletter for fifteen dollars a year. NARS is NOT associated with this list. They gave us the incentive to move ahead. ------- You can find more information in our archives. And on my home page under health/ radiation/ http://tahomagirl.com ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Free $5 Love Reading Risk Free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/Pp91HA/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/6xSolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: radiation-survivors-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ----- Together we can make a difference.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 11 Soldiers' Bosnia health claims dismissed Friday, July 5, 2002 Back The Halifax Herald Limited By Murray Brewster / The Canadian Press A military board of inquiry has dismissed the complaints of nearly three dozen Canadian soldiers who say they are plagued by a series of unexplained health problems related to their tour of Bosnia in the mid-1990s. The soldiers were interviewed as part of an inquiry called after concerns were raised by Warrant Officer Michael Peace, stationed at CFB Gagetown, N.B., who died of a brain tumour in October 2000. The health complaints raised by the soldiers ranged from persistent headaches, vision and memory problems to mysterious bleeding. All are symptoms that have also reported by other returning veterans of the Gulf War. Some soldiers link their illnesses to exposure to chemical agents, or spent depleted uranium munitions. While the military panel agreed the soldiers are sick, the board's final report, completed earlier this year, concluded that troops were not exposed to any "significant levels" of toxic material. The 34 soldiers are members and former members of the Royal Canadian Regiment, based in Gagetown, N.B., who served in Visoko, Bosnia in 1994-95 at the height of the ethnic conflict in the area. Just before his death, Peace asked his military superiors to investigate whether dust from special modifications made to armoured vehicles contributed to the development of his tumour. The cutting and pasting of special ceramic tiles to armoured personnel carriers and reconnaissance vehicles was done in the basement of the building where troops were billeted. The board, which held the inquiry in the fall of 2000, found the "add-on" armour was not toxic and played no role in his death. The board also looked for other factors, such as depleted uranium weapons and multiple chemical sensitivity, that might have made Peace and the other soldiers sick. It found none. "Depleted uranium is not considered a factor in the reported illnesses," said the report, obtained by The Canadian Press. "We have no information whether or not it was used by belligerent factions, but it is clear soldiers did not pick up anything that might have been depleted uranium, nor did they work around any hazard (tank hulks) that might have had depleted uranium dust." A senior medical officer said an independent toxicology report found nothing unusual and that the illness complaints are all part of modern warfare. "We're paying more attention to what we believe is a stress-related phenomenan," Lt.-Col. Greg Cook, a physician and specialist in internal medicine, said in an interview. He said troops, as far back as the U.S. Civil War, returned from combat with similar complaints as those reported by Gulf War and now Balkan War veterans. "We have to work with (our veterans) and convince folks that (these ailments) are not unique to them, it's a common experience with a lot of people." But Peace's widow rejected the inquiry findings and Cook's assessment. "I believe that the troops were exposed to chemicals," she said. "It is what made them sick. It is what made Mike sick." From speaking to some of her husband's former comrades, Peace said there are more than 34 cases of illness in the regiment. "The guys are afraid to say what's wrong with them. They have to work there. They are not going to do anything to jeopardize their jobs." Peace also did her own research into the chemical composition of the tiles and obtained reports, using the Access to Information Act, on the soldiers' living conditions in Visoko. In a written response to the inquiry, Peace said the cutting and burning of tiles produces crystalline silica which, according to the U.S. Labor Department, constitutes a serious health hazard. It can cause silicosis, a sometimes fatal lung disease. The military said all soldiers involved in the modification work wore proper protective gear. But soldiers testified fumes from the modification work was so strong it woke them from their sleep at night. A 1995 post-deployment report noted that "the dusty living conditions (at Camp Visoko) were probably the worst. This problem was compounded by the amount of fumes that seemed to flow freely into the living area." Other soldiers testified there was a chemical runoff in ditches near the living quarters after rain storms. Peace's response highlighted statements from troops who reported "fragments" laying around the compound following the occasional attack by one warring faction or another. "Was this depleted uranium?" she asked. Since the mid-1990s the Forces has beefed up its environmental testing of deployment areas. Copyright © 2002 The Halifax Herald Limited ***************************************************************** 12 UK: New force to protect nuclear sites /by Patrick Hennessy Deputy Political Editor/ An independent police force to protect Britain's nuclear sites is to be set up amid continuing fears of a terrorist attack by Islamic extremists, it emerged today. The force would also step up security against groups which may attempt to steal nuclear waste to create socalled "dirty bombs" - crude devices capable of causing devastation if detonated in a town or city. The planned 600-strong Civil Nuclear Constabulary would protect Britain's seven atomic sites and guard nuclear materials when they are transported around the UK. Many officers would be armed under the proposals which were contained in the small print of the Government's White Paper on cleaning up nuclear waste, a project which will cost £48 million. Officers will also be banned from going on strike or joining a union. The planned force would operate in the same way as other independent constabularies such as the British Transport Police and the Ministry of Defence police. It would have its own chief constable and its own overarching police authority, which will be appointed by the Trade Secretary. Ministers have continued to warn of the dangers presented by the al Qaeda terrorist network and believe that the prospect of extremists getting hold of a "dirty bomb" is a real one. They stress that they have received no specific threat. © Associated Newspapers Ltd., 05 July 2002 ***************************************************************** 13 'Better waste disposal, before nuclear expansion' Guardian Unlimited | Archive Search Polly Curtis Guardian Unlimited Thursday July 4, 2002 A leading nuclear scientist has warned that any plans to expand nuclear power capabilities in the UK must be backed up with proper independent research into waste disposal methods, or Britain could face a waste "crisis". Professor Ekhard Salje, head of the earth sciences department at the University of Cambridge, was commenting on today's news that the government is considering proposals to speed up the development of new nuclear power stations by using US approved designs. Professor Salje said: "Clearly they [the UK government] have to buy designs from the Americans because we don't have the sufficient research structure here to develop them ourselves." But, he said, the real problem lay with nuclear waste management. "I have serious problems with the waste disposal issue. I would think that the research on nuclear waste itself would be a prerequisite to building the things. It must be part and parcel of the whole deal. You can't do one without the other," he said. Britain risked going back to the early days of nuclear power when waste disposal was not considered during the development of power stations, said Professor Salje. The biggest independent research group is in Professor Salje's Cambridge department where between 15 and 20 people work on the waste disposal issue. "That is not sufficient for a national effort. The people doing it are good, but it is running on very small budgets," added Professor Salje. A Royal Society report, published in May, called for urgent investment in research into waste disposal. It warned that the research base in nuclear waste disposal had been eroded because of industry's reluctance to pay for research and the government's failure to recognise the importance of research into nuclear waste disposal. Lack of research could lead to a "crisis" in waste management it concluded. Leaked documents from the Department of Trade and Industry obtained by New Scientist magazine today suggested that US-approved reactor designs might no longer be required to undergo safety approval by the UK Nuclear Installations Inspectorate. Energy minister Brian Wilson confirmed that the proposal was contained in a "scoping document" setting out options for fulfilling the recommendations of the government's review of UK energy needs over the next 50 years, which said the nuclear option should be kept open. Mr Wilson maintained nuclear clean-up was one of the most important technical and environmental challenges facing the UK. "We need to ensure that the nuclear legacy is cleaned up in ways which protect the environment for the benefit of current and future generations. "We must develop wider expertise in nuclear clean-up, building on the best efforts of British Nuclear Fuel Limited and UKAEA and the real progress made in recent years." New plans, detailed in a white paper, were revealed today in which the government gave a commitment to ensuring that management arrangements were "open, transparent and command public confidence". The plans include a new authority which will be a "champion of public information", the minister pledged. One finding of the Royal Society report was that the government had spent too much time and money fighting public hostility to nuclear power, and not enough on how best to manage its waste. The nuclear legacy includes nuclear sites operated by the The United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority and BNFL which were developed in the 1940s, 50s and 60s to support government research programmes, and waste materials and spent fuel produced by those programmes and the Magnox fleet of nuclear power stations. It also includes facilities at the BNFL site at Sellafield in Cumbria used for reprocessing Magnox fuel. UKAEA's chief executive Dr John McKeown said he relished the challenge to develop and expand the authority's role in nuclear site restoration. The white paper was a "major milestone" for the authority, which was being given the opportunity to stay at the forefront of nuclear environmental restoration, he said. UKAEA manages decommissioning and site restoration at Dounreay, Windscale in Cumbria, Harwell in Oxfordshire and Winfrith in Dorset. Shadow energy minister Robert Key said: "We support this proposal in principle and will examine the detail thoroughly. "It is unreasonable to burden the modern private-sector nuclear industry with problems inherited from old state-run technologies." [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 14 Vitrification plant a huge undertaking The Oregonian 07/05/02 YAKIMA -- The contractor designing and building a $4 billion treatment complex for radioactive waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation expects to begin construction later this month. "We're very close," Suzanne Heaston, a spokeswoman for Bechtel National, said Wednesday. The massive project, which will take about 10 years, is loaded with gee-whiz statistics. For example, it will use 250,000 cubic yards of concrete -- enough to cover a football field with a concrete block 142 feet tall. Eventually, about 60,000 tons of reinforcing and structural steel will be used at the site. Some of it is already in position. The state Department of Ecology expects to have all the necessary permits completed by next week, and then the U.S. Department of Energy will give the go-ahead to pour the first concrete. An exact date remains to be determined. "We've been working very hard to get all of the permits in place so they can expedite this project," said Sheryl Hutchison, a Ecology Department spokeswoman. The state used an innovative permitting process for part of the project, approving some designs in phases -- rather than requiring a finished product -- so construction could start sooner. The vitrification plant, which will turn radioactive waste into glass cylinders for long-term storage, is supposed to be ready to run in 2007. More than 53 million gallons of highly radioactive waste is stored in 177 underground tanks. Of those tanks, 67 have leaked more than 1 million gallons into the soil through the years, contaminating groundwater and threatening the Columbia River. Under the Tri-Party Agreement, the 1989 legal pact governing cleanup at Hanford, 10 percent of the tank waste -- the most radioactive portion -- should be glassified by 2018. Bechtel and the Energy Department have said the process could be speeded up to 2013 but would cost hundreds of millions of dollars more. By 2028, under the Tri-Party Agreement, all the tank waste should be glassified, and by 2034, the tanks should be closed for good. Originally, construction on the vitrification plant was scheduled to begin in July 2001, a deadline the Energy Department was unable to meet because it had fired the contractor in 2000 when its cost estimates for the project more than doubled to $15.2 billion. The state fined the Energy Department $305,000 for failing to start construction on time. The fine will be forgiven as long as the Energy Department and its contractors meet their obligations on the project through 2003. © 2002 OregonLive.com. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 15 Japan to ship MOX fuel to Britain; protestors ask court to stop transport Thursday July 4, 12:44 PM A British vessel was scheduled to sail from a Japanese nuclear plant to transport plutonium-uranium mixed oxide (MOX) fuel back to Britain as activists tried to get a court to stop the shipment. Workers at Takahama nuclear plant, operated by Kansai Electric Power Co., started to load eight containers of MOX fuel on the Pacific Pintail, which was due to leave Thursday afternoon, said a spokesman for the plant, in Fukui Prefecture, about 380 kilometers (240 miles) west of Tokyo. "The ship will leave this afternoon and we have no plan to change that," the spokesman said. The fuel was brought to the plant from British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) in 1999, but was rejected after BNFL admitted to falsifying data related to safety checks on the fuel, unnerving the Japanese public about the safety of using nuclear fuel for power generation. Anti-nuclear activists and residents of Takahama staged small, peaceful protests outside the plant. A team of 15 activists from Greenpeace, joined by a handful of local residents, held up banners rejecting use of plutonium, the group said in a press release. The environmental group said it was seeking an interim injunction in the High Court in London to prevent the shipment leaving Takahama. The court was scheduled to hear the case from 10:30 am British time (0930 GMT, 6:30 pm Japan time). "But if the ship leaves before the hearing, the case becomes null and void," acknowledged Kazue Suzuki, an anti-nuclear activist with Greenpeace. "At this point, we are holding banners and organising protests to express our concerns," she said. The MOX fuel to be transported out of Japan contains 255 kilograms (561 pounds) of "weapons usable plutonium," Suzuki said. She said Greenpeace was concerned for security during the voyage back to Britain, saying that some countries en route were fearful of possible terrorist attacks, especially around the US Independence Day holiday. US citizens will be celebrating the holiday amid high security, following Washington's announcements that it received credible information that Americans could face imminent terror attacks at some point in the future, possibly more deadly than the September 11 attacks. Japan, which lacks natural resources, relies on some 50 nuclear reactors to provide about one-third of its electricity. Japan's worries about the use of nuclear fuel intensified in 1999 after three workers at a uranium processing plant at Tokaimura, 120 kilometres (74 miles) northeast of Tokyo, set off a critical reaction. The accident exposed more than 400 residents to radiation in what was the world's worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl in 1986. Two of the workers later died. Copyright © 2002 AFP. All rights reserved. All information ***************************************************************** 16 Top teachers union takes stance against dumpsite Las Vegas SUN July 05, 2002 The nation's leading teachers union endorsed a formal stance against Yucca Mountain Thursday. Members of the National Education Association attending an annual conference in Dallas this week voted to stand behind the Nevada State Education Association and the state of Nevada in their efforts to block Yucca. "The transportation of high-level nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, Nevada endangers 140 schools in Nevada alone," the NEA position said. "When added to the thousands of schools along the routes in 44 other states, the number of students and school employees potentially at risk is staggering." The NEA will contact its local members about the potential dangers of transporting waste, the position stated. The union also vowed to lobby the Senate, although the teachers don't have much time. Senators are expected to act on Yucca next week. The NEA is the largest teachers union in the country with 2.7 million members. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 17 Group seeks DOE quake assessment records Las Vegas SUN July 05, 2002 By Mary Manning Citing the Energy Department's rapid conclusion that a recent earthquake did no damage to a proposed nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain, advocacy group Public Citizen has filed a request for the assessment records. A 4.4 magnitude quake rattled Little Skull Mountain about 12 miles away from the site of Yucca Mountain on June 14. A temblor of 5.6 magnitude jolted the same area in June 1992. The DOE issued a press release the same day that said, "There was no damage to any Yucca Mountain Project facilities, structures or the underground Exploratory Studies Facility." A reporter was told 100 scientists and engineers had checked the site. "How could the DOE have assessed that no damage was done to the entire compound within several hours of the earthquake?" said Tyson Slocum, research director with Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. Public Citizen filed the Freedom of Information Act request for all of DOE's damage assessment records on Wednesday. "Public Citizen finds it curious that such a confident assessment was made just hours after the earthquake," the letter addressed to Yucca Mountain Project Manager Russ Dyer said. "Since Yucca Mountain sits on one of the most seismically active areas in the U.S., we need to make sure that the government is taking the time to review every nook and cranny to ensure that safety is not being compromised," Slocum said. The Senate is expected to vote on the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump as soon as Tuesday. President Bush and the House have approved the project. "This rush to judgment is symptomatic of the larger problems with the DOE's Yucca Mountain proposal," Lisa Gue, policy analyst with Public Citizen, said. "The site recommendation, soon to be voted on by the Senate, is dangerously premature at best." DOE scientists say a repository at Yucca could withstand a 6 or 7 magnitude quake. Yucca Mountain opponents have argued that a nuclear waste dump should not be built in an earthquake zone. Nevada is the third most seismically active state behind California and Alaska. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 18 NLV council approves anti-Yucca resolution Las Vegas SUN July 05, 2002 The North Las Vegas City Council unanimously approved a resolution opposing a high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain and the transportation of the wastes through Nevada. At the request of the Nevada League of Cities and Municipalities, the council voted on the resolution Wednesday night, less than a week before the Senate is expected to vote to override Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto of the project, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Doug Dickerson, executive director of the league, said he asked 18 Nevada cities to send in their resolutions by Monday. Ten cities have approved resolutions, including Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, Boulder City, Mesquite, Fallon, Sparks, Winnemucca, Gardnerville, Fernley and Incline Village. Dickerson said he expects Reno and Elko and two or three smaller cities in Northern Nevada to send in resolutions, as well. Then League President Mike Franzoia, mayor of Elko, will present the resolutions to Guinn. Copies will also be sent to the Nevada congressional delegation. The idea for a resolution was proposed by Sparks Mayor Tony Armstrong. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 19 Bands join anti-Yucca effort Las Vegas SUN July 05, 2002 Popular bands Indigo Girls, Midnight Oil and B-52s joined environmental and public interest groups Wednesday urging Sens. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Peter Fitzgerald, R-Ill., to vote against a Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. The groups held a media conference at the Allegro Hotel in Chicago as the Senate prepared to vote on the nuclear waste repository next week. Fitzgerald has already indicated he supports the repository, while Durbin remains undecided. "Mass transport of large amounts of highly dangerous radioactive waste through Illinois is a very dump idea, dangerous for people and their environment," Peter Garrett, lead singer of Midnight Oil and environmental activist. The Energy Department estimates that 38,549 truck shipments or 7,027 train loads of nuclear waste would travel through Illnois to Yucca Mountain. Some shipments could also float by barge on Lake Michigan. "Deadly nuclear waste shipments do not belong on the Great Lakes or the roadways that carry our children to school," Kate Pierson, B-52s singer, said. "If either Senator Durbin or Fitzgerald votes in support of this nuclear dump, he will do so with a guilty conscience." The watchdog group Public Citizen said Fitzgerald received $52,038 from the nuclear industry over the past three election cycles through Feb. 28; Durbin received $25,000 for the same period. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 20 Utah chambers join fight against Yucca Las Vegas SUN July 05, 2002 Salt Lake City Council also opposes plan By Richard N. Velotta Salt Lake City's chamber of commerce hopes a resolution unanimously approved by its influential board will convince Utah's two senators to vote against establishing a high-level nuclear waste dump in Nevada. The 35-member board of governors directing the 100-year-old Salt Lake Chamber -- the largest business organization in Utah with more than 2,000 member firms -- approved a resolution opposing Yucca Mountain last week. A committee of the St. George, Utah, Chamber of Commerce also wrote a letter in opposition to Yucca Mountain. St. George is about 110 miles northeast of Las Vegas on Interstate 15. Joe Christopher, president of the St. George Chamber of Commerce, said the chamber's community action committee wrote a letter in opposition to the approval of nuclear waste storage and transportation to Yucca Mountain. "Practically everything that would go there would have to come through St. George to get there, so we're concerned," said Christopher, general sales manager of Canyon Media Corp., which has three radio stations in St. George. The Las Vegas Chamber went on record against Yucca Mountain last year and broke with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on the issue. The actions by the chambers of Las Vegas, Salt Lake City and St. George represent key organized business opposition to Yucca Mountain, which is expected to face a critical vote in the Senate this month. Separately, the Salt Lake City Council approved a resolution Tuesday opposing the Nevada repository because much of the estimated 77,000 tons of waste would pass through the heart of Salt Lake City. The resolutions were prompted by recent Nevada lobbying efforts against the proposed nuclear waste repository planned 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. In late May, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman went to Salt Lake City to generate support against the Yucca Mountain repository. The seven-member Salt Lake City Council's resolution is being sent to President Bush and congressional representatives and governors of states in the West. The resolution says that "if the Yucca Mountain site is approved, 90 percent of all shipments of high-level nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain would pass through the heart of the Salt Lake Valley by railroad and on interstate highways and more high-level nuclear waste would pass through Salt Lake City than any other city in the United States except Las Vegas." The Salt Lake Chamber board said its position is in conflict with hundreds of other chambers of commerce that support Yucca Mountain, including the Davis, Heber Valley and Provo-Orem chambers in Utah. The reason those chambers supported Yucca Mountain, said Kem Gardner, chairman of the Salt Lake Chamber board of governors, is that the votes were taken before information about the transportation of waste was widely disseminated and those organizations "fell in step with the position taken by the U.S. Chamber." "They had a knee-jerk reaction, without thinking about it," said Gardner, president of The Boyer Co., a big Salt Lake City-based commercial real estate developer. "We spent all that money promoting the state of Utah during the Olympic Games, trying to sell tourism and the quality of life in the state. If you allow nuclear waste to be transported through the state, you undo a lot of the good we accomplished during the Olympics." "I just don't like the perception that Utah and Nevada is the place to send your nuclear waste," Gardner said. "They are correct in saying we have a major problem that has to be solved, but we feel we're correct in saying this is not the solution," Chamber spokesman Michael De Groote said. "We are not experts in nuclear disposal, but the position we're taking is that we are experts in what is good for Utah and this is not good for Utah and for the West." The Salt Lake Chamber has opposed the transportation and storage of nuclear waste since 2000. The organization earlier opposed the temporary storage of high-level nuclear waste at Skull Valley about 70 miles southwest of Salt Lake City on the Goshute Indian Reservation. The tribe has an agreement with Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of nuclear plant operators from across the country, and has proposed a $125 million temporary facility to store 40,000 tons of waste on the reservation. De Groote said the board took a similar, consistent approach to nuclear waste storage in its Yucca Mountain and Skull Valley stances, even though some Utah business people believe they should fight the Skull Valley proposal harder and force waste into Nevada instead. Steve Erickson, director of the Citizens Education Project, a Utah environmental group, said the federal government "could just as easily screw Utah as they've screwed Nevada" on forcing nuclear waste to the state. The Salt Lake City Council resolution also contemplates that because Yucca Mountain would not have the capacity to store all of the nation's nuclear waste, federal officials might look to sending excess waste to Skull Valley permanently. Later this month, the Senate is expected to take up debate on Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto of President Bush's order approving Yucca Mountain as the site for storing the waste. The House voted 306-117 to override the veto, but Nevada leaders think their best chance to stop the repository may be in the Senate. Utah Sens. Orrin Hatch and Robert Bennett, both Republicans, have supported Bush and favored the Yucca Mountain repository as a solution to disposing of nuclear waste scattered across the country. Utah business people say the senators are reconsidering their positions, but neither Hatch nor Bennett have said publicly that they would vote against Yucca Mountain. Neither could be reached for comment. "Those are the two we took this vote for," Gardner said. "We've notified them of our position and we would hope that they would listen to what the business community has to say. We have not heard whether they have changed their positions." Erickson said he talked to Bennett in April and that while it is encouraged that the senator is becoming better informed about the proposal, that "time is running out." All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 21 Exclusive: EPA Not Ready for a Big Hit New York Daily News Online Friday, July 05, 2002 Admits flaws on terror By KENNETH R. BAZINET Daily News Washington Bureau WASHINGTON The Environmental Protection Administration isn't ready for a radioactive dirty bomb or a chemical or biological terror attack, according to a post-Sept. 11 report obtained by the Daily News. "[The] EPA is not fully prepared to handle a large-scale [nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological] attack," the agency said in the report, titled "Lessons Learned in the Aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001." "Agency information, experience and equipment is insufficient to respond with confidence," the report said. The agency is one of several that would be called upon to determine site safety for recovery workers, as well as any danger to people living near a contaminated area, in the event of a nuclear, biological or chemical attack. "It should be noted that these attacks did not involve ... weapons of mass destruction, and yet the events of Sept. 11 presented an almost overwhelming challenge to the agency's resources," the report said. "The potential resource demands of an actual ... incident, in which the agency would play a much more significant role, should be a critical concern for the agency," it concluded. Among the report's findings: + It took as long as two weeks to get air quality samples to first responders at the World Trade Center site — even as questions persist about the safety of the air around the smoldering rubble at the World Trade Center. + The agency was short of critical equipment in its front-line regional offices, which were quickly overwhelmed by the effects of the attacks. + Local, state and federal authorities often wouldn't acknowledge the agency's role and kept it from doing critical work to measure the safety and livability of areas around the attack sites. At the Pentagon, FBI agents were particularly obstructive to agency technicians, the report said. The report recommended a series of remedies, including clarifying the EPA's on-site authority in decision-making and communications, response plans reviews and training exercises. It also recommended improving the agency's data analysis and information-sharing with local authorities, along with improving on-site testing equipment. EPA teams also should have standard credentials, clothing and hardhats that are easily recognizable by other authorities, the report says. The highly critical self-analysis, dated Feb. 1, is nearly impossible to find in Washington, but as word circulated this week about the existence of the inch-thick document, lawmakers said they had questions for EPA Administrator Christie Whitman. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said she wants Whitman to appear before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to testify about what the agency had done to fix the problems. "I'm asking that the ... committee immediately receive this report — which until now we haven't seen — and that we hold oversight hearings with EPA to explore these lessons and to ask the hard questions about what has changed since Sept. 11, or Feb. 1, and what else do we need to do to be better prepared," Clinton said. Some members of the New York congressional delegation were impressed by the agency's frank analysis of how it handled its role after Sept. 11. "EPA and Administrator Whitman should be commended for at least having the courage to catalogue their mistakes," said Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan). "The real problem is why aren't the other agencies like [the Federal Emergency Management Agency] doing the same thing." Clinton added, "This is life or death. This is not something people should be cutting corners about or fudging their words over." The EPA could not be reached for comment. ***************************************************************** 22 SELLAFIELD WORKERS DONATE £10,000 [The Whitehaven News] [Vision of Help: The eye department of Skiddaw Ward at The West Cumberland Hospital is presented with the cheque for £10,000 from the Sellafield Contractors Charity Committee, co-ordinated by West Cumbria Society for the Blind. Here, at the prese] SELLAFIELD charity committee has donated £10,000 to the West Cumbria Society for the Blind, at a presentation in the eye department of The West Cumberland Hospital. The Sellafield committee is made up of Sellafield contractor companies and its £10,000 donation will be used to help in the purchase of a diode laser which will be based at the hospital. The committee raises funds by holding two dinners every year. These events are sponsored by all the contract companies on the Sellafield site. Numerous donations are made to local charities every year in addition to a single large donation. At the presentation, the committee was represented by chairman Dave Turner, Terry Teal, Susan Crone, Eddie Farrar, Peter Bulman, Anne Marie Finlay and May Connell. BNFL was represented by Peter Rooke SRC="http://www.whitehaven-news.co.uk ***************************************************************** 23 Salt Lake Chamber Opposes Yucca Mountain Facility Chamber's Yucca Mtn. resolution Salt Lake Chamber 175 East 400 South, Ste. 600 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 For Immediate Release June 26, 2002 Contact: Michael De Groote 801.328.5056 SALT LAKE CITY -By unanimous vote, the Salt Lake Chamber Board of Governors passed a resolution opposing the creation of a high-level nuclear waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. This resolution is consistent with the Salt Lake Chamber's position against the creation of the Skull Valley facility. This places the Salt Lake Chamber in unison with the Las Vegas Chamber which is not in favor of the facility. It also places the Salt Lake Chamber in conflict with the position held by the United States Chamber of Commerce and hundreds of other chambers across the country-including the Davis, Heber Valley, and Provo/Orem Chambers of Commerce. "The Chamber's Board unanimously is against this facility because it just does not make sense for Utah or the West," says Larry Mankin, Chamber President. "The Olympic Winter Games showed the world the beauty of the west. It should not be made the country's dumping ground." Board discussion acknowledged the rising concerns about the suitability of Yucca Mountain as a storage facility. It also centered on the damage that an inevitable accident would have on Utah when a transportation mishap occurs. The Board also recognized that support for the facility is eroding in the West. Perhaps the strongest voiced opposition was to the fundamental premise behind the creation of the facility-that the West is a "great desert dumping ground." It was also noted that Utah and Nevada create no nuclear waste and would bear the burden of those states that do create high-level nuclear waste. The full text of the Chamber's resolution is as follows: Resolution - Salt Lake Chamber Whereas, the United States Senate is considering a resolution to move high-level nuclear waste from nuclear power plants where it is produced, to a proposed site in Yucca Mountain, Nevada, And, whereas, the Salt Lake Chamber has strongly opposed the relocation of this high-level nuclear waste in Skull Valley, Utah, And, whereas, transportation and other logistical problems of moving the waste to Yucca Mountain are identical to the challenges at Skull Valley, And, whereas, Utah and Nevada have previously both shouldered the nuclear burden of our country at considerable sacrifice due to radiation-caused illness and death, And, whereas, Utah and Nevada do not produce nuclear energy, and should not have the burden of storing this waste produced by other utilities in other states, And, whereas, there is adequate storage in existing storage sites, And, whereas, there is no contingency plan in the event of an accident in the transportation of this waste, Now Be it Resolved: That the Chamber opposes the use of Yucca Mountain as a high-level nuclear waste storage facility, And, that the Chamber supports the efforts of businesses in Nevada to stop this endeavor, And, that the Chamber encourages the Utah Delegation, particularly Senator Orrin Hatch and Senator Robert Bennett, to oppose this action, And, that the Chamber encourages further study to insure the safety of the waste where it is now located, without placing the nation in jeopardy through transporting this waste. Signatures: Larry G. Mankin President Kem C. Gardner Chairman of the Board ***************************************************************** 24 New Zealand tracks nuclear fuel shipment Go Asia Pacific Breaking News Pacific - [http://www.abc.net.au/ra] New Zealand will send its airforce to track two British ships carrying nuclear waste from Japan to Britain to ensure the ships don't enter its territorial waters. Although the route is secret, such shipments previously have passed through the Tasman Sea between New Zealand and Australia. The first of the ships - carrying a mix of plutonium and uranium oxides which could potentially be used in weapons - left the Japanese port of Takahama on Thursday. New Zealand Foreign Minister, Phil Goff, says while he has had assurances that safeguards have been put in place, this does not eliminate risks posed by accident or by terrorist attacks. The waste is being returned to state-owned British Nuclear Fuels after Japan's Kansai Electric Power Co discovered that data for a 1999 shipment from Britain had been deliberately falsified. Meanwhile, Greenpeace has announced a flotilla of yachts plans to gather next week in the northern Tasman Sea to wait for the two ships. As the protest builds, two Greenpeace activists have appeared in an Australian court after a roof-top protest at the Japanese Embassy in Canberra. Samantha Hawley reports the group also converged on the British High Commission: "Greenpeace activists turned up at the Japanese Embassy this morning unannounced, upset about the transfer of plutonium mixed oxide aboard the 'Pacific Pintail' that left Japan bound for Britain yesterday. It caught police by surprise, taking 15 minutes for them to arrive on the scene. Detective Superintendent, Gary Gent, says Japanese officials were obviously distressed; 'They were upset about it and asked us to take the appropriate action which we've done.' Two protestors were arrested and charged. But Greenpeace activist, Stephen Campbell, says it was for a good cause: 'We are always aware of the consequences of our actions. We are also aware of the importance that they have." 05/07/2002 17:31:56 | ABC Radio Australia News tm] --> World News from Radio Australia ***************************************************************** 25 Despite concerns, Japan defends sea transport of nuclear fuel to Britain KOZO MIZOGUCHI, Associated Press Writer Friday, July 5, 2002 (07-05) 05:17 PDT TOKYO (AP) -- Japan defended its decision Friday to transport nuclear fuel to Britain by sea, denying criticism that the shipment was vulnerable to terrorist attack or could be used for making nuclear weapons. The shipment of 560 pounds of rejected reactor fuel, a mixture of plutonium and uranium known as MOX, left the Japanese port of Takahama on its two-month journey Thursday. The radioactive material was being taken back to its maker in Britain on the Pacific Pintail, a cargo ship armed with deck-mounted machine guns. The route the ship and another armed companion vessel will take, and other security details, have not been made public. "We have done everything necessary to secure the shipment, and we are confident about it," said Tetsuya Kitajima, a spokesman for Kansai Electric Power Co. That did not stop protesters from demanding the shipment be halted. A small group of demonstrators rallied at the port where the ship embarked on its trip Thursday. On Friday, two Greenpeace protesters scaled the roof of the Japanese embassy in Canberra, Australia and unfurled a banner criticizing the shipment. The protesters -- about a dozen in all -- parked a truck carrying a large cardboard imitation nuclear bomb in front of the building. Kansai Electric imported the fuel in 1999 for an experimental nuclear power program. But the fuel's maker, British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., later admitted it had falsified quality records and agreed to ship the fuel back to Britain. The original shipment to Japan was widely criticized by environmental groups and government officials in Australia, New Zealand and some Pacific island nations. Opponents said not enough was done to ensure the safety of the cargo, and urged Japan to provide military escorts. They also say the shipments are an attractive target for terrorists. "This type of shipment is totally unacceptable to the world at large and the international community," Irish Environment Minister Martin Cullen said. "The shipment of such materials through the Irish Sea represents an unacceptable risk to the environment of Ireland and the health and economic well-being of its population." Though not weapons grade, the fuel is dangerous because it could still easily be transformed for use in nuclear weapons, Greenpeace activist Shaun Burnie said Friday. "It's no more complicated than making designer drugs," he said. But Japanese officials and an independent nuclear expert strongly denied that. Yutaka Ikoma, an official with the government's Resources and Energy Agency, which oversees nuclear policy, said it is virtually impossible to use the material for bombs. "Plutonium for reactor use and weapons use is completely different," he said. "Weapons-grade plutonium must be more than 90 percent pure, this fuel is only about 4 or 5 percent (pure)." Naomi Shono, a physics professor at Hiroshima Jogakuin University, said it would theoretically be possible to use the plutonium for weapons. "But the money and technical skill that it would be required make that possibly extremely unrealistic," he said. Resource-poor Japan aims to use MOX fuel at up to 18 nuclear reactors, out of a total 52 commercial plants, by the year 2010. A group of 10 power utilities plans to build its own $967 million MOX fuel processing plant in northern Japan by 2009. The San Francisco Chronicle ***************************************************************** 26 Pros, cons of nuclear waste plan are debated *© 2002 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd* By Paul O'Hare 05 July 2002 Beach owner sues over radioactive waste A landowner has launched a lawsuit against the UK Atomic Energy Authority, claiming it has repeatedly contaminated his beach with radioactive particles. Geoffrey Minter, who owns Sandside Bay near the nuclear installation at Dounreay in Caithness, said the action was a response to a fruitless five-year campaign against the authority. Mr Minter described his action, believed to be the first of its kind, as the only way to resolve the long-running dispute in the face of "spin, excuses and broken promises". The authority said it would consider the issues raised by the petition before issuing a formal response. The first radioactive particle was discovered on the beach in 1984. Seven years later Mr Minter bought Sandside House, an estate which includes beaches, a harbour and an 18-hole golf course. Two further radioactive particles were found on Sandside Bay's main beach in 1997, and a further 17 since. *© 2002 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd* By Michael Harrison Business Editor 05 July 2002 The bill for dealing with the legacy of Britain's civil nuclear programme had risen to £48bn and the final cost could be much higher still, the Government said yesterday. Ministers also said that taxpayers would have to part with £20bn over the next fifteen years to fund the new body being created to take charge of the clean-up of nuclear power stations, research establishments and the Sellafield reprocessing site in Cumbria. Critics of the nuclear industry said the figures were further evidence that the Government should veto the building of any new nuclear stations. However, a leaked Department of Trade and Industry report suggested that ministers were looking for ways to go ahead with up to eight new reactors by easing planning restrictions. According to a White Paper published yesterday by the department, Managing the Nuclear Legacy, the new Liabilities Management Agency would need funding of at least £1.3bn a year between now and 2017. This is £500m more than the Government has earmarked at present for dealing with "back end" costs of sites owned by British Nuclear Fuels and the UK Atomic Energy Authority. Whitehall officials said that in the last year alone, BNFL's liabilities had risen from £35bn to £40.5bn while the UKAEA's liabilities now stood at £8.9bn. But they also admitted that no-one really knew the true size of the final bill that will have to be borne by the taxpayer for a nuclear programme which dates back to the 1950s. BNFL, for instance, has still not "bottomed out" the cost of decommissioning and cleaning up the original Windscale reactor which was damaged in 1957. "This is just one example," said a DTI official. "There are still some major uncertainties around what has to be dealt with and what the ultimate cost will be." Friends of the Earth said the rising cost of Britain's nuclear clean-up demanded an investigation by the parliamentary spending watchdog the National Audit Office and the Commons Public Accounts Committee. "Today's revelation of the staggering cost of cleaning up Britain's civil nuclear waste legacy highlights once again that nuclear power is completely uneconomic," said Roger Higman, FoE's nuclear campaigner. "The Government must address this issue seriously by ruling out the building of new nuclear power stations and concentrating on the development of renewable energy instead." Two options are canvassed in the White Paper for funding the clean-up programme. The first is to set up a ring-fenced "segregated fund". This would be like a pension fund and would be separate from other government finances. It would contain the £4bn already sitting in BNFL's nuclear liabilities investment portfolio and the annual payments to be made by government plus an cash surpluses from the operation of Sellafield and the Magnox reactors. The LMA would be free to invest the money to maximise returns. The alternative proposal, and the one favoured by the Government, is to have a "statutory segregated account" which would contain the same pot of money but would be controlled by the DTI and the Treasury and would be pooled with general government finances. The White Paper says the segregated fund would offer few advantages over a segregated account and would be complex to operate. Although the new agency will be responsible for managing and funding Britain's nuclear liabilities it will not be in charge of disposing of the waste. It is the job of Nirex, which was formed twenty years ago, to find deep sites capable of storing intermediate and low level nuclear waste. Nirex, which is owned by BNFL, the UKAEA and British Energy, is pushing to be made independent but some say it ought to become part of the LMA. The White Paper is non-committal on this. Once the new liabilities agency has been set up and BNFL is shorn of its £40bn in nuclear liabilities, the Government will be free to privatise the remaining commercial operations of BNFL. These consist of nuclear fuel manufacture and the clean-up of contaminated sites in other parts of the world. The move could prove controversial because the taxpayer would be left to pick up the tab for BNFL's liabilities while shareholders enjoy the profits from its privatised commercial activities. The part-privatisation of BNFL is still a long way off, however. Ministers had intended to go ahead with a partial sale of the company before the last election until the scandal over the falsification of safety records at Sellafield's Mixed Oxide Fuel plant. The earliest that the Government intends to consider privatisation is 2004-05. Even that may prove optimistic because it is unlikely necessary legislation will be included in the next Queen's Speech. *Expensive waste * * Cleaning up the nuclear power industry will cost Britain £48bn * The final clean-up bill will almost certainly rise but no one knows what it will be because there are "major uncertainties" * For example, one of the big jobs still to be done is the decommissioning of the 1950s Windscale nuclear plant * The Government wants to create a new Liabilities Management Agency to manage the clean-up nationally * It would have a budget of at least £1.3bn a year for the next 15 years. That is £500m more than the current budget * The agency's creation will pave the way for the part-privatisation of BNFL ***************************************************************** 29 Rejected cargo of nuclear fuel on way to Sellafield * /online.ie 04 Jul 2002/ A controversial shipment of rejected nuclear fuel is on its way to Sellafield from Japan. Despite massive protests a freighter loaded with the deadly cargo set sail today and is expected to make its way up the Irish sea at the end of August. Objectors say the journey is too dangerous and the ship is not secure from possible attack. Green Party leader Trevor Sargeant says the radioactive material should be kept in Japan. "Most of the countries along the ship route are going to be on high alert because this material should be retained and stored and made safe in Japan rather than risking many peoples lives and the maritime environment bringing it back to Sellafield." /online.ie 04 Jul 2002/ A controversial shipment of rejected nuclear fuel is on its way to Sellafield from Japan. Despite massive protests a freighter loaded with the deadly cargo set sail today and is expected to make its way up the Irish sea at the end of August. Objectors say the journey is too dangerous and the ship is not secure from possible attack. Green Party leader Trevor Sargeant says the radioactive material should be kept in Japan. "Most of the countries along the ship route are going to be on high alert because this material should be retained and stored and made safe in Japan rather than risking many peoples lives and the maritime environment bringing it back to Sellafield." 05.07.2002 TAKAHAMA - A ship carrying nuclear material from Japan to Britain prepared sailed last night despite opposition from anti-nuclear activists, who said the cargo was a theft and attack risk. The sailing of the Pacific Pintail, carrying a weapons-usable mix of plutonium and uranium oxides (MOX), has raised tension as it coincides with the United States' Independence Day and comes after US warnings of the continuing potential for terrorist attacks. An air of watchfulness surrounded the pier in the looming shadow of Takahama's nuclear power plant 300km west of Tokyo. Police with dogs surrounded two massive, 100-tonne nuclear transport casks trucked to the pier for loading, 20 security guards stood on the ship's deck and plant security kept protesters out of the area. The Pacific Pintail and 12 Japanese coast-guard escorts had slipped into serene Uchiura Bay, past the Greenpeace International protest ship Arctic Sunrise. The MOX fuel is being returned to state-owned British Nuclear Fuels after Japan's Kansai Electric Power Co Inc discovered that data for a 1999 shipment from Britain had been deliberately falsified. Kansai was to use the fuel in commercial reactors. As a security measure, the Pacific Pintail, which had a machine gun, was to sail with another ship, the Pacific Teal. Greenpeace deployed two inflatables to fly 12 yellow kites spelling out "Stop Plutonium" when the Pacific Pintail entered the bay. "Security concerns are a major issue to countries along the tens of thousands of kilometres between Japan and the United Kingdom," Greenpeace said. The ships were slow, lightly armed, and vulnerable to armed attack. The plutonium in the cargo was sufficient for 50 nuclear weapons if stolen. - REUTERS ©Copyright 2002, New Zealand Herald ***************************************************************** 39 Still Cagey About the Kursk [http://www.moscowtimes.ru Thursday, Jul. 4, 2002. Page 9 By Pavel Felgenhauer The saga of the Kursk nuclear submarine that sank in the Barents Sea in August 2000 seems to be over, at least officially. The government commission investigating has formally completed its task and filed a report. The Kremlin and the prosecutor general have apparently received copies, but the public has been told very little about the true causes of the disaster that killed 118 men. In August 2000, President Vladimir Putin publicly vowed that the Russian people would know all about the causes of the Kursk tragedy. But for almost two years officials have been repeating the same peculiar story: The Kursk was sunk by a torpedo exploding on board, or through collision with an unknown vessel or the explosion of a Nazi sea mine floating around since the 1940s. Of course, it was obvious from the start that an ancient sea mine exploding outside the strongly armored pressure hull of the Kursk could not possibly have instantly sunk a sub as big as an oil tanker and designed to withstand close nuclear blasts. To Our Readers Has something you've read here startled you? Are you angry, excited, puzzled or pleased? Do you have ideas to improve our coverage? Then please write to us. All we ask is that you include your full name, the name of the city from which you are writing and a contact telephone number in case we need to get in touch. We look forward to hearing from you. Email the Opinion Page Editor A collision with another sub would have inevitably left the intruder (allegedly U.S. or British) also badly damaged at the site of the wreck. Early on, independent experts clearly pointed out the most likely cause: a faulty torpedo. Now the government commission has finally come to the same conclusion: A 650-mm caliber torpedo fueled with highly volatile hydrogen peroxide was to blame. The fuel ignited, causing a fire that in turn detonated the entire stockpile of armed torpedoes on board -- more than 7 tons of TNT. It's a step in the right direction that the authorities are no longer accusing Western navies of sinking the Kursk, but there are still too many questions remaining unanswered. In fact, little is known since the report has not been made available to the public. There have been different leaks and comments by various members of the commission to news organizations instead. But the leaks do not fully tally with one another, and it is still not clear what caused the hydrogen peroxide fuel to flare or why the other warheads detonated as a result of fire, even though they are specifically designed not to blast unless first activated? Independent experts also pointed out that the torpedo malfunction that sank the Kursk was the direct result of sloppy performance and mismanagement by naval personnel either at base, when the torpedo was pumped with hydrogen peroxide fuel, or at sea, where the torpedo was prepared for launch during exercises. It's possible that it was the result of a series of errors, not untypical in the Russian military. Apparently, the sinister official silence that has followed the end of the Kursk commission's investigation is a continuation of the many falsehoods the navy has circulated for almost two years to cover up the case. Or maybe officials are simply embarrassed to admit in public that the heroic sailors of the Kursk were in fact victims of the negligence of their own colleagues. It has also been disclosed that the faulty 650-mm peroxide-fueled torpedoes (in use in the navy since the 1970s) were all withdrawn from subs and ships in 2000. This drastic and expensive action is material evidence of the fact that the naval authorities were aware early on of the true cause of the Kursk disaster and that talk about Nazi mines and sneaky U.S. subs was no more than a smokescreen to obscure the facts. Last year, after an international rescue operation successfully lifted the hull of the Kursk from the sea, Putin ousted several top admirals who were in command of the Northern Fleet at the time of the disaster for mismanagement. Apparently Putin already knew then who the real culprits were. But the admirals were not ousted in disgrace and soon became important officials in Putin's administration or were appointed members of the Federation Council (something that never happens without a nod from the Kremlin). The commander of the navy, Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov, who in the fall of 2000 publicly lied to reporters telling them he had solid evidence that the Kursk had been sunk by a foreign sub is today still commander in chief of the navy. It seems that high-ranking military officials are never held accountable -- no matter what they do. Officers believe that their chiefs perform efficiently only when there is an opportunity for them to line their pockets. The failure of the Kursk investigation to uncover the truth will surely only further depress morale. Pavel Felgenhauer is an independent defense analyst. [http://www.moscowtimes.ru ***************************************************************** 40 WNA NEWS BRIEFING 02.27 | 26 June - 2 July 2002 A weekly summary of international news relevant to the nuclear energy industry. [NB02.27-1] The European Commission (EC) has published its conclusions of the debate on its Green Paper on security of energy supply in the European Union (EU). The EC said that the 'nuclear factor remains an inseparable part of the debate' and recommends 'the nuclear option remains open to those EU Member States who would like it'. The European nuclear industry welcomed the EC's conclusions. Dr Peter Haug, Secretary General of FORATOM, described the EC report as 'fair and balanced'. (NucNet News, 227/02, 27 June; NucNet News, 228/02, 27 June; Foratom, 27 June; FreshFUEL, 1 July, p1; see also News Briefing 02.04-5) [NB02.27-2] Czech Republic: The closure of the Rozna uranium mine - the country's only operating such mine - has been postponed from 2004 until January 2006. (Ux Weekly, 1 July, p4; see also News Briefing 00.47-11) [NB02.27-3] US: A decision on the proposed site for a US gas centrifuge uranium enrichment facility based on European technology will be 'finalised soon' by Louisiana Energy Services (LES). Urenco's Pat Upson, chairman of the LES consortium, said that a shortlist of sites is being considered and a decision would be announced within the next four to six weeks. LES expects to submit a licence application for the plant to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by the end of 2002. According to a report in The Erwin Record, Urenco is considering Unicoi County, Tenn., as a potential site for the enrichment plant. However, Urenco officials have not confirmed whether it is on the shortlist of potential sites. (NucNet Business News, 42/02, 27 June; Nuclear Market Review, 30 June, p3; Ux Weekly, 1 July, p2; see also News Briefing 02.13-1) [NB02.27-4] Russia and Ukraine have signed a six-year loan agreement totalling US$44 million for the completion of the Khmelnitsky-2 and Rovno-4 nuclear (K2/R4) power reactors in Ukraine. The announcement follows a Russian pledge earlier in 2002 to help fund completion of the reactors. The credit will be used in 2002-2004 to supply reactor equipment and spare parts. Russia will also supply nuclear fuel, valued at US$100 million, for the two units. (Ux Weekly, 1 July, p4; Nucleonics Week, 27 June, p17; see also News Briefing 02.16-9) [NB02.27-5] US: A US$288 000 fine has been proposed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) over the loss of two irradiated fuel rods at the Millstone-1 nuclear power reactor. The plant is owned and operated by Dominion Resources, but the violations occurred while the plant was owned and operated by Northeast Utilities (NU). Dominion has said it will not contest the fine. As part of an agreement associated with the sale of the Millstone plant in March 2001, NU has agreed to reimburse Dominion for the full amount of the fine. (SpentFUEL, 1 July, p4; Nuclear Market Review, 30 June, p3; NucNet News, 225/02, 26 June; see also News Briefing 02.10-10) [NB02.27-6] Belgium: The cabinet has approved a final version of a new draft law aimed at phasing out the use of nuclear energy, from 2015 onwards. The bill has now been sent to parliament for debate and ratification. The new law foresees the closure of the country's seven existing nuclear power reactors not later than 40 years after the date on which they entered commercial operation. (NucNet News, 231/02, 1 July; see also News Briefing 02.26-7) [NB02.27-7] Netherlands: The three political parties expected to soon form the country's new government have confirmed a reversal of previous anti-nuclear policy with the announcement that the country's only operating nuclear power plant, Borssele, should not be closed prematurely. A draft policy statement by the centre-right coalition partners includes a formal call for the single-unit Borssele plant to remain in operation as long as it is safe and economically viable to do so. The 449 MWe PWR started operating in 1973. (NucNet News, 232/02, 2 July; see also News Briefing 02.23-1) [NB02.27-8] Czech Republic: CEZ has received regulatory permission to increase the output of the Temelin-2 nuclear power reactor to 30% of full power. A plant spokesman said Temelin-2 should reach 30% output 'within the next two weeks'. About 300 tests would then be conducted over the next month before plant management requests permission to raise the output to 55%. (Nuclear Market Review, 30 June, p3; see also News Briefing 02.23-5) [NB02.27-9] Lithuania has signed an agreement worth US$125 million with the assembly of donors (including the EU and EBRD) for the decommissioning of the Ignalina nuclear power plant. Ignalina plant management will now immediately begin preparing tender offers for three projects to be financed with the money. Lithuania has already agreed to shut Ignalina-1 by 2005 and has agreed in principle to close unit 2 by 2009, provided the EU guarantees sufficient financial support after decommissioning. (NucNet Business News, 41/02, 26 June; see also News Briefing 02.25-1) [NB02.27-10] The Swedish government has appointed Bo Bylund - a lawyer who is currently director-general of the Swedish National Rail Administration - to negotiate an agreement with nuclear operators on the details and timetable for the eventual closure of Sweden's nuclear power reactors. Negotiations are expected to start this summer and are not expected to conclude before the parliamentary elections on 15 September. (NucNet News, 230/02, 28 June; see also News Briefing 02.25-4) [NB02.27-11] Egypt plans to build a commercial nuclear power plant, the country's minister of electricity and energy, Dr Hassan Ahmed Yunes, announced. The plant will be located northwest of Alexandria. (Ux Weekly, 1 July, p4; see also News Briefing 02.19-10) [NB02.27-12] Pakistan will continue to develop its commercial nuclear energy program and will build additional nuclear plants, according to Dr Pervez Butt, chairman of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC). Currently, Pakistan's two operating nuclear power plants - Chasnupp and Kanupp - provide about 3% of the country's total electricity generation. (Nuclear Market Review, 30 June, p3; FreshFUEL, 1 July; p4; see also News Briefing 02.09-18) [NB02.27-13] US: Studsvik of Sweden and Washington Group International Inc of the US have formed a joint venture to process federal nuclear waste for the US Department of Energy (DOE). The new company - THOR Treatment Technologies (THORTT) - will capitalise on the patented THOR(SM) Pyrolysis/Steam Reforming Technology already in use to treat radioactive waste for the commercial nuclear industry at Studsvik's facility in Erwin, Tenn. The first contracts for demonstration tests are expected to be executed in autumn 2002, with initial processing contracts anticipated in 2003. (NucNet Business News, 41/02, 26 June; SpentFUEL, 1 July, p3; see also News Briefing 97.35-12) [NB02.27-14] UK: The transfer of at least 35 billion UK pounds (US$53.5 billion) in liabilities from BNFL as well as 8.9 billion UK pounds (US$13.6 billion) in liabilities from the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) to a new Liabilities Management Agency looks set to be delayed. Details of the plan are expected to be released this week, but the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) is likely to decide against introducing legislation for the transfer of liabilities during the next session of parliament, thereby delaying the transfer by at least one year. (Ux Weekly, 1 July, p3; see also News Briefing 01.49-1) [NB02.27-15] France: Tests conducted following an incident in 2001 involving a transport of iridium from Sweden to the US show that one man was exposed to radiation levels far higher than authorised limits. The French nuclear safety and radiation protection authority (IRSN) says that tests carried out on employees of delivery company Federal Express (FedEx) at Roissy airport, Paris, through which the package passed, show one man received a dose of about 100 millisieverts (mSv). That level of irradiation is 100 times higher than annual statutory limits for the general population and is equal to the dose European Union (EU) regulations allow for radiation workers over five years. (NucNet News, 224/02, 26 June; Nucleonics Week, 27 June, p1; see also News Briefing 02.02-17) [NB02.27-16] A major new initiative to improve control of the large number of radioactive sources used worldwide for industrial and medical purposes has been launched by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The aim of the campaign is to implement worldwide standards for the control of powerful radioactive sources. IAEA director-general Mohamed ElBaradei said that, while a number of countries with existing regulatory systems are already stepping up security measures, many other countries lack either the resources or the national structures to effectively control radioactive sources. (IAEA, 25 June; NucNet News, 221/02, 25 June; see also News Briefing 02.13-3) [NB02.27-17] Russia: The Group of Eight (G-8) countries agreed to a new US$20 billion program to safeguard Russia's nuclear, chemical, biological weapons. The package would be spread over the next ten years and is half funded by the US, with the remainder coming from the rest of the G-8 countries, excluding Russia. The G-8 leaders also agreed to establish a nuclear safety and security group by the G-8 summit in France in 2003. They also pledged to improve security at nuclear facilities, cooperate to stop weapons traffickers and eliminate all chemical weapons. (SpentFUEL, 1 July, p1; Ux Weekly, 1 July, p4; Financial Times, 27 June, p11; see also News Briefing 01.12-3) Previous News Briefing NB02.26 ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************