***************************************************************** 06/06/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.143 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 US: Atomic Safety & Licensing Board to Continue Hearing June 11 in 2 US: DOE: Protesters seek to offer 'necessity defense' NUCLEAR REACTORS 3 China: Engineer blows whistle on inferior materials at reactor 4 US: NRC to Hold Three Public Meetings on Davis-Besse June 12 in Ohio 5 US: NRC Assessing U.S. Nuclear Plants' Airstrike Risk 6 CHILDREN OF CHERNOBYL STILL NEED OUR HELP NUCLEAR SAFETY 7 US: NRC Assessing U.S. Nuclear Plants' Airstrike Risk 8 US: NFS attorney vows to contest contamination suit 9 US: New Yorkers Get Protection Against Nuclear Fallout 10 CONCERN OVER B30 RADIATION NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 11 US: South Carolina has had enough of being the nation's dumping 12 US: Proposed 'shaky' waste site safety is debated 13 US: Missouri Chamber raises concerns about nuclear waste storage 14 US: Questions Raised Over Energy Dept. Official's Industry Ties 15 US: Proposed 'shaky' waste site safety is debated 16 US: Yucca: Don't give in to environmental extremism 17 US: Nuke waste plan under consideration at Millstone 18 US: It's past time to move on Yucca Mountain 19 US: S.C., Govt. Clash Over Plutonium 20 Germans Approve Nuclear Waste Dump 21 US: Reid, Ensign doubt they can stop Yucca if Senate votes on it 22 US: Number of U.S. Train Derailments Up 23 US: Mock atomic container to pass through Idaho in Yucca protest 24 US: Magazine report suggests Yucca Mountain really in Utah 25 US: Senate panel's Yucca vote advances plan 26 US: Nevada to challenge DOE in lawsuit 27 US: Boxer and Chafee Introduce Bill To Restore "Polluter Pays" For 28 US: Proposed 'shaky' waste site safety is debated 29 US: Actor Mike Farrell Urges Senators to Oppose Yucca Mountain Dump 30 US: Editorial: Nevada's senators brace for last stand 31 US: Nevada files another suit against Yucca 32 US: Bush Environmental Plans Challenged 33 SELLAFIELD WORKERS FAIL 34 US: Tennessee part of sanction suit against North Carolina - 35 US: DOE waste facility is now operational 36 US: Missouri Chamber raises concerns about nuclear waste storage 37 US: Not In My State: Debating the Fate of Nuclear Waste -- 38 US: Standoff over plutonium signals shift in priorities A S.C. shuns 39 US: Nevada sues, again, to stop Yucca Mountain project 40 US: IEER | Alternative Nuclear Waste Plan 41 US: Sen. Boxer seeks to regenerate Superfund 42 US: Public Citizen Demands Disclosure of Pro-Yucca Campaign?s Ties t 43 US: Questions Raised Over Energy Dept. Official's Industry Ties NUCLEAR WEAPONS 44 Stop arming India and Pakistan 45 US: Nuclear Weapons and Media Fog 46 FCNL: Legislative Action Message (6/6/02) 47 U.S., NATO Discuss Nuclear Threats 48 Kiss My Nuclear Arsenal 49 US: Bush Seeks Homeland Security Dept. 50 US: Subcritical nuclear weapons test rescheduled 51 Fears spread that other Asian nations will seek nuclear arms 52 US: Bush urges senators to ratify nuclear treaty 53 US: Rumsfeld Cautions Nuclear Foes 54 U.S nuclear expert in Kashmir entourage 55 A-bomb survivors fear new Hiroshima US DEPT. OF ENERGY 56 Scientist 'Melt' Environmental Remediation Efforts* OTHER NUCLEAR 57 * Is It OK To Hate Bush? ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board to Continue Hearing June 11 in Chattanooga on TVA Appeal of NRC Discrimination Ruling NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 32 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov No. II-02-032 June 5, 2002 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] A hearing before an independent Atomic Safety & Licensing Board, appointed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to hear a Tennessee Valley Authority appeal of a $110,000 civil penalty sought to be imposed by the NRC for alleged violation of NRC employee protection requirements, will resume on June 11 in Chattanooga. The hearing, which commenced April 23, will resume at 9:00 a.m. (EDT) on June 11 in the Chickamauga Room at the Radisson Read House Hotel, located at 827 Broad Street. Parties to the proceeding are TVA and the NRC staff. The Board is considering whether TVA violated NRC requirements by discriminating against a former employee for engaging in protected activities; and, if so, whether an NRC Order imposing a civil monetary penalty for the violations should be sustained. Members of the Atomic Safety & Licensing Board presiding over the hearing are administrative judges Charles Bechhoefer, Chairman, Ann Marshall Young and Dr. Richard F. Cole. The hearing is open to observation by interested members of the public. Documents related to this proceeding issued prior to December 1, 1999, are available for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852-2738, telephone (301) 415-4737 or 1-800-397-4209. Documents issued subsequent to November 1, 1999, are available through the PDR and electronically through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible to the public through NRC's internet web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Help in using ADAMS is available by calling the PDR at the above telephone numbers. EDITORS: The continuation of this proceeding will be conducted in a private, public building, and cameras, microphones and video recording devices will be allowed so long as they do not disrupt the proceeding. ***************************************************************** 2 DOE: Protesters seek to offer 'necessity defense' KnoxNews: Local By Jamie Satterfield, News-Sentinel staff writer June 6, 2002 Four people charged with trespassing at the Department of Energy's Y-12 plant as part of a nuclear weapons protest are asking a federal magistrate to let them tell a jury they had no choice but to enter the property. Arguing that the production of nuclear weapons at the Oak Ridge plant violates international law, attorneys for the four alleged trespassers asked U.S. Magistrate C. Clifford Shirley to allow them to present a "necessity defense" at the upcoming trial. "These folks acted to enforce that law exactly what the U.S. Attorney's Office does every day," attorney Mike Whalen argued Wednesday. Whalen represents Timothy Joseph Mellen, 46, of Oak Ridge, who is charged along with Mary Elinor Adams, 61, of Bisbee, Ariz.; Lena Shallit Feldman, 26, of Lexington, Ky.; and Sister Mary Dennis Lentsch, 65, of Apison, Tenn. All four were charged April 14 after they crossed a metal barrier onto Y-12 property. Protests have become commonplace at the Y-12 plant in the past several years, with arrests frequently being made when protesters either walked onto the property or blocked the roadway in front of the plant. However, protesters typically were charged with misdemeanor offenses, and their cases were heard in an Oak Ridge court. Penalties were light. But this year, authorities opted to charge alleged trespassers with federal offenses, citing heightened security concerns in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. In the federal system, the four face up to a year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000 if convicted. At a hearing in April, Shirley set a June 18 trial date. On Wednesday, he heard motions in the case, including a request that the trial be postponed. He refused. But the crux of Wednesday's hearing was whether the protesters should be allowed to state to a jury the heart of their protest message: The U.S. government signed a treaty promising to work toward nuclear disarmament but continues to produce the weapons at plants like Y-12. The protesters believe, their attorneys argued, that trespassing was the only means left to stop plants like Y-12 from operating. "These individuals had a responsibility and a duty to act," Whalen argued. The attorneys want to use what was referred to as a "necessity defense." Under that defense, a defendant seeks to be cleared of an offense by arguing that he or she had no "legal alternative" left to stop "imminent harm" and was forced to break the law. Examples discussed in court Wednesday included a burglar who broke into a house because he was "freezing to death" or a motorist speeding in order to take a dying person to a hospital. There was also talk likening the conduct to a Nazi guard who refused to participate in the killing of Jews. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeff Theodore said the protesters were "stretching" far beyond the purpose of a necessity defense in trying to argue that they had no choice but to trespass. "You can't show imminent harm," Theodore argued. "There has to be an immediate danger. It can't just be a theoretical, future harm that would apply to everyone. There's no way they could reasonably believe their criminal acts would lead to disarmament." Shirley did not issue a ruling late Wednesday evening. He said he would take the matter under advisement and issue a ruling later. However, Whalen and attorneys John Eldridge, Randall Reagan and Assistant Federal Public Defender Kim Tollison are asking to be allowed to present testimony from their clients before Shirley makes a final decision. Jamie Satterfield may be reached at 865-342-6308 or Satterfield@knews.com. The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 China: Engineer blows whistle on inferior materials at reactor Engineer blows whistle on China Shipbuilding The Taipei Times Online: 2002-06-06 POUND FOOLISH: An engineer with one of the firm's contractors reported that inferior materials were being used to build part of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant By Chiu Yu-Tzu STAFF REPORTER According to the Atomic Energy Council (AEC), an engineer blew the whistle on state-run China Shipbuilding Corp (¤¤²î) in April when he reported that the company had been using inferior materials in the construction of a reactor pedestal for the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant. The man, who worked for one of the company's contractors, filed the report on April 24. The discovery has resulted in demands by the AEC for the Taiwan Power Company (Taipower) to rebuild all or most of the pedestal, officials said yesterday. "Materials which are are less pressure-resistant used in the construction [of the reactor pedestal] would certainly affect its performance, creating safety concerns," AEC Vice Chairman Chiou Syh-tsong (ªô½çÁo) said yesterday. The pedestal reportedly costs about NT$180 million. After receiving the report, the AEC says it carried out a comprehensive investigation, including on-site observation and welding material composition analysis. "We have no choice but to demand the reconstruction of those elements of the pedestal that now await assembly at China Shipbuilding, because results of the composition analysis show that the items could never been repaired," Shen Li (¨H§), director of the AEC's department of nuclear regulation, told the Taipei Times yesterday. According to the AEC, the pedestal contains five components. Shen's comments refer to four of the components built by China Shipbuilding. The last component, completed and transferred to the construction site at the nuclear plant site in Kungliao township, Taipei County, is awaiting assembly. Shen said that the AEC had also carried out on-site observations and welding material composition analysis on the last component of the pedestal at the plant construction site. But a final decision on whether to demand the reconstruction of the final component of the pedestal would be made after the AEC receives a similar report from Taipower, Shen said. That report is expected within days. In addition, the AEC has ordered Taipower to take responsibility for mistakes in the plant's construction. Reportedly, high-ranking officials of Taipower are to be issued warnings over the lapse. Taipower officials said yesterday that rebuilding the reactor pedestal, which will support the reactor pressure vessel of Unit 1, would not delay the completion of the plant, set for 2006. "Contracted companies should be held responsible for the pedestal's jerry-built construction, as Taipower has not officially checked and accepted the reactor pedestal," Taipower President Lin Ching-chi (ªL²M¦N) said in answer to questions raised by reporters at the legislature yesterday. Lin said that Taipower is investigating China Shipbuilding's supervision of its contracted companies. Meanwhile, China Shipbuilding Corp has halted the construction of another of the plant's reactor pedestals. Fan Kuang-nan (­S¥ú¨k), deputy managing director of the company, said yesterday the company hoped Taipower would allow it to continue the construction of the reactor pedestal for Unit 2 in order to meet the deadline. Anti-nuclear activists told the Taipei Times yesterday that they are not be surprised at errors surrounding the construction, as rumors about changes in the details of the project have been widespread in Kungliao since the resumption of construction last year. "Taipower should is the one to blame because it lacks the capacity to ensure the quality of construction," said Lai Wei-chieh (¿à°¶³Ç), secretary-general of the Green Citizens' Action Alliance, a Taipei-based anti-nuclear group. This story has been viewed 990 times. URL=[http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2002/06/06/story/0000139153] Copyright © 1999-2002 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 NRC to Hold Three Public Meetings on Davis-Besse June 12 in Ohio NRC: Press Release Region III - 2002 - 33 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region III 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532 www.nrc.gov No. III-02-033 June 6, 2002 CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov [opa3@nrc.gov] The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will conduct three public meetings to discuss the agency's activities associated with the corrosion damage to the reactor vessel head at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant on Wednesday, June 12, at 10 a.m., 3 p.m. and 7 p.m. in Oak Harbor, Ohio. All three meetings will be held at the Oak Harbor High School Auditorium, 11661 West State Route 163, in Oak Harbor. The first meeting, at 10 a.m., will focus on the activities of the Davis-Besse Reactor Vessel Head Degradation Lessons Learned Task Force. It will conduct an independent evaluation of the NRC staff's regulatory processes related to assuring reactor vessel head integrity in order to identify and recommend areas for improvement. The purpose of the meeting is to introduce the Task Force, its objectives, the scope of its activities and its schedule; to answer questions, and to address public comments. The 3 p.m. meeting will be between the NRC oversight panel, set up to coordinate the agency's activities associated with the corrosion damage to the reactor vessel head, and utility officials. The public is invited to observe the business portion of the meeting; and will have an opportunity to ask questions of the NRC staff before the meeting is adjourned. The NRC will hold a separate public meeting at 7 p.m. to update the public on NRC's activities related to the reactor vessel head degradation. The public will be encouraged to ask questions and make comments. The Lessons Learned Task Force, assigned by the NRC's Executive Director of Operations to assess lessons-learned related to the degradation of the reactor vessel head at Davis-Besse, is headed by Arthur T. Howell, III, Director of the Division of Reactor Safety in NRC's Region IV Office in Arlington, Texas. It includes specialists from Region IV as well as the NRC's Region II Office in Atlanta, Georgia; Office of Nuclear Materials Safety & Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, and Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Representatives from the state of Ohio are also participating as observers in the task force review activities. The NRC oversight panel, created on April 29, includes NRC management personnel and staff from its Region III office in Lisle, Illinois, the NRC Headquarters office in Rockville, Maryland, and the NRC Resident Inspector Office at the Davis-Besse site. Documents on the Davis-Besse corrosion issue, including further details on NRC's oversight panel activities and the lessons learned task force, are posted on the NRC's web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/vessel-head- degradation.html. ***************************************************************** 5 NRC Assessing U.S. Nuclear Plants' Airstrike Risk Wed Jun 5, 4:50 PM ET By Chris Baltimore WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, under pressure from lawmakers to do more to safeguard the nation's 103 nuclear power plants, said on Wednesday it was analyzing what devastation might occur if a fuel-laden commercial airliner crashed into a reactor. The agency may also order nuclear power plants to conduct more frequent drills against potential sabotage or terrorist attacks, NRC Chairman Richard Meserve told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. As a part of the agency's review of security measures since the deadly Sept. 11 hijack attacks, Meserve said the agency is conducting a "major engineering evaluation" of nuclear plant vulnerability to airplane strikes. Some U.S. lawmakers and activist groups are concerned that a Sept. 11-type attack against a nuclear power plant would release deadly radioactive materials that could spread for miles. "Civilian nuclear power plants are at the top of the list of targets," Democratic Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts testified, pointing to plant diagrams found in caves abandoned in Afghanistan by al Qaeda, the group Washington blames for the hijack attacks. Meserve acknowledged that "no existing nuclear facilities were specifically designed to withstand a deliberate, high-velocity, direct impact of a large commercial airliner." At the same time, the reinforced concrete containment structure around U.S. nuclear plant reactors are strong enough to turn away "tornadoes, hurricanes, fires, floods and earthquakes," he said. As a part of its study, Meserve said the NRC may ask Sandia National Laboratories to create computer models detailing the destruction that could happen if a commercial airliner made a direct hit on a nuclear plant. "We're evaluating (airplane strikes) ... for various types of plants and we may end up doing it for each plant," Meserve told reporters after the hearing. In 1988, Sandia conducted a related test and slammed an F-4 Phantom fighter jet into a concrete block at 481 miles per hour to measure the force of the impact of the jet. The aircraft's fuel tanks were filled with water instead of flammable fuel. The test showed the F-4 broke up and only penetrated several inches. But the 1988 test was not designed to measure the strength of nuclear plant containment structures. "We don't make any claims as to having tested a containment structure," a Sandia spokesman said. The Senate committee is considering Democratic-proposed legislation to federalize the privately employed security guards at plants. The NRC and U.S. utilities oppose making nuclear plant security guards federal employees. They also object to proposals to station military anti-aircraft defenses around nuclear plants to shoot down attackers. Such measures could "lead to significant collateral damage to plant workers and members of the public," Meserve warned, calling airport security measures the best way to guard against attack. Republican committee members criticized the chairman, independent Jim Jeffords of Vermont, for holding an open hearing on nuclear plant security. They demanded that any future hearings on such a security-sensitive topic be held behind closed doors. "It's safe to say that the people that want to hurt us are watching," said Robert Smith, a New Hampshire Republican, commenting on the hearing's live television coverage. Jeffords countered that the public "has a right to know what's going on," and pointed out that he scheduled a closed-door nuclear security briefing last year. Nuclear power plants provide about 20 percent of the nation's electricity. Copyright © 2002 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 CHILDREN OF CHERNOBYL STILL NEED OUR HELP If you could prolong a child's life by two years, would you? Of course you would, and that's what the Tynedale Chernobyl Children's Group is doing. This summer it is host to 18 children from the Kiev region in Belarussia who are victims of the Chernobyl Nuclear Reactor Four disaster in April 1986. These children live in the shadow of the disaster area which is contaminated with radiation. The fall-out triggered a devastating environmental catastrophe which leaves the area contaminated for a further 24,000 years. These holidays are organised by Friends of Chernobyl's Children who arrange a month's holiday for the children, who are undernourished and arrive in thin, shabby clothes. They suffer vitamin deficiency and have a life expectancy of only 32 years. There are 26 hosting groups for about 500 children across England. They return to Belarussia healthier and laden with new clothes, toiletries, suitable toys, gifts and vitamin tablets. While here, they receive health checks by opticians, dentists and doctors. The children who visit Tynedale enjoy trips to swimming pools, Beamish, the seaside, the MetroCentre and many other attractive venues. The language barrier does not pose any real problems as sign language quickly becomes the method of communication. The children need strong shoes, warm clothes and thick coats to survive the cold winters in Kiev, where the temperature can plummet to minus 40¼C. They return to poverty, contaminated food and milk. Their immune systems have been destroyed by radioactive pollution. Their future is bleak and uncertain, but each summer they enjoy fresh air, wholesome food and fun in Tynedale and, almost unbelievably, that one month extends their lives by up to two years. If you feel you could help by collecting suitable clothes, or fund-raising for the group, or organising a day out or an event for the children, contact Jonathan Oldham on (01434) 632444 or Irene Gladstone on (01661) 844443. Soroptimists International of Tynedale organised a barbecue last Sunday at Joan Smith's home at Farnley, near Corbridge, and despite the wet weather, £400 was raised for the Tynedale Chernobyl Children's Group. Members are most grateful to the Smith family, the butchers Halls and bakers Nicoll and Laidlow for their support. [http://cngroup.dsvr.co.uk ***************************************************************** 7 NRC Assessing U.S. Nuclear Plants' Airstrike Risk /Wed Jun 5, 4:50 PM ET/ /By Chris Baltimore/ WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, under pressure from lawmakers to do more to safeguard the nation's 103 nuclear power plants, said on Wednesday it was analyzing what devastation might occur if a fuel-laden commercial airliner crashed into a reactor. The agency may also order nuclear power plants to conduct more frequent drills against potential sabotage or terrorist attacks, NRC Chairman Richard Meserve told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. As a part of the agency's review of security measures since the deadly Sept. 11 hijack attacks, Meserve said the agency is conducting a "major engineering evaluation" of nuclear plant vulnerability to airplane strikes. Some U.S. lawmakers and activist groups are concerned that a Sept. 11-type attack against a nuclear power plant would release deadly radioactive materials that could spread for miles. "Civilian nuclear power plants are at the top of the list of targets," Democratic Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts testified, pointing to plant diagrams found in caves abandoned in Afghanistan by al Qaeda, the group Washington blames for the hijack attacks. Meserve acknowledged that "no existing nuclear facilities were specifically designed to withstand a deliberate, high-velocity, direct impact of a large commercial airliner." At the same time, the reinforced concrete containment structure around U.S. nuclear plant reactors are strong enough to turn away "tornadoes, hurricanes, fires, floods and earthquakes," he said. As a part of its study, Meserve said the NRC may ask Sandia National Laboratories to create computer models detailing the destruction that could happen if a commercial airliner made a direct hit on a nuclear plant. "We're evaluating (airplane strikes) ... for various types of plants and we may end up doing it for each plant," Meserve told reporters after the hearing. In 1988, Sandia conducted a related test and slammed an F-4 Phantom fighter jet into a concrete block at 481 miles per hour to measure the force of the impact of the jet. The aircraft's fuel tanks were filled with water instead of flammable fuel. The test showed the F-4 broke up and only penetrated several inches. But the 1988 test was not designed to measure the strength of nuclear plant containment structures. "We don't make any claims as to having tested a containment structure," a Sandia spokesman said. The Senate committee is considering Democratic-proposed legislation to federalize the privately employed security guards at plants. The NRC and U.S. utilities oppose making nuclear plant security guards federal employees. They also object to proposals to station military anti-aircraft defenses around nuclear plants to shoot down attackers. Such measures could "lead to significant collateral damage to plant workers and members of the public," Meserve warned, calling airport security measures the best way to guard against attack. Republican committee members criticized the chairman, independent Jim Jeffords of Vermont, for holding an open hearing on nuclear plant security. They demanded that any future hearings on such a security-sensitive topic be held behind closed doors. "It's safe to say that the people that want to hurt us are watching," said Robert Smith, a New Hampshire Republican, commenting on the hearing's live television coverage. Jeffords countered that the public "has a right to know what's going on," and pointed out that he scheduled a closed-door nuclear security briefing last year. Nuclear power plants provide about 20 percent of the nation's electricity. Copyright © 2002 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or ***************************************************************** 8 NFS attorney vows to contest contamination suit Elizabethton Star - Online Edition By Kathy Helms-Hughes STAR STAFF khughes@starhq.com [khughes@starhq.com] An attorney for Nuclear Fuel Services Inc. in Erwin said Tuesday that his client will "vigorously contest" a lawsuit filed Friday in U.S. District Court against Gerald O'Connor Jr., owner of Impact Plastics Inc. and Preston Tool & Mold Inc., located in an adjacent industrial park. Neil J. Newman, NFS General Counsel, said, "NFS has acted in a responsible and forthright manner in advising Mr. O'Connor and his companies about the subsurface groundwater contamination" identified as part of NFS's ongoing monitoring program. According to state and federal documents, Impact Plastics has been collecting its own groundwater data from beneath the Impact Plastics property, located at 1070 Industrial Drive. Sampling data indicated the presence of PCE, or tetrachloroethylene, which is known to cause cancer; TCE, or trichloroethylene, a suspected carcinogen; cis1,2-dichloroethylene, chloroform and vinyl chloride -- all at elevated concentrations. Radiological sampling has yielded data for gross alpha, gross beta, uranium-, plutonium- and thorium isotopes, and technetium-99, all above background samples. NFS's attorney contends that though levels of contaminants beneath O'Connor's property is above federal drinking water standards, neither O'Connor nor his workers drink the water or come into contact with it in any way. Impact Plastics says it is concerned that there are nearby users of groundwater who could be affected by potential contamination. "Sampling of the groundwater beneath Mr. O'Connor's plant property has been in compliance with all regulatory procedures and these samples have been tested by multiple independent laboratories," Newman said. In third quarter 2001, NFS and a firm conducting sampling of onsite monitoring wells at Impact Plastics split samples. Those analyzed by NFS's laboratory indicated PCE present at 278 parts per billion in monitoring well 120A. Impact Plastics' portion of the sample, analyzed by a separate laboratory in South Carolina, indicated PCE present at 420 parts per billion. Monitoring well 120B, sampled by NFS, indicated PCE present at 234 parts per billion; results on behalf of Impact Plastics equaled 340 parts per billion. Newman said all sample results done by NFS have been presented to and reviewed by Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "NFS fully agrees with the regulator's conclusion that subsurface groundwater beneath Mr. O'Connor's property does not present a risk to him, his employees or the public," he said. A risk assessment of chemical contaminants in groundwater beneath the NFS site and adjacent areas concluded that no further remediation of the groundwater was necessary, according to Newman. However, NFS has begun a pilot project to clean up PCE and uranium on its property using In-Situ Reactive Zone or "molasses" technology. Though used successfully at other sites to clean up PCE and chromium, it is only now being tested on dissolved uranium. NFS, according to its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit, is authorized to discharge treated wastewater from laboratory-, laundry- and fuel production facilities, uranium recovery, air pollution control equipment and miscellaneous wash waters through an outfall line in the Nolichucky River at mile 94.6. The city of Erwin discharges into the river at mile 94.4. In Aug. 25, 2000, NFS extended its discharge line approximately 8 feet into the Nolichucky. In November 2000, NFS sampled soil underneath a deteriorated area in the base floor trench of its Waste Water Treatment Facility. Data from the sampling indicated elevated levels of radioactivity in the soil. Once the problem was identified, NFS made repairs to the trench, and applied a concrete sealant. Soil beneath the wastewater facility will continue to be monitored and will be addressed according to NRC regulations as part of the "end-of-plant-site" decommissioning activities. Copyright © 1996 - 2002 Elizabethton Newspapers, Inc. ***************************************************************** 9 New Yorkers Get Protection Against Nuclear Fallout [NewsMax.com] Jason Pierce, CNSNews.com Thursday, June 6, 2002 Suburban New Yorkers living near the Indian Point nuclear power plant are getting potassium iodide pills to protect them against the possible release of radioactive fallout. Given growing fears that terrorists will attack nuclear plants, Westchester County officials said they would start distributing the pills at schools beginning Saturday. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is providing the pills, which protect people against thyroid cancer by preventing the body from absorbing radioactive material. The Indian Point plant is located north of New York City. Copyright CNSNews.com All Rights Reserved © NewsMax.com ***************************************************************** 10 CONCERN OVER B30 RADIATION [The Whitehaven News] [http://www.cumbria-online.co.uk] RADIATION from a primitive open-air nuclear fuel storage pond at Sellafield known by the workforce as "Dirty Thirty" is escaping on to and off the site. And Sellafield's regulation enforcers, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate, is so worried about the deterioration of B30 that it has ordered BNFL to come up with a plan to either clean out the plant or put up another building over it to stop radiation getting out. Radiation levels from B30 are so high that anyone working in the plant or its open compound have to wear face masks. After the Seascale pigeon scare which saw countless "radioactive" birds having to be culled, there is also great concern about seabirds landing on B30 and other Sellafield open ponds and carrying contamination into local villages. But the NII believes that certain amounts of activity are leaking off the site into "the general environment" and until the pond is cleaned out or sealed the release will be constant. Even though BNFL said yesterday "B30 had no significant impact off site" it was considering options for reducing the activity levels close to the ponds. The Inspectorate, which has power to close down any plant, has also ordered BNFL to carry out monitoring to see exactly how much radiation is escaping, even though at this stage there is no suggestion that the off-site leaks are any danger to public health. However, B30 workers have to wear the face masks otherwise they would exceed their permitted radiation doses. Despite an apparent BNFL reluctance, the NII would like the company to cover the open pond which is filled with huge quantities of corroded fuel and radioactive sludge giving off radiation. The Inspectorate feels the pond can be covered by the construction of an over-building to shield radiation and has instructed BNFL "to carry out a feasibility study to show why it can't be done". Under an improvement notice served last year, BNFL has to produce a detailed programme of work for emptying and decommissioning the old fuel handling building. It was due two months ago but time has been extended. The NII want 90 per cent of the sludge taken out by 2009. At first BNFL promised it would do the job two years earlier but this is no longer possible due mainly to the higher than normal radiation levels and the need to ensure the protection of workers. There is a catch-22 - once the pond water is disturbed by decommissioning it will spew out even more radiation. The situation is a major headache to BNFL's bossses because whether they entomb the plant or clean it out the cost will run into many millions of pounds. The big worry is that the pond itself will start leaking on to the site posing a major risk to workers and public outside. Only two weeks ago, Sellafield held an emergency exercise based on a worst case scenario of the B30 pond failing and also on an assumption that at some time it will start leaking and get into the site drainage system en- route to the environment. The exercise envisaged Sellafield plants being evacuated and people living downwind of the leak having to shelter in their homes. David Moore, of Seascale, chairman of the Sellafield Local Liaison Committee, which acts as a community watchdog on Sellafield operations, said: "We are looking for some prompt action from BNFL but in a safe manner. The safety of workers and the public is paramount. The condition of the B30 pond is deteriorating. and we would like to see it closed off and maybe that could be done reasonably quickly. It is a viscious circle looking after the legacy of radioactive waste but whatever the cost the money has to be spent, there is no cheap way round it. We have raised our own concerns about seagulls picking up contamination on the ponds, migrating in and out all the time, especially after what happened with the pigeons at Seascale." BNFL say: "Monitoring and assessment work shows that seagull access to Sellafield poses no health concerns beyond the conventional hygiene issues. We are considering methods of controlling access to the open pond such as netting and bird scaring." ***************************************************************** 11 South Carolina has had enough of being the nation's dumping Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 07:55:15 -0500 (CDT) South Carolina has had enough of being the nation's dumping ground Thursday, June 06, 2002 By Jeffrey Collins, Associated Press NEW ELLENTON, South Carolina -- In the early Cold War '50s, people around here welcomed the opening of "the bomb plant" along the Savannah River. In fact, South Carolinians for decades have embraced just about any industry that could bring jobs to the countryside. But now that attitude is changing, as illustrated by South Carolina's plutonium standoff. The U.S. Department of Energy announced plans last fall to ship weapons-grade plutonium from its Rocky Flats installation in Colorado to the Savannah River site, where it would be converted into nuclear reactor fuel over the next two decades in an operation that could create up to 800 jobs. But Gov. Jim Hodges has said he does not trust the government to keep its word and fears the plutonium will be left at Savannah River permanently. He has vowed to do "whatever it takes" to prevent the radioactive material from being stored here -- including lying down in the road to stop the plutonium-laden trucks. The Highway Patrol has conducted drills on how to block the shipments. And the governor is suing the Energy Department. "Dumping this weapons-grade plutonium in our state turns us into a terrorist target. We cannot allow the federal government to paint a bull's-eye on South Carolina," Hodges, a Democrat up for re-election in November, said earlier this year. The shipments were set to begin May 15 but were put on hold for a month to see how the lawsuit plays out. The case is set to be heard on June 13. The dispute is part of what some see as a turnaround in public opinion in South Carolina. With its cheap labor and little concern about the environment, South Carolina has long been home to some of the nation's most dangerous substances. In addition to the Savannah River site, the state has a low-level nuclear waste dump in Barnwell. But a hazardous waste landfill near Sumter and a medical waste incinerator in Hampton have been shut down in recent years by state officials, reflecting what some see as greater environmental awareness. "South Carolina has always tilted toward anything that would create jobs. But recently there has been a gradual awareness that some industry does more damage than good," said Jim Farmer, a history professor at the nearby University of South Carolina-Aiken. Sporadic attacks on Hodges for putting Savannah River site jobs at risk with his stand against the plutonium have not caught on with the public. "People worry we'll lose the reasons why people come here: the beaches, the beautiful environment," said Democratic state Sen. Phil Leventis, a harsh critic of the Sumter-area landfill in his district. The Savannah River site is about 20 miles (32 kilometers) east of the Augusta, Ga., area. It has 477,000 people and lies 170 miles (274 kilometers) east of Atlanta, a metropolitan area with a population of 4 million. In 1950, the government bought up 300 square miles of land near Ellenton and over the next three years constructed the five Savannah River reactors that would be used to process plutonium for nuclear weapons. During the height of the Cold War, Savannah River employed 26,000 people. Copyright 2002, Associated Press ***************************************************************** 12 Proposed 'shaky' waste site safety is debated Daily Universe | KBYU TV/FM | CCN Cable | CommWorld By Ryan Christopher Grange /NewsNet Staff Writer/ 5 Jun 2002 Hearings are being held this week to determine whether 4,000 containers of nuclear waste will be safe in the seismically active valleys southwest of Salt Lake City. Seismic activity could disrupt containers of nuclear waste with disastrous results, said Denise Chancellor, assistant attorney general. Although the utility companies obtained the necessary licenses and leased the Skull Valley land, located 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, the state continues to protest the admittance of nuclear waste. "We don't know what will happen in the next 10,000 years and what effect it will have on the waste containers," said Ric Cantrell, community action director for the Utah Attorney General's Office. Although seismic movements are not common in Utah, every caution needs to be taken when storing nuclear waste, Chancellor said. "There is no room for error when it comes to high level nuclear waste," she said. The nuclear waste would come from several utilities companies from the East Coast. A consortium of companies, under the umbrella of Private Fuel Storage, made the proposal to deposit 4,000 containers of nuclear waste in Utah. "We believe we have proved that our containers are safe under any circumstances," said Sue Martin, Private Fuel Storage Public Affairs representative. Private Fuel Storage had previously obtained all the necessary permits to deposit the nuclear waste in Utah and had its facility reviewed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "The NRC gave us satisfactory reports in both its safety review and its environmental impact report," Martin said. However, in spite of the approval of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the state is not satisfied, Martin said. "The casks that Private Fuel Storage will be using is an unproven design," Cantrell said. Hearings are being held only because the state of Utah intervened, Martin said. The hearings aim to determine whether the facility is safe and may result in a challenge of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's approval of the project. Expert witnesses, including the designers of the storage containers, will give their opinions as to whether the containers could sustain an earthquake or a stray missile from the nearby military base. "It is definitely a legitimate concern for the state," Martin said. Cantrell said the state's goal for the hearings this week is to present information. "Our only shot at keeping Utah safe is to convince the NRC not to give permission to those companies to leave their waste here," Cantrell said. The hearings this week will most likely be the last shot the state has at blocking the entrance of nuclear waste into the state. "We need to prove once again that our facility is safe under any circumstances," Martin said. Home | Campus | Lifestyles | Opinion | Sports | Religion | Features | World | Utah | Text Only LEGEND Live Audio Video Photos Advertising | Classifieds | Web Cam | Email Briefs | Palm Version *Copyright ©2002 BYU NewsNet* E-mail comments to: online@newsroom.byu.edu ***************************************************************** 13 Missouri Chamber raises concerns about nuclear waste storage Letter to the Editor June 05, 2002 ** Congress soon will debate legislation that will determine whether the federal government proceeds with plans to build a permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel at one site designed for safe, permanent storage or continue to use dozens of sites around the country designed only for temporary storage. ** The Missouri Chamber of Commerce has sent letters to Missouri's Congressional Delegation to urge support for legislation overriding Nevada's veto of plans for a permanent nuclear repository at Yucca Mountain. The temporary storage sites at nuclear power plants were not designed as long-term solutions for used nuclear fuel. The federal government was required, by law, to store the waste at a permanent site. It selected Yucca Mountain-a site that has been studied for more than 20 years and that can safely contain the waste for hundreds of years. Much concern has been raised about transportation of waste from Yucca Mountain. However, no plans for routes to Yucca Mountain have been finalized, and states will have opportunities for input on transportation plans, including the timing and routing of shipments. Missouri's Emergency Management Agency and emergency responders have in place a highly effective emergency response system that will protect citizens and the environment in the unlikely event of an accident. More than 3,000 nuclear fuel shipments already have occurred and although there have been eight accidents, none resulted in radioactive releases. This is because scientists and engineers designed effective, safe procedures including shipping containers that can withstand even the most severe accidents. Derailing Yucca Mountain over concerns about transportation, which will be addressed separately, is simply wrong. If Congress does not pass the Yucca Mountain legislation, nuclear waste will be left at numerous sites around the country, including several in Missouri, in spaces designed only for temporary storage. Electricity consumers, including many of the businesses our organization represents, have paid for a federal repository through a tax, included in their rates, that goes into the federal nuclear waste fund. This fund was created to facilitate a federal program to accept and store spent nuclear fuel. In fact, Missouri consumers already have almost $200 million into the nuclear waste fund. It is time to see a return on that investment and to secure permanent storage for spent nuclear fuel. Daniel P. Mehan Missouri Chamber of Commerce President/CEO Jefferson City /©Christian County Headliner 2002/ *Reader Opinions* ***************************************************************** 14 Questions Raised Over Energy Dept. Official's Industry Ties The New York Times June 6, 2002* *By DAVID FIRESTONE* Before he was named under secretary of energy by President Bush last year, Robert G. Card was a top executive of the companies whose multibillion-dollar contracts his office now controls. Those companies performed some of the nation's most sensitive and expensive jobs, cleaning up highly toxic waste from nuclear weapons factories. Now, with the storage of that waste becoming a political issue in races around the country, Mr. Card has come under scrutiny for decisions that could add millions of dollars to the contracts of his previous employers. Critics in Congress and elsewhere are calling for an investigation into his ties to the nuclear cleanup industry. Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, wrote to the Office of Government Ethics last week, raising questions about Mr. Card's actions, saying he believed they might violate Bush administration guidelines and federal statutes governing conflicts of interest. "Until those questions are answered, the integrity of Mr. Card's decisions will be in doubt, including those related to Yucca Mountain," Mr. Reid said. Yucca Mountain is the Nevada site recently chosen by the Energy Department for long-term storage of nuclear waste, a decision opposed by Mr. Reid and most Nevada officials. Because very few companies are able to build such a repository, opponents of the site have said that Yucca Mountain will be a windfall for Mr. Card's former employers, the Kaiser-Hill Company and CH2M Hill Inc. Energy Department officials note that Mr. Card has divested himself of his former companies' stock and renounced his pension benefits, and they suggest that his critics are motivated by their political disagreement with the Yucca Mountain decision. Late yesterday, the Office of Government Ethics issued a letter disagreeing with Senator Reid's claims. The letter, based on the Energy Department's assurances to the office that Mr. Card had not participated in any matter relating to his former employers, said Mr. Card's actions had been proper. "We do not believe that CH2M Hill, Kaiser-Hill, or Kaiser Group Holdings Inc. was a party or represented a party in any of the matters discussed above in which Under Secretary Card participated," Amy Comstock, director of the ethics office, wrote. "Accordingly, it appears that none of Mr. Card's actions violated any ethics statutes or regulations." But Mr. Card's critics, who include Democratic elected officials in Nevada and South Carolina who are at odds with some of his decisions, say his ties to the industry make it impossible to determine whether his favorite projects are good public policy or favors to old colleagues. Mr. Reid said he would pursue an inquiry into Mr. Card's role. Most accusations against Mr. Card involve contracts by his former companies to clean up two of the country's biggest environmental hazards: the Rocky Flats Site near Denver and the Hanford Site in Washington State, both of which processed plutonium for nuclear weapons before closing. CH2M Hill, where Mr. Card was a director and senior vice president, has a $2.2 billion contract to manage radioactive waste storage tanks at Hanford and decommission them as the waste is processed. Mr. Card was chief executive of Kaiser-Hill, which is half-owned by CH2M Hill and which has a $4 billion contract to clean up Rocky Flats. As under secretary for energy, science and environment, Mr. Card supervises the Office of Environmental Management, which is in charge of cleaning up nuclear waste sites and manages the contracts of his old companies. In March, that office said it was sending $433 million from an $800 million discretionary cleanup fund to Hanford, much of which would go to expedite CH2M Hill's cleanup work. On March 6, in testimony to a Congressional committee, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said Mr. Card played a major role in the decision. The extra financing for Hanford's cleanup came about because of an agreement between Mr. Card and the State of Washington, Mr. Abraham said, after "a top-to-bottom review that Under Secretary Card and Assistant Secretary Roberson completed." Mr. Card took the microphone at that hearing to describe the expedited cleanup work, and people who met in February with Gov. Gary Locke of Washington, a Democrat, to discuss the financing confirmed that Mr. Card was present and played a leading role in the talks. Mr. Card declined to be interviewed. An Energy Department spokesman, Joseph Davis, said that while Mr. Card had a role in working with Hanford officials to accelerate the cleanup, he had not been involved in deciding how much money would be sent to the site for the accelerated program, or how much would go to CH2M Hill. That decision, Mr. Davis said, was made solely by Assistant Secretary Jessie Roberson, who reports directly to Mr. Card. At Rocky Flats, the project he supervised in the private sector, Mr. Card has taken a vocal public role in urging that the cleanup be hastened and the plutonium there be shipped to South Carolina for processing, a decision applauded in Colorado but unpopular in South Carolina. The contract with Kaiser-Hill provides a $340 million incentive if the company can complete the cleanup by 2006. That provision, negotiated by Mr. Card while at Kaiser-Hill, has led to accusations by South Carolina officials that Mr. Card is trying to benefit his former company at state expense. "How are we supposed to be comfortable that we're getting a fair shake in South Carolina when the man we're negotiating with is a former employee of the company that clearly stands to gain financially if Rocky Flats is closed on a timely basis?" Gov. Jim Hodges of South Carolina, a Democrat, asked on Tuesday. The Energy Department's general counsel wrote to Governor Hodges this year that Mr. Card had severed his financial ties to Kaiser-Hill, other than his vested interest in its pension plan. On Tuesday, Mr. Davis said that Mr. Card had volunteered to forgo any benefits from the pension plans at the two companies, which combined would provide about $2,400 a month beginning in 2018. But federal ethics rules require presidential appointees to go even further than selling stock in their previous employers, as Mr. Card did. As a condition of his appointment, Mr. Card agreed to recuse himself from department matters in which he was involved "personally and substantially" while at Kaiser-Hill or CH2M Hill. Department officials say his recusal and his divestiture of company stock means that there is neither a conflict nor an appearance of one. "The department's legal counsel has reviewed all of the critics' charges and found no basis to them," Mr. Davis said. "I think various opponents of the department's position on Yucca Mountain are trying to rehash unfounded and baseless allegations. In a word, I believe it's unfair." But Mr. Card's critics are calling for a further investigation. Earlier this year, Representative Shelley Berkley, a Nevada Democrat and another opponent of the Yucca Mountain plan, asked the department for documents on Mr. Card's role, which she has turned over to Congressional investigators. She said she was concerned about a potential windfall to one of Mr. Card's former employers if the mountain storage site is built. ***************************************************************** 15 Proposed 'shaky' waste site safety is debated Daily Universe | KBYU TV/FM | CCN Cable | CommWorld By Ryan Christopher Grange /NewsNet Staff Writer/ 5 Jun 2002 Hearings are being held this week to determine whether 4,000 containers of nuclear waste will be safe in the seismically active valleys southwest of Salt Lake City. Seismic activity could disrupt containers of nuclear waste with disastrous results, said Denise Chancellor, assistant attorney general. Although the utility companies obtained the necessary licenses and leased the Skull Valley land, located 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, the state continues to protest the admittance of nuclear waste. "We don't know what will happen in the next 10,000 years and what effect it will have on the waste containers," said Ric Cantrell, community action director for the Utah Attorney General's Office. Although seismic movements are not common in Utah, every caution needs to be taken when storing nuclear waste, Chancellor said. "There is no room for error when it comes to high level nuclear waste," she said. The nuclear waste would come from several utilities companies from the East Coast. A consortium of companies, under the umbrella of Private Fuel Storage, made the proposal to deposit 4,000 containers of nuclear waste in Utah. "We believe we have proved that our containers are safe under any circumstances," said Sue Martin, Private Fuel Storage Public Affairs representative. Private Fuel Storage had previously obtained all the necessary permits to deposit the nuclear waste in Utah and had its facility reviewed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "The NRC gave us satisfactory reports in both its safety review and its environmental impact report," Martin said. However, in spite of the approval of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the state is not satisfied, Martin said. "The casks that Private Fuel Storage will be using is an unproven design," Cantrell said. Hearings are being held only because the state of Utah intervened, Martin said. The hearings aim to determine whether the facility is safe and may result in a challenge of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's approval of the project. Expert witnesses, including the designers of the storage containers, will give their opinions as to whether the containers could sustain an earthquake or a stray missile from the nearby military base. "It is definitely a legitimate concern for the state," Martin said. Cantrell said the state's goal for the hearings this week is to present information. "Our only shot at keeping Utah safe is to convince the NRC not to give permission to those companies to leave their waste here," Cantrell said. The hearings this week will most likely be the last shot the state has at blocking the entrance of nuclear waste into the state. "We need to prove once again that our facility is safe under any circumstances," Martin said. *Copyright ©2002 BYU NewsNet* ***************************************************************** 16 Yucca: Don't give in to environmental extremism deseretnews.com Opinion Thursday, June 6, 2002 *By Jay Ambrose* Scripps Howard News Service This wonderful world needs a sane environmental movement, one that is practical enough to get results and balanced enough to recognize other precious values, weighing the benefits of policies against their costs. But glance over your shoulder and you see a different kind of movement bearing down on us. Extreme and unyielding, it is smashing the more temperate voices that stand in its way, and while its leaders may count that a victory, it isn't. Their dominance as champions for their cause could be disastrous for planet Earth. What's my evidence of extremism? I offer up the Kyoto Protocol, a supposed solution to global warming that would yank between $100 billion and $400 billion a year out of workaday affairs in this country alone. It is preposterous to think you can do that without harm, without depriving people of goods they would otherwise have, without some degree of suffering, much of it among the poor. Yet there is an end that justifies such desperate means, isn't there? As a matter of fact, there isn't. Even most proponents concede that, at best, this treaty will retard warming only marginally. It is, they say, a first step, meaning that there would have to be a second step, maybe a third and more ? in other words, the proposed battering that Europeans are already promising to endure will only get worse. The issue of human-induced global warming is replete with uncertainties. All the studies endorsed by major institutions say as much, and none of them predicts a major catastrophe lying just beyond the bend. In the discussion of warming, however, the extremists keep shouting with certainty about horrors we face. Some of the shouters are scientists, but theirs is not the detached, coolly analytical mode of scientific discourse; theirs is the passion of the ideologue. Other examples of environmental extremism? You might not recognize it as one because of the propagandizing, but opposition to exploring for oil in Alaska qualifies. The designated area is roughly 1/10,000th of a wildlife refuge and an out-of-the-way spot described as muck and mud in the summer and below-zero ice in the relentlessly dark winter. Where might drilling be more acceptable? It is extreme to try to delay the inevitable movement of nuclear waste to a safe spot in Nevada when the waste poses a greater threat in present locations. It is extreme to oppose the use of biotechnology to produce great amounts of food that could help feed the hungry when this food has never harmed a soul. It is extreme to fight for fuel limits resulting in smaller cars when the smaller cars can lead to increased traffic fatalities and there are other ways of getting the gas savings. How is it that such radical views come to be advocated? I think some of the leaders on this front are true believers, people who have adopted environmentalism as their religion, the Earth as their god, and who are both fundamentalist and fanatical in the faith. I think some of them are truly superstitious about modern-world technology; that some of them genuinely hate and want to hamper free enterprise; that many believe that giving an inch is surrendering all and that some think the rest of us are too dumb and apathetic to act unless they scare us to death with their exaggerations. But it will be more dangerous to the cause if they succeed. If this nation adopts needless measures that have unbearable consequences, the public could grow skeptical of measures that are necessary. If we expend resources unwisely, we will not have them to expend wisely. And if the extremists engage in endless hyperbole, we will not believe those who tell the truth. Most Americans care about the preservation of wilderness, about animal life, about the beauty of nature, about the health effects of pollution. They have supported reasonable policies that have given us an extraordinary and insufficiently noted reduction in air and water pollution, growth of green space and the rescue of a number of endangered species. Through reasonable measures, we can deal with the likes of global warming, too. For starters, far more research is needed. It would be a shame ? an extreme shame ? to let the zealots reverse this remarkable progress. /Jay Ambrose is director of editorial policy for Scripps Howard Newspapers. E-mail him at AmbroseJ@shns.com / © 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 17 Nuke waste plan under consideration at Millstone /Dominion studying new storage system / By Paul Choiniere - More Articles Published on 06/06/2002 *Waterford* ? Rapidly running out of room to store nuclear waste, the operators of the Millstone Power Station are considering a new storage technology not yet utilized in New England ? one they say offers several advantages, including greater security in these troubled times. Engineers estimate that the Millstone 2 nuclear plant will run out of room in its storage pool by 2005 or 2006. Since the plant began operations in 1975, nuclear fuel rods, their energy spent, have been transferred to the adjacent pool. The highly radioactive spent fuel is removed about every 18 months so that fresh fuel can be installed in the reactor. Dominion, the Virginia-based company that owns Millstone station, wants to keep Millstone 2 operating. The plant is licensed through 2015 and Dominion has expressed an interest in extending the license another 20 years beyond that. To keep the plant operating, a place for the spent fuel must be found. Under serious consideration is construction of a NUHOMS facility, an acronym for Nuclear Horizontal Modular Storage System, in which spent fuel rods are placed in steel containers. The containers would then be slid horizontally into cylindrical vaults built into a 15-foot-tall concrete bunker. Once stored, large manhole-type covers would be used to bolt the containers inside. The oldest spent fuel would be moved first, having had the greatest time to cool. The process of moving the spent fuel rods into the canisters would take place under the water of the storage pool to shield the radiation. With the lids welded in place to contain the deadly cargo, the containers would be vacuumed dry. A trailer would be used to transfer the 120-ton cylinders to the storage bunker. Dominion officials said they have not determined what the project would cost. Alan Price, site vice president at Millstone, said an alternative plan would be to move some of the spent fuel from Unit 2 to Unit 3, which began operations in 1986 and has ample capacity. The spent fuel would still have to be placed in storage containers to safely make the move between plants. The major problem with that plan would be the need to move the nuclear waste out of a storage pool a second time if and when the nation creates a national, permanent repository for all nuclear waste. Moving the spent the fuel out of the NUHOMS facility into a transportation cask would be a simpler process, Price said. There are no plans to move the spent nuclear fuel stored at the closed Millstone 1 plant, which permanently ceased operations in 1995. The high-level nuclear waste there remains in the storage pool awaiting a final move to a national storage site, Price said. Driving the problem at Millstone and nuclear plants across the country is the failure of the U.S. Department of Energy to create a national nuclear waste dump, as mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. After years of political and scientific wrangling, however, the country appears to be moving closer to that solution. President Bush has accepted the DOE's recommendation that Yucca Mountain in Nevada be used as the national high-level nuclear waste repository. On May 8, the House of Representatives voted 306-117 to approve the plan, despite the objections of Nevada. On Wednesday, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee voted 13-10 to move the issue to the full Senate, where the vote is expected to be close. Even if the project wins Senate approval, Nevada officials have said they would fight the plan in the courts, as have several environmental and anti-nuclear groups. The most optimistic scenarios suggest nuclear waste shipments could begin in 2015, a decade after Millstone 2 reaches its current storage capacity. So far nuclear plants in New England have opted for vertical dry cask storage. Yankee Rowe in Massachusetts and Maine Yankee were faced with the long-term waste storage issue after the plants closed in the 1990s. The waste at those plants is being moved to steel and concrete cylinders that sit vertically on a concrete pad. Connecticut Yankee in Haddam, which ceased operations in 1996, is pursuing the same plan. Raj Harnal, project manager for the waste storage issue at Millstone, said NUHOMS offer better radiation shielding. And because it utilizes a nondescript concrete building it would better blend into the industrial setting at Millstone and reduce the chances of being a target of sabotage. The system also takes up less space and would be more easily located in the current station setting, he said. NUHMOS has been approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, meaning Dominion would not need a license amendment if it built the facility according to the specifications approved by the NRC. Dominion would need some land-use approvals from the town. The system has not been without its problems. The prior manufacturer of the nuclear fuel storage system, Vectra Technologies, ran afoul of the NRC in 1997 when it failed to properly document its quality control work and, in one case, utilized materials in bunker construction not approved by the NRC. Vectra eventually ended up in bankruptcy and the technology was acquired by Transnuclear for $4.5 million. It resumed production in 1998. Paul Narbut, senior inspector in the NRC's spent fuel project office, said follow-up inspections determined the facilities built by Vectra were safe, despite the documentation and material violations. The systems are now being designed as required, he said. NUHOMS is being used at eight sites in the country, said Alan Hanson, president and chief executive officer of Transnuclear, a subsidiary of Transnucleaire in France. Those sites include Susquehanna nuclear station near Berwick, Pa., and just recently the Oyster Creek plant near Toms River, N.J. While licensed for 20 years, the facilities are robust structurally and should remain intact ?for a very long time, like the pyramids,? said Hanson. Given the increased terrorist threat, not everyone agrees NUHOMS is good enough. This week the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research in Takoma Park, Md., called for underground storage of nuclear waste in hardened silos that would be highly resistant to any attack. While hardened storage sites would cost more, they would eliminate nuclear waste as an attractive terrorist target, said Arjun Makhijani, president of the institute that advocates for environmentally prudent energy choices. Millstone officials are expected to make a decision on the waste issue over the next few months. /p.choiniere@theday.com/ * * * * 1998-2002 The Day Publishing Co. FAQs ***************************************************************** 18 It's past time to move on Yucca Mountain Published June 5, 2002 U.S. senators should follow the House's lead and clear the way for Yucca Mountain in Nevada to house nuclear waste. Congress pledged to the country, and specifically the 39 states where radioactive waste sits at commercial power reactors and federal sites, that a permanent repository for nuclear waste storage would be ready in 1998. Four years later, the federal government has not even issued a license for construction of a disposal site. The Bush administration, having designated Yucca Mountain as the country's central nuclear waste repository this year, is ready to pursue that license. All it needs is Congress' vote to override the veto federal law affords Nevada, which is opposed to accepting other states' nuclear waste. The House voted 306-117 last month to override the state. The Senate must take the same step before July 26, or Nevada's objection stands. Inaction would be costly - not just for the federal government, which already has spent years and billions of dollars studying Yucca, but also for communities across the nation that are counting on Congress to carry through on its promise to consolidate the nation's nuclear waste where it can be better protected. About 45,000 tons of radioactive waste is scattered about the country. Electricity customers who buy power generated at nuclear reactors have paid $16 billion over the last two decades to finance a spent nuclear fuel disposal site. Northwest rate payers, who get some of their juice from Richland's Energy Northwest reactor have shelled out $98 million. At that reactor, the spent nuclear fuel pool is full. Energy Northwest, and by extension the public power consortium's customers, have spent $40 million to build extra storage at an outdoor pad next to the plant. It plans to move fuel there this year to make room in the indoor pool while it waits for Yucca to be finished. Also bound for Yucca - to be buried 1,000 feet below the earth's surface yet 1,000 feet above the water table - would be glassified wastes from Hanford's underground tanks and 2,300 tons of spent nuclear fuel from the K Basins. The Senate's nod would set the project on a course that would allow Yucca to begin accepting waste in 2010 - 12 years behind the federal government's original schedule. If the Senate doesn't act, the federal government likely will have to start searching for a new site. One of the places on its short list last time was Hanford. Certainly, no one in this state is jumping at the chance to add to Hanford's already vast collection of nuclear waste. But the argument for proceeding at Yucca is largely not a parochial one. Simply put, too much money and time has been spent on determining that the Nevada site is the most suitable waste storage site for the federal government to give up now because Nevada politicians don't like the idea. Yucca Mountain is not a referendum on nuclear energy or nuclear defense. The nation already has tons of radioactive wastes sitting in roughly 130 communities. The only question before the Senate is whether it will honor the federal government's commitment to store those wastes the safest way it knows how. What's your opinon? Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 19 S.C., Govt. Clash Over Plutonium Las Vegas SUN June 05, 2002 NEW ELLENTON, S.C.- In the early Cold War '50s, people around here welcomed the opening of "the bomb plant" along the Savannah River. In fact, South Carolinians for decades have embraced just about any industry that could bring jobs to the countryside. But now that attitude is changing, as illustrated by South Carolina's plutonium standoff. The U.S. Department of Energy announced plans last fall to ship weapons-grade plutonium from its Rocky Flats installation in Colorado to the Savannah River Site, where it would be converted into nuclear reactor fuel over the next two decades in an operation that could create up to 800 jobs. But Gov. Jim Hodges has said he does not trust the government to keep its word and fears the plutonium will be left at Savannah River permanently. He has vowed to do "whatever it takes" to prevent the radioactive material from being stored here - including lying down in the road to stop the plutonium-laden trucks. The Highway Patrol has conducted drills on how to block the shipments. And the governor is suing the Energy Department. "Dumping this weapons-grade plutonium in our state turns us into a terrorist target. We cannot allow the federal government to paint a bull's-eye on South Carolina," Hodges, a Democrat up for re-election in November, said earlier this year. The shipments were set to begin May 15 but were put on hold for a month to see how the lawsuit plays out. The case is set to be heard on June 13. The dispute is part of what some see as a turnaround in public opinion in South Carolina. With its cheap labor and little concern about the environment, South Carolina has long been home to some of the nation's most dangerous substances. In addition to the Savannah River Site, the state has a low-level nuclear waste dump in Barnwell. But a hazardous waste landfill near Sumter and a medical waste incinerator in Hampton have been shut down in recent years by state officials, reflecting what some see as greater environmental awareness. "South Carolina has always tilted toward anything that would create jobs. But recently there has been a gradual awareness that some industry does more damage than good," said Jim Farmer, a history professor at the nearby University of South Carolina-Aiken. Sporadic attacks on Hodges for putting Savannah River Site jobs at risk with his stand against the plutonium have not caught on with the public. "People worry we'll lose the reasons why people come here: the beaches, the beautiful environment," said Democratic state Sen. Phil Leventis, a harsh critic of the Sumter-area landfill in his district. The Savannah River Site is about 20 miles east of the Augusta, Ga., area, with 477,000 people, and 170 miles east of Atlanta, a metropolitan area with a population of 4 million. In 1950, the government bought up 300 square miles of land near Ellenton and over the next three years constructed the five Savannah River reactors that would be used to process plutonium for nuclear weapons. During the height of the Cold War, Savannah River employed 26,000 people. "To some it's the worst thing that ever happened. For me, it's the best thing that's ever happened," said Clarence Bush, who runs an auto repair shop whose customers include engineers and others who work at Savannah River. A man could make twice as much working at Savannah River as he could in other towns nearby, and getting a job there was dream of many growing up in nearby Barnwell, recalled Edward Lemon, mayor of the town of 5,000. "If you could get on out there, you were set," Lemon said. With the Cold War over, about 13,000 people work there now, cleaning up the leftover nuclear material and getting it ready to ship to New Mexico to be stored underground permanently. The plutonium from Rocky Flats is being sent to South Carolina as part of a plan to clean up and close the Colorado installation. "If they end up just storing it here, so what?" said Arthur Hanna, who retired after 33 years of working on Savannah River reactors. "As long as they keep it protected." All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 20 Germans Approve Nuclear Waste Dump Las Vegas SUN June 05, 2002 HANNOVER, Germany- Germany on Wednesday approved the construction of a permanent dump for nuclear waste to be built in an abandoned iron-ore mine. The dump near the western city of Salzgitter, which is to hold up to 11 million cubic feet of low-grade radioactive waste, can go ahead after Lower Saxony state gave final clearance to the Federal Office for Radiation Protection. The approval was the first for a permanent dump granted under a 1976 law governing nuclear waste storage. Still, the Salzgitter approval can only be acted on once outstanding legal challenges by residents and environmentalists have been dealt with in the courts, according to Jutta Kremer-Heye, a spokeswoman for the Environment Ministry in Lower Saxony. That condition is part of a deal signed last year by the German government and energy companies to phase out nuclear power within about 20 years. The shutdown was a key demand of the junior partner in the center-left government, which grew out of Germany's strong anti-nuclear movement. Faced with massive protests, the government has delayed indefinitely a decision on whether to make permanent a storage site further north at Gorleben for high-level waste from the country's nuclear power plants. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 21 Reid, Ensign doubt they can stop Yucca if Senate votes on it Las Vegas SUN June 05, 2002 WASHINGTON (AP) - After a defeat on a key committee vote, Nevada's two senators acknowledged Wednesday there's little chance of stopping the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project if it comes up for a direct vote in the Senate. But Sens. Harry Reid and John Ensign said they still have a final card to play: Many senators' devotion to "the tradition of the Senate" which frowns on a measure being forced to a vote over the objection of the majority leader. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, by a 13-10 vote, approved a resolution Wednesday that would override Nevada's objections to the nuclear waste repository planned for Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Under a 1982 nuclear waste law, any senator - Republican or Democrat - can now bring the matter up for fast-track consideration by the full Senate as long as action is taken before July 25. The House already has approved the resolution. While the committee vote was closer than had been expected, both Reid and Ensign in interviews Wednesday expressed little hope of stopping the resolution if it comes up for a direct floor vote. A win in a direct vote on Yucca "is not in the cards," conceded Reid, and Ensign said such a vote would "be very difficult." But Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle has said he would not bring up the resolution. Reid and Ensign said they planned to challenge any move by an individual senator who attempts to force a vote, arguing that would set "a dangerous precedent" and flout Senate tradition. Ensign, a Republican, said he hoped to convince some GOP senators, who favor the Yucca project, to side with him in the "tradition of the Senate" argument. Never has a senator forced a vote over the objections of the majority leader, said Ensign. He said he believes many Republicans "recognize the dangerous precedent." "It's about Senate tradition," added Reid, a Democrat. A number of Republicans have said the need to find a place to bury the nation's nuclear waste overrides Nevada's objections and they plan to force a vote if necessary. Sen. Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, said Wednesday the government is obligated, under contracts with the nuclear industry, to dispose of the waste. "If (this resolution) doesn't prevail, then Yucca is not going to be considered a site." The Bush administration emphasized the bipartisan support for the waste site in the committee's 13-10 vote. Three Democrats, including committee chairman Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, joined 10 Republicans in favor of the resolution. The vote "reflects the kind of bipartisan support" expected in the full Senate, said Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. Only Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, who has raised concerns about shipping wastes through tunnels as it crosses the Rocky Mountains, bucked his Republican colleagues on the issue. Critics of the Yucca project contend the waste - about 45,000 tons of spent reactor fuel, growing at the rate of 2,000 tons a year - can safely be kept at reactor sites across the country. They argue that transporting the waste across the country poses more dangerous safety and security problems. The Yucca facility would be designed to hold 77,000 tons of commercial reactor waste and nuclear waste from the Energy Department weapons program. Opponents of the project said that even after the site is full, thousands of tons of waste will continue to build up at reactor sites. Bush gave the Yucca project the go-ahead in February, saying 20 years of study has shown the site - a ridge of volcanic rock 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas - is safe to keep nuclear material that will remain highly radioactive for more than 10,000 years. The waste would be placed 900 feet below ground and eventually closed in. Nevada filed a formal objection in April, requiring Congress to decide whether to proceed with the site or abandon it. The Energy Department has said the earliest the Yucca facility could open is 2010, and many nuclear experts believe that timetable is too optimistic. On the Net: Yucca Mountain Project: http://www.ymp.gov [http://www.ymp.gov] Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board: http://www.nwtrb.gov [http://www.nwtrb.gov] Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management: http://www.rw.doe.gov [http://www.rw.doe.gov] All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 22 Number of U.S. Train Derailments Up Las Vegas SUN June 06, 2002 WASHINGTON- The number of train derailments grew by more than a quarter during the last five years, and the head of the National Transportation Safety Board called Thursday for more frequent and more detailed inspections. Derailments rose from 1,741 in 1997 to 2,206 in 2001, a jump of 27 percent, Federal Railroad Administration statistics show. In January, one person died when a Canadian Pacific Railway freight train derailed in Minot, N.D. and released more than 250,000 gallons of anhydrous ammonia. Safety board Chairwoman Marion Blakey told the House Transportation railroads subcommittee that the Federal Railroad Administration needs to increase track inspections. She also called for new technologies in performing the work. Federal Railroad Administrator Allan Rutter acknowledged the rise in derailments, but said the agency is working to address the problem. There had been just 400 federal and 150 agency-trained state inspectors to oversee how well the railroads inspected 230,000 miles of track, but the Federal Railroad Administration is adding 12 track inspectors this year and plans to add another 12 next year, Rutter said. In addition, many derailments occurred in train yards, far from the main lines that carry freight and passenger traffic, he said. The House subcommittee called the hearing following several recent train accidents. Besides the chemical spill in Minot and the Auto Train derailment in Florida, a freight train and commuter train collided in Placentia, Calif., in April, killing two people; and two trains derailed last month after colliding with trucks. Eight cars of a freight train derailed in Indiantown, Fla., and 10 cars of an Amtrak train derailed in Coosawhatchie, S.C., injuring 14 people. "These recent accidents, while tragic, do not represent a trend," Rutter said. "Progress has been made and will continue to be made in improving the safety of America's railroad industry." Two passengers were killed in train collisions and derailments between 1997 and 2001, and another 13 in grade crossing accidents, out of 2.3 billion passengers riding the rails, Rutter said. Edward Hamberger, president of the Association of American Railroads, an industry group, said accidents overall have been dropping. Even as derailments rose, government statistics show, railroad accidents and incidents declined by 3.6 percent between 1998 and 2001, from 16,503 to 15,908. "Railroads recognize their responsibilities regarding safety and have devoted enormous resources to its advancement," Hamberger said. On the Net: House committee: http://www.house.gov/transportation [http://www.house.gov/transportation] NTSB: http://www.ntsb.gov [http://www.ntsb.gov] FRA: http://www.fra.dot.gov [http://www.fra.dot.gov] All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 23 Mock atomic container to pass through Idaho in Yucca protest Las Vegas SUN June 06, 2002 TWIN FALLS, Idaho (AP) - A mock nuclear waste cask will pass through southern Idaho as a protest of the proposed Yucca Mountain waste repository in Nevada. After starting on the West Coast, the cask will arrive in Boise Friday before passing by Twin Falls Saturday and into Salt Lake City on its way to Nevada, said Gary Richardson with the Snake River Alliance. "Proponents in Idaho, including the congressional delegation, favor Yucca Mountain because they believe it will get nuclear waste out of Idaho," said Jessica Hixson with the nuclear watchdog group. "However, if Yucca Mountain opens, hundreds of shipments of nuclear waste would travel through Boise every year for almost 40 years." The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee approved a resolution 13-10 Wednesday that would override Nevada's objections to the repository planned 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has pointed to the Department of Energy's flawless record trucking nuclear waste as evidence of the plan's safety. The alliance has teamed with Citizen Alert of Nevada to sponsor the cask's journey to raise awareness of the issue. The container is a full-size replica of a high-level nuclear waste truck cask, a dumbbell-shaped cylinder 20 feet long and 7 feet tall, on a trailer. The real casks are supposed to withstand falls off the truck and fires. In Boise, the cask will be greeted at the Vista Avenue overpass above Interstate 84 before traveling to Boise City Hall, where the drivers will argue the dangers of transporting 77,000 tons of nuclear waste. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 24 Magazine report suggests Yucca Mountain really in Utah Thursday, June 06, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By SEAN WHALEY REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU CARSON CITY -- Nevadans apparently have less to fear from Yucca Mountain than they might have first thought. According to an article published Wednesday in the online version of People magazine, the site selected for the burial of the nation's high level nuclear waste is in Utah. Nevada officials who are fighting the dump, actually destined for a site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, laughed off the mistake. But they also acknowledge that getting the public and the media familiar with the Yucca Mountain issue is an uphill battle. When told about the error, Bob Loux, executive director of the state's Agency for Nuclear Projects, laughed out loud. "That's pretty funny," he said. "I like it." Tessa Hafen, a spokeswoman for U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, said the mix-up is unfortunate. "We're trying to get the word out," she said. "It is clearly an error." The story reported on a visit by actor Mike Farrell to the Capitol to talk to members of Congress about the dangers of transporting nuclear waste to the proposed repository site at Yucca Mountain. The report said in part: "Current `Providence' and former `M*A*S*H' actor and longtime activist Mike Farrell lobbied in Washington Tuesday to stop Congress from allowing 77,000 tons of nuclear waste to be shipped through 44 states to what would become the world's largest nuclear waste dump at the earthquake-prone Yucca Mountain in Utah." Efforts to contact the magazine were unsuccessful, but word of the error may have gotten back to the publication. The story disappeared from the online edition late Wednesday. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 25 Senate panel's Yucca vote advances plan Thursday, June 06, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Reid, Ensign hope parliamentary moves can block resolution By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Senate's energy committee voted Wednesday to authorize the Yucca Mountain Project, setting the stage for a final showdown in Congress over plans for a nuclear waste repository in Nevada. The 13-10 vote by the Energy and Natural Resources Committee sends a Yucca Mountain resolution to the Senate floor under a fast-track process. The resolution would override a veto that Gov. Kenny Guinn cast in April and allow the Energy Department to continue forward with the program once President Bush signs it. In their most candid assessment to date, Nevada's senators said afterward they see slim chance of attracting 51 votes to kill the nuclear waste project outright despite months of lobbying colleagues and an anti-Yucca campaign waged in various parts of the country. Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., instead announced they will try to block the Yucca Mountain bill on procedural grounds and possibly utilizing other parliamentary maneuvers. "We have a better chance of getting Republican (support) on a procedural vote than on an up-or-down vote," Ensign said. Only one Republican so far, Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, has declared he will vote against Yucca Mountain. Reid has said he has lined up 30 to 35 Democrats to support the state's official opposition. Together they are short of 51 votes, and published vote counts have indicated that close to a majority of the Senate already supports the Bush administration's call that nuclear waste be buried at the site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Reid said the Senate might get to the Yucca Mountain bill within several weeks. The House passed the measure in early May. Outlining their plans, Reid and Ensign said they, along with ally Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., will challenge any senator who tries to call up the Yucca Mountain bill for debate. The challenge would force a vote, not on Yucca Mountain directly, but on whether senators want to buck long tradition that invests power in the majority leader. The tradition holds that only the majority leader calls up bills for debate, and Daschle has said he will refuse to call for the Yucca Mountain bill. Research by Ensign's staff found five instances since 1987 when the Senate had an opportunity to buck tradition on fast-track issues such as Yucca Mountain but declined to do so. Breaking tradition "would set a dangerous precedent. It literally could send the Senate into chaos," Ensign said. Ensign conceded if the Nevadans lose that procedural vote, "it will be very difficult" to hold off pro-Yucca senators. A Nevada win on the procedural fight wouldn't kill the Yucca resolution, but would throw the Senate into uncertainty. It also probably would increase pressure on Daschle. Republicans have accused the majority leader of being an obstructionist on other issues important to President Bush. On the other hand, Daschle has pledged to help Reid, his leadership deputy and personal friend. Daschle spokeswoman Ranit Schmelzer said Wednesday that Daschle "has been very clear on this issue. He opposes Yucca Mountain. He has said for some time he has been urging his colleagues not to bring the legislation to the floor. If it does come to the floor, he's working hard to make sure there are Democrat votes against it." A spokesman for Minority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., did not return a call for comment. Senators readily acknowledge the institution places a premium on custom and tradition. "We work hard not to (set precedent)," said Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, a pro-Yucca senator who has considered the implications of challenging the majority leader. "When (Republicans) have the leadership we don't want the minority doing that to us and when (Democrats) have it, they don't want the minority doing that to them," he said. Craig said he didn't think a Yucca Mountain vote would set a dangerous precedent, but "all of us are hopeful we can work out a reasonable timeline" for a vote. Another pro-Yucca senator, Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, said he has suggested Lott work something out with Daschle to smooth the Senate's debate. "I think the leadership should address how this is brought up," he said. "It saves a lot of needless posturing." Craig and Murkowski predicted the Yucca Mountain measure will pass the Senate if brought to a vote. Neither ventured to predict the vote margin. The 23-member energy committee conducted brief discussion on the bill before passing it early in the day. Ten Republicans and three Democrats voted for the repository program to proceed. Nine Democrats and one Republican, Campbell of Colorado, voted against the project. Democrats voting for the repository were Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Bob Graham of Florida and committee chairman Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico. Bingaman said he heard nothing in three days of hearings last month that told him the Department of Energy should not be allowed to continue the nuclear waste project. If approved by Congress, the next step is for the DOE to prepare a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "The Department of Energy needs to do more to resolve remaining design issues, improve its performance assessment, strengthen transportation planning to ensure the safety and security of waste shipments, but the various technical experts we heard from all indicated they believe the department can do that," Bingaman said. Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., said he was anguished between his support for nuclear power and his friendship with Reid. He ended up voting against Yucca Mountain, but said he may change his vote later. Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said she opposed the Yucca Mountain project because it does not go far enough to remove more waste from the government's nuclear reservation at Hanford, Wash. "I can't support a resolution that is not comprehensive," she said. "I don't want to see this issue come back to us." Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 26 Nevada to challenge DOE in lawsuit Thursday, June 06, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Injunction sought to stop Yucca project By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada officials planned to file their most sweeping lawsuit to date today challenging environmental studies that led President Bush to select Yucca Mountain for a nuclear waste repository. The lawsuit charges the Department of Energy violated major environmental and nuclear policy laws when it put together a final impact statement on the proposed Nevada storage site. The state asks for an injunction stopping development on the project located 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The 57-page petition was set to be filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the court that already is considering four other Nevada lawsuits on Yucca Mountain, several of which have been consolidated. A copy of the lawsuit was obtained Wednesday night. The lawsuit focuses on more than a half-dozen areas where Nevada is charging technical and substantive violations of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. "We suspect the state of Nevada would sue at every turn," DOE spokesman Joe Davis said Wednesday night. "Our EIS is thorough and complete. We look forward to reviewing the suit." The lawsuit charges the environmental study lacks critical details because it says DOE has not defined key Yucca Mountain elements such as the basic repository design, the composition of nuclear waste containers and issues related to transportation safety and security. It also charges that an above-ground facility DOE plans at the Yucca site to store nuclear waste for years while it "cools" enough to be stored underground is illegal. Nevada also contends DOE failed to study 54 locations that generate nuclear waste destined for Yucca Mountain, a charge that Nevada lawmakers aired at a congressional hearing this spring. The final environmental impact statement on Yucca Mountain, consisting of more than 9,000 pages and weighing 80 pounds, was made public on Feb. 14, the same day Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham sent his recommendation for the Nevada site to President Bush. Bush signed off on the recommendation the following day. The Nevada lawsuit charges DOE failed to abide by rules requiring the study to be publicly circulated for 30 days before being finalized. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 27 Boxer and Chafee Introduce Bill To Restore "Polluter Pays" For Nation's Toxic Waste Sites U.S. SENATOR BARBARA BOXER | CALIFORNIA Bill seeks to protect taxpayers from paying millions in Superfund cleanup costs June 6, 2002 Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Lincoln Chafee (R-RI), Chair and Ranking Member of the Superfund Subcommittee, unveiled legislation to ensure that polluters continue to pay for cleanup of the nation's most toxic waste sites – also known as Superfund sites. The Bush Administration announced earlier this year that it would not request a reauthorization of superfund fees on oil and chemical companies. This fee, established in 1980, provides revenue to the Superfund trust fund, which ensured that polluters paid the bulk of Superfund cleanups. As a result of the Administration's decision to abandon the concept of "polluter pays," the Superfund trust fund will be depleted by 2004. "One in every four Americans lives within four miles of a Superfund site, putting these individuals at a higher risk of cancer and other diseases," said Boxer. "Sadly, the Bush Administration has turned its back on the people of this country and weakened the Superfund program by abandoning ‘polluter pays'." "I am proud to join Senator Chafee to help ensure that the cleanup of these toxic waste sites continues and to ensure that polluters – not communities – pay." The Boxer-Chafee bill requires oil and chemical companies to once again pay the Superfund fee. The funds raised by the fee would go toward the Superfund trust fund, guaranteeing the fund's solvency. "The Superfund program has a long track record of success – 800 sites have been cleaned up already – but there is far more work to be done. This bill will help ensure that cleanups continue, but not at the expense of our nation's communities or the American taxpayer." The Boxer-Chafee bill is co-sponsored by Senators Jeffords (I-VT), Torricelli (D-NJ), Biden (D-DE), Corzine (D-NJ), Akaka (D-HI), Durbin (D-IL), Dodd (D-CT), Reed (D-RI), Nelson (D-FL), Clinton (D-NY) and Cantwell (D-WA). ***************************************************************** 28 Proposed 'shaky' waste site safety is debated BYU NewsNet - By Ryan Christopher Grange [rcg8@email.byu.edu] NewsNet Staff Writer 5 Jun 2002 Hearings are being held this week to determine whether 4,000 containers of nuclear waste will be safe in the seismically active valleys southwest of Salt Lake City. Seismic activity could disrupt containers of nuclear waste with disastrous results, said Denise Chancellor, assistant attorney general. Although the utility companies obtained the necessary licenses and leased the Skull Valley land, located 50 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, the state continues to protest the admittance of nuclear waste. "We don't know what will happen in the next 10,000 years and what effect it will have on the waste containers," said Ric Cantrell, community action director for the Utah Attorney General's Office. Although seismic movements are not common in Utah, every caution needs to be taken when storing nuclear waste, Chancellor said. "There is no room for error when it comes to high level nuclear waste," she said. The nuclear waste would come from several utilities companies from the East Coast. A consortium of companies, under the umbrella of Private Fuel Storage, made the proposal to deposit 4,000 containers of nuclear waste in Utah. "We believe we have proved that our containers are safe under any circumstances," said Sue Martin, Private Fuel Storage Public Affairs representative. Private Fuel Storage had previously obtained all the necessary permits to deposit the nuclear waste in Utah and had its facility reviewed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "The NRC gave us satisfactory reports in both its safety review and its environmental impact report," Martin said. However, in spite of the approval of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the state is not satisfied, Martin said. "The casks that Private Fuel Storage will be using is an unproven design," Cantrell said. Hearings are being held only because the state of Utah intervened, Martin said. The hearings aim to determine whether the facility is safe and may result in a challenge of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's approval of the project. Expert witnesses, including the designers of the storage containers, will give their opinions as to whether the containers could sustain an earthquake or a stray missile from the nearby military base. "It is definitely a legitimate concern for the state," Martin said. Cantrell said the state's goal for the hearings this week is to present information. "Our only shot at keeping Utah safe is to convince the NRC not to give permission to those companies to leave their waste here," Cantrell said. The hearings this week will most likely be the last shot the state has at blocking the entrance of nuclear waste into the state. "We need to prove once again that our facility is safe under any circumstances," Martin said. Copyright ©2002 BYU NewsNet ***************************************************************** 29 Actor Mike Farrell Urges Senators to Oppose Yucca Mountain Dump Site News From Sen. Harry Reid - Assistant Democratic Leader From Nevada Tuesday, June 4, 2002 Washington, D.C. - Actor Mike Farrell flew from California to Capitol Hill to talk to lawmakers about the dangers of transporting deadly nuclear waste to a proposed dump site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Farrell played BJ Hunnicut in M*A*S*H and now stars in the television drama Providence. He met with several Senators, including Harry Reid of Nevada - another staunch opponent of Yucca Mountain. "I've been talking about this issue for twenty years, but there are still some people who haven't heard our message," said Reid. "When a celebrity like Mike Farrell talks about Yucca Mountain, we can reach a whole new audience. More and more people are realizing that trucks could soon be driving past their homes and schools and churches, carrying a substance that's 240 times as radioactive as the bomb that dropped on Hiroshima. But I want to make sure all Americans know that Yucca Mountain is a threat to their health and safety." Farrell said he is worried that nuclear waste can't be transported safely, and that trucks and trains carrying it will be vulnerable to terrorist attacks and accidents. He also said that until the storage controversy is resolved, the deadly waste should be kept next to the power plants that produced it. Farrell brought copies of an anti-Yucca Mountain letter with him to hand out to the Senators. The letter was signed by 50 people, including Farrell's M*A*S*H co-star Jamie Farr and actor-producer Rob Reiner. ***************************************************************** 30 Editorial: Nevada's senators brace for last stand Las Vegas SUN June 06, 2002 Despite how dangerous it would be to ship nuclear waste and bury it in Nevada, on Wednesday the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee recommended 13-10 that the full Senate do so anyway. It was a defeat for Nevada, but the final vote in the committee could have been worse when it's compared to the 306-117 vote on the same bill in the House. One of the reasons for the House's lopsided vote was that GOP Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., for years has made Yucca Mountain a top priority in the Republican agenda. The odds were stacked against Nevada in the House, especially with President Bush's endorsement of Yucca Mountain, but it isn't as bad in the Senate because Harry Reid of Nevada is that body's second-highest ranking Democrat. For instance, of the 10 votes against Yucca Mountain in the Senate committee's Wednesday vote, nine were from Democrats. But Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., has had a steep hill to climb in corralling GOP senators because the Republican leadership in the Senate has fought to open a dump in Nevada. The situation doesn't look good since so many senators from both parties represent states looking to get rid of their nuclear waste. We can only hope that Nevada's two senators can work a miracle through their powers of persuasion or that the duo can use a parliamentary maneuver to keep the Senate from voting on the Yucca Mountain project, a disaster waiting to happen. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 31 Nevada files another suit against Yucca Las Vegas SUN June 06, 2002 LAS VEGAS SUN WASHINGTON -- As expected, the state of Nevada this week filed another lawsuit against the Department of Energy aimed at derailing the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project. The suit charges that the DOE's environmental impact statement was "tantamount to fraud" in the words of Nevada Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa, who filed the suit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Under the National Environmental Policy Act, environmental impact statements are required for large-scale government and private projects and developments. The Nevada lawsuit alleges that the DOE's impact statement was full of holes, because the DOE has not yet even defined the Yucca project. Because so many details are unknown, the DOE could not compile a complete EIS, the suit says. Among other assertions, the suit alleges: -- That the DOE did not consider a number of impacts associated with shipping nuclear waste across the nation from temporary waste sites to Nevada. -- That the DOE failed to consider the shipping effects on 54 of the 131 sites where waste is now stored. -- That the DOE's Yucca plan involves establishing an above-ground waste storage area where waste would be kept until it was ready to be taken into underground tunnels -- a kind of interim waste site that Nevada law bans. "Given the perpetual impact and irreversible nature of DOE's recommendation to move forward with Yucca Mountain, the American people deserve an exemplary environmental review of this project -- better than anything ever before performed," Del Papa said in a written statement. "Instead, we have a document that is tantamount to fraud and that has been described to me by highly experienced environmental lawyers as perhaps the worst EIS of its kind ever produced." Nevada has filed a number of other lawsuits aimed at killing Yucca Mountain, including suits against the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 32 Bush Environmental Plans Challenged (washingtonpost.com) By a Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, June 6, 2002; Page A06 Lawmakers challenged President Bush on several environmental fronts yesterday in a bipartisan show of concern over his approach to logging, nuclear waste disposal and the cleanup of Superfund toxic waste sites. The president prevailed in the day's action on one of the most hotly disputed issues -- the plan to build a centralized nuclear waste repository beneath Nevada's Yucca Mountain. But the Senate majority leader has vowed to fight it on the Senate floor. Meanwhile, some Democrats say environmental issues may play well for their party's candidates in November. "I think the whole Bush administration environmental record will be on trial this fall," said Jane Danowitz, director of the Heritage Forests Campaign and a Democratic activist. White House spokesman Scott McClellan defended the administration's policies and said the Democrats were engaging in "the same old divisive rhetoric of the past that only serves to slow cooperative progress towards safeguarding our air, land and water and protecting the public health." Yesterday, Reps. Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y.) and Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) introduced legislation backed by 172 other House members that would put into law a Clinton administration rule barring logging and road construction in much of 58.5 million acres of untouched national forest land in 39 states. The timber industry is challenging the rule in court. And the Bush administration has ordered a forest-by-forest review with an eye toward making changes in response to complaints from local officials and commercial interests. "In moving this bill forward, we are not just codifying an agency rule; we are enshrining in law the views and values of the American people," Boehlert said at a Capitol Hill news conference. Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Lincoln D. Chafee (R-R.I.) will jointly introduce legislation today to reauthorize an expired corporate tax that generated more than $1 billion a year to help clean up Superfund sites. The tax expired in 1995, and the Bush administration declined to seek its reauthorization. That prompted Senate Democrats to accuse the administration of letting corporate polluters off the hook financially while badly shortchanging the funding of new cleanup operations. "Moving away from the 'polluter pays' concept is very unpopular," Boxer said. "And cutting cleanup in half is very unpopular." Administration critics say polls suggest that most Americans are concerned about waste cleanup issues and protecting national forests and other natural resources. A recent Bloomberg poll of 1,200 adults found that 45 percent trusted congressional Democrats to do the most to protect the environment, while 26 percent named Bush and 14 percent chose congressional Republicans. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee voted 13 to 10 yesterday to approve the president's plan to create the first centralized nuclear waste disposal facility in the Nevada desert. Three Democrats, including chairman Jeff Bingaman (N.M.), supported it and Republican Ben Nighthorse Campbell (Colo.) opposed it. Senate Majority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) and Majority Whip Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) have vowed a vigorous floor fight against the plan. They said there were many unanswered scientific questions about the project and cited the possible danger of transporting 77,000 tons of nuclear waste cross-country. But Reid and Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) acknowledged after the committee action that there is little chance of stopping the project if it comes up for a direct vote in the Senate. Reid and Ensign said they hope that many senators will adhere to a Senate tradition that frowns on a measure being forced to a vote over the majority leader's objection. The House approved the project May 8. Under a 1982 nuclear waste law, any senator -- Republican or Democrat -- can now bring the matter up for fast-track consideration provided action is taken before July 25. Without further action, Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto of the project would stand. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham called the Senate committee vote a bipartisan step toward "enhancing our national security and environmental protections." © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 33 SELLAFIELD WORKERS FAIL [The Whitehaven News] SOME Sellafield workers have been found with drugs in their system while working on the nuclear site. They were caught in random checks for substances abuse. BNFL spoke for the first time this week about the drugs-testing carried out at Sellafield and its other UK sites among both BNFL employees and contractors. Although the specific details are being treated confidentially, it is known that at Sellafield some workers tested positive to substances over a 10-month period. No one was sacked. "In a very small proportion of cases (across all the sites), people testing positive to substances were temporarily restricted from their work as part of their medical management and support and to ensure that safe working continued," said John Clarke, Sellafield's director of health and safety. He added: "The overwhelming majority of tests were negative. I am extremely encouraged by the results. The number of positive tests has been very low and those substances identified in positive tests broadly reflect the presence and use of those substances in society as a whole. "In each case of a positive test, a decision is made whether the individual should be removed from their work area. Without exception, all individuals who have tested positive have responded well to the advice and assistance offered to them. Anyone who tests positive is subject to an on-going enhanced testing regime." Mr Clark said BNFL treated substance abuse with the utmost seriousness. "The main purpose is to make sure safety is not compromised and that all employees receive a high level of health care. "This low rate of positive testing is a very promising sign and we aim to reduce the level of positive results even further in the future," added the health and safety chief. ***************************************************************** 34 Tennessee part of sanction suit against North Carolina - 2002-06-03 - Nashville Business Journal The states of Alabama, Florida, Tennessee and Virginia and the Southeast Compact Commission for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management have filed a lawsuit in the U.S. Supreme Court to enforce $90 million in sanctions against the state of North Carolina. The suit accuses North Carolina of failing to comply with the provisions of North Carolina and the Southeast Compact laws and of not meeting its obligations as a member of the compact. North Carolina was supposed to build a low-level radioactive waste storage facility, but resident opposition prompted the state to cancel those plans. Monday's filing with the U.S. Supreme Court represents the next step to enforce sanctions imposed against North Carolina by the Compact Commission in December 1999. In July 2000, the commission, on behalf of its member states, requested the U.S. Supreme Court to enforce the sanctions against North Carolina. The commission asked the court to exercise its powers of original jurisdiction, which would allow the suit to bypass the lower courts and go directly to the Supreme Court. In June 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the commission's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint, saying only that a state and not solely the commission acting on behalf of a state or states, could invoke the court's original jurisdiction. The court did not address the merits of the complaint against North Carolina. The court's ruling left the door open for Alabama, Florida, Tennessee and Virginia, as members of the compact, to file Monday's joint complaint with the Compact Commission. The Southeast Compact for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management is an agreement among seven states -- Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia -- to provide for the responsible management of the region's low-level radioactive waste. The Compact Commission oversees administration of the compact. [Get Copyright Clearance] Copyright 2002 American City Business Journals Inc. ***************************************************************** 35 DOE waste facility is now operational The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News -- 06/06/02 by Paul Parson Oak Ridger staff After about a year's worth of construction, the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge waste disposal facility is up and running. Located in Bear Creek Valley just west of the Y-12 National Security Complex, the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility will initially hold up to 400,000 cubic yards of waste, including low-level radioactive, mixed, hazardous and polychlorinated biphenyl-contaminated materials from cleanup efforts on the Oak Ridge Reservation. "There will be no out-of-state waste," said Bill Cahill, project manager for the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility. Cahill said the site began accepting waste shipments last week. The types of waste range from soil, sludge and sediments to building debris and personal protection equipment. The design of the disposal site, or landfill, includes several layers of clay, rock and various synthetic liners to prevent waste from contaminating the area's groundwater. There is also a system in place to collect and treat liquids that leach from waste operations. DOE officials said that the disposal facility could expand to accommodate up to 2 million cubic yards of waste. However, the future expansion and the facility's final size will be based on the quantity of waste generated during cleanup efforts on the Oak Ridge Reservation. The facility is expected to close in 2009, according to Cahill. Duratek Federal Services Inc. will operate the waste disposal facility under a subcontract with Bechtel Jacobs Co. -- DOE's Oak Ridge cleanup contractor. Duratek was also responsible for constructing the site. Shortly after construction on the site began in early 2001, the U.S. General Accounting Office issued a report recommending that DOE reevaluate waste disposal options before building new facilities, including the one in Oak Ridge. Ultimately, Cahill said DOE found it to be more cost-effective to construct the Oak Ridge facility. Officials are scheduled to commemorate the opening of the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility during a ceremony Friday. Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or [pparson@oakridger.com] . All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger ***************************************************************** 36 Missouri Chamber raises concerns about nuclear waste storage Christian County Headliner Letter to the Editor June 05, 2002 Congress soon will debate legislation that will determine whether the federal government proceeds with plans to build a permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel at one site designed for safe, permanent storage or continue to use dozens of sites around the country designed only for temporary storage. The Missouri Chamber of Commerce has sent letters to Missouri's Congressional Delegation to urge support for legislation overriding Nevada's veto of plans for a permanent nuclear repository at Yucca Mountain. The temporary storage sites at nuclear power plants were not designed as long-term solutions for used nuclear fuel. The federal government was required, by law, to store the waste at a permanent site. It selected Yucca Mountain-a site that has been studied for more than 20 years and that can safely contain the waste for hundreds of years. Much concern has been raised about transportation of waste from Yucca Mountain. However, no plans for routes to Yucca Mountain have been finalized, and states will have opportunities for input on transportation plans, including the timing and routing of shipments. Missouri's Emergency Management Agency and emergency responders have in place a highly effective emergency response system that will protect citizens and the environment in the unlikely event of an accident. More than 3,000 nuclear fuel shipments already have occurred and although there have been eight accidents, none resulted in radioactive releases. This is because scientists and engineers designed effective, safe procedures including shipping containers that can withstand even the most severe accidents. Derailing Yucca Mountain over concerns about transportation, which will be addressed separately, is simply wrong. If Congress does not pass the Yucca Mountain legislation, nuclear waste will be left at numerous sites around the country, including several in Missouri, in spaces designed only for temporary storage. Electricity consumers, including many of the businesses our organization represents, have paid for a federal repository through a tax, included in their rates, that goes into the federal nuclear waste fund. This fund was created to facilitate a federal program to accept and store spent nuclear fuel. In fact, Missouri consumers already have almost $200 million into the nuclear waste fund. It is time to see a return on that investment and to secure permanent storage for spent nuclear fuel. Daniel P. Mehan Missouri Chamber of Commerce President/CEO Jefferson City ©Christian County Headliner 2002 ***************************************************************** 37 Not In My State: Debating the Fate of Nuclear Waste -- June 4, 2002 PBS Online NewsHour: [a NewsHour with Jim Lehrer Transcript] One state's fight over what to do with plutonium from the nation's nuclear weapon plants. A report on the dispute over storing nuclear waste in Nevada's Yucca Mountain [Handling Nuclear Waste] TOM BEARDEN: There are six tons of weapons grade plutonium inside the Rocky Flats plants 13 miles north of Denver. The Department of Energy has been dismantling the former bomb factory for years and wants to close it entirely by 2006, turn the land into a wildlife refuge. But it can't close until the plutonium is removed. DOE wants to send the Rocky Flats plutonium, and eventually 28 additional tons from other former weapons plants across the country, to its Savannah River site near Aiken, South Carolina. About half the plutonium the U.S. created during the Cold War was made in reactors here. The agency wants to build a multi-billion dollar reprocessing plant on this site to turn the plutonium into MOX, or mixed oxide fuel, for nuclear power reactors. It would eventually be burned to produce electricity. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham says this is all part of an agreement with Russia to turn weapons grade plutonium into useful fuel. [Sec. Abraham] SPENCER ABRAHAM, Secretary of Energy: These programs with Russia are vital to the nonproliferation goals both that we have, Russia has, and the world has. And if this material isn't disposed of here in the United States and on a parallel track in Russia, it poses a very serious risk. TOM BEARDEN: But South Carolina Governor Jim Hodges doesn't believe a word of it. GOV. JIM HODGES: Oh, it is a bogus argument. I don't think there's any question about that. When you look at what they have proposed, they have proposed moving surplus plutonium from Colorado to South Carolina, thousands of miles, just to sit for three or four years. If national security is at stake, why are they moving plutonium thousands of miles just to sit? It's not like it's moving here to be processed. I mean, the MOX construction project will take several years. I mean, it's hard to fathom that there's any national security issue at risk here. South Carolina's concerns TOM BEARDEN: Hodges says his real concern is that DOE will bring the plutonium here, and then never build the reprocessing plant, leaving South Carolina holding the bag. [Gov. Hodges] GOV. JIM HODGES: In fact, what they orally tell us that they're willing to do is always substantially different than what we see on paper. We heard about two weeks ago that the federal government was willing to enter into an agreement that would... that would end up... that would end up processing all the plutonium by the year 2020 or so. Well, when the written form of that came, it actually could be extended to 2040 or 2050. TOM BEARDEN: Hodges asserts further proof of DOE's unreliability, saying the agency originally planned to "immobilize" some of the plutonium in glass for permanent storage, but abandoned that part of the plan. GOV. JIM HODGES: Some 18 months ago, the Department of Energy entered into a formal agreement with our state where they said, "Here's what we're going to do with plutonium, here's how we're going to treat it, and here's what we're going to invest to get this process done." And then, within the matter of a year, or a year and a half, the Department of Energy was then saying, "Sorry, this agreement that we entered into is no longer valid. We have changed our mind." [nuclear waste] TOM BEARDEN: DOE says they decided to drop immobilization in order to save taxpayer dollars. SPENCER ABRAHAM: We always intended to have approximately two-thirds of the plutonium converted into MOX fuel. Now we're going further. And the approach we've taken actually saves the taxpayers $2 billion while accomplishing the same final product of immobilizing... of putting... of disposing of, of reducing from weapons grade quality the plutonium. So it's consistent with the Russian program now, it's more affordable, and it's more workable. And the fact that the program's been slightly modified should in no way, in my judgment, change the idea of us going forward with it. The bureaucracy behind the plutonium [South Carolina Roadblock] TOM BEARDEN: Hodges' response to all this was to stage a roadblock drill; have the highway patrol practice stopping trucks at the state line. GOV. JIM HODGES: Well, they're our roads, and they're our highways. And I think the authority that I have as governor of the state, it's my obligation to protect the health and safety of people that live here in South Carolina. TOM BEARDEN: The governor said he was prepared to block any plutonium shipments, even if it meant laying down across the road. He also filed a lawsuit, charging DOE with violating administrative and environmental laws, and is seeking an injunction to prevent the shipments. And recently, four private citizens in South Carolina joined the lawsuit, seeking personal monetary damages if the transfers take place. Colorado Republican Senator Wayne Allard says Governor Hodges is trying to use the issue to get re-elected this fall, particularly with his threat to block the trucks with his body. SEN. WAYNE ALLARD: That's political grandstanding, and it's been used in the past. TOM BEARDEN: As proof, Allard points to the governor's TV commercial on the issue, an ad the DOE urged the governor to pull. [Gov. Hodges' Commercial] COMMERCIAL SPOKESMAN: Governor Jim Hodges is demanding that the federal government keep its word; that they not make our state into a permanent dumping ground for weapons-grade plutonium. SEN. WAYNE ALLARD: They're still issuing threats time and time again. I would really appreciate it if, and I think the country would appreciate it, it would be best for this country, that he would sit down and say, "look, let's negotiate. Let's see what's best." I think we've reached that point. I'm waiting for him to say "yes" just once. [Sen. Allard's Commercial] COMMERCIAL SPOKESMAN: To Wayne Allard, our greatest duty is our national security. TOM BEARDEN: But Democrat Hodges says Allard is playing politics, too. He says the bush administration, hoping to regain control of the Senate, is prepared to give the Colorado Senator whatever he wants to get reelected, including getting the plutonium out of his state so he could take credit. Blease Graham is a political science professor at the University of South Carolina. He says the governor has found an issue that has legs. BLEASE GRAHAM, University of South Carolina: I think it resonates in South Carolinians who are by tradition suspicious of external influences. They want a governor or a political leaders, generally, who fight for their interests, who's not being steamrolled by Washington, some outside establishment. TOM BEARDEN: But Secretary Abraham says that far from steamrolling South Carolina, the administration has gone out of its way to try to reach a compromise. SPENCER ABRAHAM: We have taken a variety of steps to try to provide assurances, from having first delayed shipments so we could put together a plan of action that would show him exactly how and provide budget support for the disposition of this material-- we did that. He said he wanted a written agreement; we've sent him a written agreement. He said he wanted it to be more enforceable; we reconfigured it to make it so. He said that wasn't good enough, he wanted legislation. We've worked for days to try to write a bill that now, in fact, on a bipartisan basis passed the Senate Armed Services Committee, but he says that's not good enough. TOM BEARDEN: The Sierra Club may symbolize the struggle many factions are having with the issue. They don't want the plutonium recycled, but they don't want it stored here, either. [Dell Isham] DELL ISHAM, South Carolina Sierra Club: We do not want to become the permanent waste dump of the world. TOM BEARDEN: Dell Isham is the chapter director for the South Carolina Sierra Club. He believes that turning weapons grade plutonium into reactor fuel is too dangerous, and prefers immobilization, encasing the plutonium in glass. DELL ISHAM: The immobilization process is the best of a lot of bad options, but it's the one that is not supported by the bush administration and not funded by Congress. Yucca Mountain TOM BEARDEN: If it were immobilized, where would it go? DELL ISHAM: Well, that is A... is a big question, and, of course, the question currently on everybody's minds also is not just the Savannah River site, but also Yucca Mountain. TOM BEARDEN: Yucca Mountain is the Department of Energy's proposed high level nuclear waste storage area 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The agency has been testing the geology there for decades, trying to determine if it can safely store plutonium from spent nuclear reactor fuel for thousands of years. SPOKESMAN: We have a multi-billion dollar hole in the ground, probably the most expensive hole in the ground in the history of human beings, that has been established by Congress for this purpose. TOM BEARDEN: The Sierra Club has taken a position to be opposed to the use of Yucca Mountain for scientific and geologic reasons, and the Sierra Club in South Carolina, of course, doesn't want permanent storage here. But if you had to choose from a really undeveloped, inappropriate site and one that had been developed for that purpose, again, you're looking at two bad options. [Mal McKibben] MAL McKIBBEN, Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness: You can't have it both ways. I mean, if the people there are saying, "we ought to send it... we ought to make glass out of it and send it to Yucca Mountain," but the same people are saying, "I don't want Yucca Mountain to open," it's... that is illogical. TOM BEARDEN: Mal McKibben is the executive director of a nonprofit group called Citizens for Nuclear Technology Awareness. He says immobilization creates its own risks. MAL McKIBBEN: It is still weapons grade plutonium, and what you have done is put enough plutonium in a mine, in the ground, to make many thousands of weapons. So you've created a plutonium mine for the future. The bid for plutonium TOM BEARDEN: McKibben's group, based in Aiken, supports the MOX plan. They believe the town's economy world flourish because the government would spend billions of dollars in construction funds and create hundreds of high paying jobs here. But Allard says the state ought to lose those jobs if the governor continues to delay. [Sen. Allard] SEN. WAYNE ALLARD: You know, there was the competitive bid for handling the plutonium. Other states wanted the project. And his state came forward, they bid for the project, they won it. And now it's an election year and he's playing the game. But this is not anything new to me. TOM BEARDEN: Governor Hodges says he still wants those jobs. He says he'll accept the plutonium if DOE will agree to a court-supervised settlement. GOV. JIM HODGES: We ought to go down to the... to the courthouse and enter into a consent order, so that if they a year from now or five years from now change their mind, that we have a federal judge who can say, "Wait a minute. You're not going to be allowed to do that." TOM BEARDEN: Secretary Abraham says that's not going to happen. SPENCER ABRAHAM: Once you enter into one of those types of an agreements, then other parties, third-party interveners, from who knows what perspective, including the perspective of people who don't like our agreement with Russia, could enter into the case, seek to intervene, and seek to, in some way, influence these programs. In short, we would be trying to put a major international agreement into place against the backdrop of having a variety of third parties having access to tamper with that agreement and try to change it at all times. TOM BEARDEN: In the meantime, Allard, and Democratic Representative Mark Udall, also of Colorado, turned up the heat last month when they proposed legislation that would fine DOE if it does not remove all the plutonium from Rocky Flats by November 2003. The Energy Department has agreed to delay the first plutonium shipments until after a federal court hears arguments in the governor's lawsuit on June 13. Copyright © 2002 MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 38 Standoff over plutonium signals shift in priorities A S.C. shuns role as nuke host ELLENTON, S.C. - In the early Cold War '50s, people around here welcomed the opening of ''the bomb plant'' along the Savannah River. In fact, South Carolinians for decades have embraced just about any industry that could bring jobs to the countryside. 2 6/6/2002 By Jeffrey Collins , Associated Press NEW ELLENTON, S.C. - In the early Cold War '50s, people around here welcomed the opening of ''the bomb plant'' along the Savannah River. In fact, South Carolinians for decades have embraced just about any industry that could bring jobs to the countryside. But now that attitude is changing, as illustrated by South Carolina's plutonium standoff. The US Department of Energy announced plans last fall to ship weapons-grade plutonium from its Rocky Flats installation in Colorado to the Savannah River Site, where it would be converted into nuclear reactor fuel over the next two decades in an operation that could create up to 800 jobs. But Governor Jim Hodges has said he does not trust the government to keep its word and fears the plutonium will be left at Savannah River permanently. He has vowed to do ''whatever it takes'' to prevent the radioactive material from being stored here - including lying down in the road to stop the plutonium-laden trucks. The Highway Patrol has conducted drills on how to block the shipments. And the governor is suing the Energy Department. ''Dumping this weapons-grade plutonium in our state turns us into a terrorist target. We cannot allow the federal government to paint a bull's-eye on South Carolina,'' Hodges, a Democrat up for reelection in November, said earlier this year. The shipments were set to begin May 15 but were put on hold for a month to see how the lawsuit plays out. The case is set to be heard on June 13. The dispute is part of what some see as a turnaround in public opinion in South Carolina. With its cheap labor and little concern about the environment, South Carolina has long been home to some of the nation's most dangerous substances. In addition to the Savannah River Site, the state has a low-level nuclear waste dump in Barnwell. But a hazardous waste landfill near Sumter and a medical waste incinerator in Hampton have been shut down in recent years by state officials, reflecting what some see as greater environmental awareness. ''South Carolina has always tilted toward anything that would create jobs. But recently there has been a gradual awareness that some industry does more damage than good,'' said Jim Farmer, a history professor at the nearby University of South Carolina at Aiken. Sporadic attacks on Hodges for putting Savannah River Site jobs at risk with his stand against the plutonium have not caught on with the public. ''People worry we'll lose the reasons why people come here: the beaches, the beautiful environment,'' said Democratic state Senator Phil Leventis, a harsh critic of the Sumter-area landfill in his district. The Savannah River Site is about 20 miles east of the Augusta, Ga., area, with 477,000 people, and 170 miles east of Atlanta, a metropolitan area with a population of 4 million. In 1950, the government bought up 300 square miles of land near Ellenton and over the next three years constructed the five Savannah River reactors that would be used to process plutonium for nuclear weapons. During the height of the Cold War, Savannah River employed 26,000 people. With the Cold War over, about 13,000 people work there now, cleaning up the leftover nuclear material and getting it ready to ship to New Mexico to be stored underground permanently. This story ran on page A2 of the Boston Globe on 6/6/2002. © Copyright 2002 Globe Newspaper Company. [ Send this story to a ***************************************************************** 39 Nevada sues, again, to stop Yucca Mountain project MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer Thursday, June 6, 2002 (06-06) 13:47 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) -- The federal government violated environmental and nuclear policy laws in selecting a Nevada desert mountain ridge as the burial site for the nation's nuclear waste, Nevada alleges in a lawsuit filed Thursday. With Congress likely to endorse President Bush's recommendation of the Yucca Mountain as early as next month, state officials are increasingly focusing on the courts to try to stop the repository from being built 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The new lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington by Nevada Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa, is the state's second this year against the Yucca Mountain proposal. It challenges the validity of the Energy Department's final environmental impact statement, issued just a day before Bush's decision in February. Energy Department officials have said they expected legal challenges from Nevada and defended the selection of the site. The state is alleging that the environmental study is flawed because it lacks such important details as the design of the storage facility, the specifications of the containers that will hold radioactive waste and a transportation plan. The lawsuit says the study violates the National Environmental Policy Act and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the law Congress wrote to guide the selection of a site and the construction of the facility. In a legal challenge filed with the same court in February, the state argued Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's recommendation of the site and Bush's decision were based on flawed guidelines. That lawsuit is still pending. The state filed earlier lawsuits over Yucca Mountain water rights, radioactivity standards and the criteria on which Abraham made his decision. On the Net: Yucca Mountain Project: www.ymp.gov [http://www.ymp.gov] Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board: www.nwtrb.gov [http://www.nwtrb.gov] Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management: www.rw.doe.gov [http://www.rw.doe.gov] Nevada opposition: www.state.nv.us/nucwaste [http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste] ©2002 Associated Press   ***************************************************************** 40 IEER | Alternative Nuclear Waste Plan For immediate release For further information contact: Arjun Makhijani [ ieer@ieer.org] : 240-603-9648 cell P R E S S R E L E A S E Independent Institute Recommends Alternative Nuclear Waste Plan Safer and more environmentally sound than the proposed Yucca Mountain repository June 4, 2002; Takoma Park, Maryland -- An independent technical institute has offered an alternative approach to the management of spent nuclear fuel in the United States. The plan is safer and more environmentally sound than the plan to bury the country's high level radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The latter was endorsed by the Bush administration in February and voted on favorably by a majority of the U.S. House of Representatives last month. The institute's plan is printed below in its entirety. "Our plan, which is based on more than two decades of analysis and experience on radioactive waste management policy, includes the placement of spent fuel in hardened storage at or near the point of generation for a period of about 50 years. This would reduce the risk of large-scale catastrophe in case of a terrorist attack," explained Dr. Arjun Makhijani, author of the plan and president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) in Takoma Park, Maryland. "Meanwhile, ten years of scientific and engineering work would be undertaken, on questions like, 'What are the natural geologic conditions that retard the movement of radionuclides for long periods?'," Dr. Makhijani continued. "More basic research on various geologic settings is needed before sites can be scientifically screened. Site selection should not begin until this preliminary work has been done." "The time to completion of disposal of spent fuel from existing reactors would be similar to that of the Yucca Mountain plan," said Dr. Makhijani. "In my opinion, Yucca Mountain would not be a contender for a nuclear waste repository if the process were conducted on the technical merits," said Dr. Makhijani. "In my considered opinion, of all the sites studied, Yucca is in most ways the worst from an environmental point of view." "In light of the deficiencies of the Yucca Mountain site and the risks of transporting spent fuel without proper design and testing of casks, IEER has put forth a plan for nuclear waste management, with due consideration to terrorism risks, that would greatly reduce on-site risks and increase the likelihood of a far better repository program," said Dr. Makhijani. "Our plan would have the benefit of greater public acceptance, especially if it were coupled with termination of the waste stream as nuclear power plant licenses expire." IEER is a non-profit organization in Takoma Park, Maryland, that provides the public and policy-makers with clear, thoughtful studies on a variety of energy and environmental issues. IEER has analyzed radioactive waste management policy for more than 20 years and has published numerous reports, books, and articles on the topic. See the IEER web site: www.ieer.org. -- 30 -- Attachment IEER NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN June 4, 2002 IEER advocates the following program be carried out by an institution that does not have the conflict of interest that the U.S. Department of Energy does, and under more stringent public health and environmental protection standards than those currently in effect: Interim Management Interim Hardened On-Site Storage (HOSS) (different from spent fuel pools and dry casks now used) should be used for all spent fuel that can be moved out of pools. Pool storage should be minimized. No new above-ground dry storage of the present varieties should be licensed. Current dry storage should be converted to HOSS. The federal government should pay for HOSS at closed power plant sites since it has defaulted on its obligation to begin taking the waste on January 31, 1998, and has large amounts of ratepayer money dedicated to waste management that it has not spent. Goals: Hardened On-Site Storage should be able to withstand most terrorist attacks without significant off-site releases. A second level goal is to prevent catastrophic off-site releases in case of even severe attacks. There could be defense in depth as part of the system. The technology to accomplish HOSS is available. Interim Hardened On-Site Storage (HOSS) should meet the following criteria: 1. It should not result in catastrophic releases resist almost all types of attacks. The amount of releases projected in even severe attacks should be small enough that the storage system would be unattractive as a terrorist target. 2. It should be able to withstand a direct hit by a large commercial airliner full of fuel or anti-tank weapons without catastrophic offsite releases. 3. The individual canister locations should not be easily detectable from offsite. On-site storage would be needed for about 50 to 60 years -- not much different from what is projected to occur at present. Long-term Management The long-term repository plan should proceed as follows: Ten years of the following scientific and engineering work: 1. Research on natural geologic conditions that retard the movement of radionuclides for long periods. 2. Development of materials that mimic these natural geologic conditions ("Natural analog" materials). 3. Research on geologic environment types that would match the characteristics of these natural analogs. 4. Intensified basic scientific research on the properties of the most important radionuclides under a variety of laboratory conditions. After this initial work, the process of selecting two or three repository and natural analog types would be initiated for concentrated work (10 years). Then site selection (10 years). If the process is sound, disposal could in principle happen in the twenty years to follow. The total time for complete disposal of fuel from existing power plants (40 year license) would be roughly 50 years, maybe sixty. If the power plants are closed down the overall timetable would not be longer than envisioned for Yucca Mountain now. End attachment ----------------------------------------------------------------- Also see: + A Bad Approach To Nuclear Waste (Washington Post op-ed, February 2002) + Considering the Alternatives: Creating a framework for sound long-term management of highly radioactive wastes in the United States [http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/vol_7/7-3/longterm.html] + Department of Energy Makes the Wrong Choice by Selecting Yucca Mountain, Nevada as a Suitable Nuclear Waste Repository [http://www.ieer.org/comments/waste/yuccapr.html] , IEER press release (January 10, 2002) + Energy Dept. 'Cleanup' Program Invites Lax Standards, Threatens Crucial Water Resources [http://www.ieer.org/comments/waste/budget02.html] (Press release, February 4, 2002) + "If not Yucca Mountain, then what?" - An alternative plan for managing highly radioactive waste in the United States [http://www.ieer.org/fctsheet/yuccaalt.html] , IEER/ANA fact sheet (December 2001) + Some Evidence of Yucca Mountain's Unsuitability as a Repository [http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/vol_7/7-3/yucca.html] Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Comments to Outreach Coordinator: ieer@ieer.org [ieer@ieer.org] Takoma Park, Maryland, USA Posted June 5, 2002 ***************************************************************** 41 Sen. Boxer seeks to regenerate Superfund Tri-Valley Herald Thursday, June 06, 2002 - 3:01:07 AM MST By Lisa Friedman WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Polluting companies would once again foot the bill to clean up any contamination they leave behind under a bill Sen. Barbara Boxer will introduce Wednesday. The California Democrat also is proposing to reauthorize millions of dollars in funding to help the Environmental Protection Agency mop up so-called Superfund sites nationwide. California is home to 781 such contaminated industrial sites. While the vast majority of them are in the Los Angeles area, nearly 100 hazardous waste sites can be found throughout the East Bay and Peninsula, from shuttered gasoline stations and dry cleaners to power plants and abandoned office parks. So far, only a handful of them, such as the Alameda Naval Station and Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, have made it to the top of the government's priority list of places that must be cleaned up immediately. Fewer and fewer toxic locations, in fact, are receiving priority status. That's because Superfund, which uses special corporate taxes to clean up contamination, expired in 1995 and has never been restored. As a result, the trust fund is running out of money. While Congress has debated reinstating the tax for years, the Bush administration this year pounded the nail in the Superfund tax's coffin by announcing it would not request a renewal. Instead, the administration decided to designate fewer sites for restoration and also swung the lion's share of cleanup costs from industry to the taxpayers. Boxer's bill, to be introduced with Sen. Lincoln Chaffee, R-R.I., would place the burden back squarely on the shoulder of industry by reinstating the Superfund tax. In hearings Boxer held during March and April on Superfund issues, she assailed the Bush White House and predicted the impact on California would be "huge." "The administration has turned its back on the notion that the polluter should pay for the mess they made," she said. The Superfund tax, established under the Carter administration, amassed $3.8 billion at its peak by levying taxes on crude oil, chemical feed stocks and other polluting industries. Corporations, however, long chafed at the program and argued it was overly burdensome and poorly managed. ***************************************************************** 42 Public Citizen Demands Disclosure of Pro-Yucca Campaign?s Ties to the Nuclear Industry* June 5, 2002 /*Alliance for Sound Nuclear Policy a "Front Group" for NEI*/ WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Public Citizen today sent a letter to Alliance for Sound Nuclear Policy to request full disclosure of the group?s funding sources and membership. The Alliance has launched an aggressive television and newspaper advertising campaign in support of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. The Alliance surfaced following Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's Feb. 14 recommendation in favor of the nuclear dump, which is widely opposed by environmental and public interest organizations. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee narrowly approved the Yucca Mountain proposal 13-10 today. The full Senate is expected to vote on the controversial issue in the coming weeks. In statements made to the media, the Alliance has claimed to represent "more than 26 million consumers, seniors, environmentalists, business leaders and union members," but the group does not have a Web site and is not registered as a lobbyist organization. However, Public Citizen has learned that the Alliance is housed at the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), the nuclear industry?s lobbying organization. Alliance director Sherry Reilly has worked for NEI in public relations for several years. "This group appears to be intentionally obscuring information about its membership and funding," said Joan Claybrook, Public Citizen president. "This Alliance is nothing more than a front group for NEI. Its pro-Yucca Mountain advertising campaign, which claims to represent the views of consumers, is misleading and disingenuous absent full disclosure of the Alliance?s close ties to the commercial nuclear industry." The nuclear industry has heavily lobbied in support of the Yucca Mountain proposal because it is desperate for a "solution" to the nuclear waste problem to help pave the way for an expansion in nuclear power generation. According to Public Citizen research, current U.S. senators and 2002 senatorial candidates have taken more than $5 million from the nuclear power industry in political action committee "hard money" contributions since 1997. The nuclear industry contributed more than $82,000 to Abraham?s failed bid for re-election to the U.S. Senate prior to his controversial Yucca Mountain site recommendation, and Abraham?s top nuclear contributors in 2000 spent $25 million lobbying Congress in that year alone. "Lawmakers should not fooled by the Alliance?s efforts to put a friendly face on the industry that continues to generate 2,200 tons of high-level radioactive waste each year," Claybrook said. "When the Senate votes on the repository proposal, the agenda of the well-financed nuclear industry should not be allowed to dominate concerns for public health, safety and the environment. This is just one more example of industry maneuvering and manipulating to cover their tracks and pretend they represent the public interest." ### Public Citizen ***************************************************************** 43 Questions Raised Over Energy Dept. Official's Industry Ties The New York Times June 6, 2002* *By DAVID FIRESTONE* Before he was named under secretary of energy by President Bush last year, Robert G. Card was a top executive of the companies whose multibillion-dollar contracts his office now controls. Those companies performed some of the nation's most sensitive and expensive jobs, cleaning up highly toxic waste from nuclear weapons factories. Now, with the storage of that waste becoming a political issue in races around the country, Mr. Card has come under scrutiny for decisions that could add millions of dollars to the contracts of his previous employers. Critics in Congress and elsewhere are calling for an investigation into his ties to the nuclear cleanup industry. Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, wrote to the Office of Government Ethics last week, raising questions about Mr. Card's actions, saying he believed they might violate Bush administration guidelines and federal statutes governing conflicts of interest. "Until those questions are answered, the integrity of Mr. Card's decisions will be in doubt, including those related to Yucca Mountain," Mr. Reid said. Yucca Mountain is the Nevada site recently chosen by the Energy Department for long-term storage of nuclear waste, a decision opposed by Mr. Reid and most Nevada officials. Because very few companies are able to build such a repository, opponents of the site have said that Yucca Mountain will be a windfall for Mr. Card's former employers, the Kaiser-Hill Company and CH2M Hill Inc. Energy Department officials note that Mr. Card has divested himself of his former companies' stock and renounced his pension benefits, and they suggest that his critics are motivated by their political disagreement with the Yucca Mountain decision. Late yesterday, the Office of Government Ethics issued a letter disagreeing with Senator Reid's claims. The letter, based on the Energy Department's assurances to the office that Mr. Card had not participated in any matter relating to his former employers, said Mr. Card's actions had been proper. "We do not believe that CH2M Hill, Kaiser-Hill, or Kaiser Group Holdings Inc. was a party or represented a party in any of the matters discussed above in which Under Secretary Card participated," Amy Comstock, director of the ethics office, wrote. "Accordingly, it appears that none of Mr. Card's actions violated any ethics statutes or regulations." But Mr. Card's critics, who include Democratic elected officials in Nevada and South Carolina who are at odds with some of his decisions, say his ties to the industry make it impossible to determine whether his favorite projects are good public policy or favors to old colleagues. Mr. Reid said he would pursue an inquiry into Mr. Card's role. Most accusations against Mr. Card involve contracts by his former companies to clean up two of the country's biggest environmental hazards: the Rocky Flats Site near Denver and the Hanford Site in Washington State, both of which processed plutonium for nuclear weapons before closing. CH2M Hill, where Mr. Card was a director and senior vice president, has a $2.2 billion contract to manage radioactive waste storage tanks at Hanford and decommission them as the waste is processed. Mr. Card was chief executive of Kaiser-Hill, which is half-owned by CH2M Hill and which has a $4 billion contract to clean up Rocky Flats. As under secretary for energy, science and environment, Mr. Card supervises the Office of Environmental Management, which is in charge of cleaning up nuclear waste sites and manages the contracts of his old companies. In March, that office said it was sending $433 million from an $800 million discretionary cleanup fund to Hanford, much of which would go to expedite CH2M Hill's cleanup work. On March 6, in testimony to a Congressional committee, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said Mr. Card played a major role in the decision. The extra financing for Hanford's cleanup came about because of an agreement between Mr. Card and the State of Washington, Mr. Abraham said, after "a top-to-bottom review that Under Secretary Card and Assistant Secretary Roberson completed." Mr. Card took the microphone at that hearing to describe the expedited cleanup work, and people who met in February with Gov. Gary Locke of Washington, a Democrat, to discuss the financing confirmed that Mr. Card was present and played a leading role in the talks. Mr. Card declined to be interviewed. An Energy Department spokesman, Joseph Davis, said that while Mr. Card had a role in working with Hanford officials to accelerate the cleanup, he had not been involved in deciding how much money would be sent to the site for the accelerated program, or how much would go to CH2M Hill. That decision, Mr. Davis said, was made solely by Assistant Secretary Jessie Roberson, who reports directly to Mr. Card. At Rocky Flats, the project he supervised in the private sector, Mr. Card has taken a vocal public role in urging that the cleanup be hastened and the plutonium there be shipped to South Carolina for processing, a decision applauded in Colorado but unpopular in South Carolina. The contract with Kaiser-Hill provides a $340 million incentive if the company can complete the cleanup by 2006. That provision, negotiated by Mr. Card while at Kaiser-Hill, has led to accusations by South Carolina officials that Mr. Card is trying to benefit his former company at state expense. "How are we supposed to be comfortable that we're getting a fair shake in South Carolina when the man we're negotiating with is a former employee of the company that clearly stands to gain financially if Rocky Flats is closed on a timely basis?" Gov. Jim Hodges of South Carolina, a Democrat, asked on Tuesday. The Energy Department's general counsel wrote to Governor Hodges this year that Mr. Card had severed his financial ties to Kaiser-Hill, other than his vested interest in its pension plan. On Tuesday, Mr. Davis said that Mr. Card had volunteered to forgo any benefits from the pension plans at the two companies, which combined would provide about $2,400 a month beginning in 2018. But federal ethics rules require presidential appointees to go even further than selling stock in their previous employers, as Mr. Card did. As a condition of his appointment, Mr. Card agreed to recuse himself from department matters in which he was involved "personally and substantially" while at Kaiser-Hill or CH2M Hill. Department officials say his recusal and his divestiture of company stock means that there is neither a conflict nor an appearance of one. "The department's legal counsel has reviewed all of the critics' charges and found no basis to them," Mr. Davis said. "I think various opponents of the department's position on Yucca Mountain are trying to rehash unfounded and baseless allegations. In a word, I believe it's unfair." But Mr. Card's critics are calling for a further investigation. Earlier this year, Representative Shelley Berkley, a Nevada Democrat and another opponent of the Yucca Mountain plan, asked the department for documents on Mr. Card's role, which she has turned over to Congressional investigators. She said she was concerned about a potential windfall to one of Mr. Card's former employers if the mountain storage site is built. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company ***************************************************************** 44 Stop arming India and Pakistan Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 11:46:18 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Stop arming India and Pakistan From: "Eli Pariser, 9-11Peace.org" Date: 6 Jun 2002 03:21:37 -0000 Dear friend, As soldiers trade mortar fire across Kashmir's disputed border and peasants flee the area, British leaders are at odds about whether they should continue to allow the sales of weapons and aircraft to India and Pakistan. Roger Berry, the chairman of the Commons committees investigating arms exports, has said that the conflict between the two countries was "as clear a case you could get" for an arms ban. But Jack Straw continues to justify the sale to India of 66 Hawk aircraft -- which can be used to train soldiers for nuclear bombing raids -- on the basis of "British commercial interests." It's time to embrace a policy of common sense: Britain will not aid and abet this war mongering; "commercial interests" do not take precedence over the lives of thousands of Kashmiris and millions of Indians and Pakistanis. As long as British arms make their way into the arsenals of these nuclear rivals, attempts to broker peace are hypocritical. As the Guardian points out, the UK would be "making peace in conflicts which our own arms exports may have helped to exacerbate." Given the rift in the national leadership, we have a real opportunity to make a difference if we act quickly. Please contact your MP and ask him/her to support an immediate weapons embargo on India and Pakistan and to make your concerns known to Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. You can do this at: http://www.faxyourmp.com If that doesn't work, you can look up the relevant contact information at: http://www.locata.co.uk/commons/ You can also contact Jack Straw directly: Fax: 020 7272 2144 Mail: House of Commons, London SW1A OAA Email: strawj@parliament.uk Patricia Hewitt, Dept Trade and Industry, can be reached at: Fax: 020 7215 5468 Mail: House of Commons, London SW1A OAA Email: npst.hewitt@dti.gsi.gov.uk Even a short message is better than none at all. And the more you communicate in your own words, the more attention will be paid to your call to action. In your message, you may want to highlight some of the following talking points: * The British government is hardly a passive bystander in the arms trade. To the contrary, as author Arundhati Roy put it: "Tony Blair's 'peace' mission a few months ago was actually a business trip to discuss a one billion pound deal . . . to sell Hawk fighter-bombers to India. Roughly, for the price of a single Hawk bomber, the government could provide 1.5 million people with clean drinking water for life." * By most estimates, a nuclear exchange between the two countries would leave 12 million dead and over 7 million seriously wounded. Britain must do everything in its power to restrain the two countries from such violence; an arms embargo would emphasize that the nation is serious in its demand for a peaceful resolution. * Even if a nuclear attack doesn't occur, a conventional war would still devastate Kashmir and result in the deaths of thousands of innocent non-combatants. In these deaths, the UK would be especially culpable, since some are likely to be inflicted with British-made weaponry. * According to scotsman.com, the military firm BAe has sold fighter jets to India and is also currently training Pakistani troops in air combat. Providing such aid to both sides can only increase the damage that will occur if war breaks out. * In 2001, the combined military expenditure of India and Pakistan was 18 billion dollars. Yet over 40% of their populations -- 450 million people -- live below the poverty line. Britain shouldn't encourage this irresponsible spending behavior. Once you've taken action, please let us know at: http://www.9-11peace.org/embargo.php3 Keeping a good count will help us enhance this lobbying effort. You can also sign up there to receive future email alerts on this and other peace-related topics. And please encourage your friends and colleagues to do the same by forwarding this email to them. Thank you for your help. Together, we can ensure that Britain stops fanning the flames of South Asian conflict. Sincerely, --Eli Pariser 9-11Peace Campaign MoveOn.org Thursday, June 6, 2002 P.S. If you'd like to make even more of an impact, consider attending this event on Saturday at 10 Downing St: South Asia Solidarity Group: "No War in South Asia!" "Stop British Arms Sales to India and Pakistan!" "Vajpayee and Musharraf Must Negotiate!" Mass Protest outside Downing Street and Human Chain Against War and Communalism Saturday 8 June 11.30am to 2.00pm Contact by telephone at 020 7267 0923 or by email at southasia@hotmail.com for more information. --------------------------------------------------------- This is a message from the 9-11peace campaign of MoveOn.org If you wish to remove yourself from this list, please visit our subscription management page at: http://www.moveon.org/subscrip/i.html?id=558-948463-Zl%2B84GRCw1UOx3%2BGsVgVRg ***************************************************************** 45 Nuclear Weapons and Media Fog Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 12:54:09 -0500 (CDT) NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND MEDIA FOG By Norman Solomon / Creators Syndicate American media outlets roused themselves from outright denial early this month, spurred by belated warnings from top U.S. officials that a nuclear war between India and Pakistan would kill millions of people. The tone of news coverage shifted toward alarm. Meanwhile, atomic history remained largely sanitized. "Even one military move by either of these nuclear-armed neighbors," USA Today's front page reported in big type, "could set off an unstoppable chain reaction that could lead to the holocaust the world has feared since the atomic bomb was developed." The June 10 edition of Newsweek includes a George Will column with a chilling present-day reference to the Cuban Missile Crisis: "The world may be closer to a nuclear war than it was at any time during the Cold War -- even October 1962." Yet when it comes to nuclear weapons, the mainstream American press has scant emotional range or professional zeal to scrutinize the progression of atomic perils. From the start of the nuclear era, each man in the Oval Office has carefully attended to public relations, with major media rarely questioning the proclaimed humanitarian goals. Making an announcement on Aug. 6, 1945, President Harry Truman did his best to engage in deception. "The world will note that the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base," he said. "That was because we wished in this first attack to avoid, insofar as possible, the killing of civilians." But civilians populated the city of Hiroshima -- as well as Nagasaki, where an A-bomb struck three days later. Hundreds of thousands died as a result of the atomic bombings. American military strategists were eager "to use the bomb first where its effects would be not only politically effective but technically measurable," Manhattan Project physicist David H. Frisch recalled. For U.S. media, the atomic bombings of the two Japanese cities have been pretty much sacrosanct. So, in 1994, a national uproar broke out when the Smithsonian Institution made plans for an exhibit marking the 50th anniversary. Much of the punditocracy was fit to be tied. "In the context of the time ... the bombing made a great deal of sense," Cokie Roberts said on network television -- and, she added, raising critical questions a half-century later "makes no sense at all." On the same ABC telecast, George Will sputtered: "It's just ghastly when an institution such as the Smithsonian casts doubt on the great leadership we were blessed with in the Second World War." Columnist Charles Krauthammer, denouncing "the forces of political correctness," wrote that the factual display on the museum's drawing board "promises to be an embarrassing amalgam of revisionist hand-wringing and guilt." Such intense media salvos caused the Smithsonian to cave in rather than proceed with a forthright historical exhibition. Even five decades later, a clear look at the atomic bombings was unacceptable. This summer, as the leaders of Pakistan and India ponder the nuclear-weapons option, they could echo the punditry. After all, "in the context of the time," they might conclude, an atomic bombing makes "a great deal of sense," without need to question their "great leadership" or engage in "hand-wringing and guilt." Back in 1983, a statement by U.S. Catholic Bishops perceptively called for a "climate of opinion which will make it possible for our country to express profound sorrow over the atomic bombing in 1945. Without that sorrow, there is no possibility of finding a way to repudiate future use of nuclear weapons." But American officials and leading journalists continue to be highly selective with their repudiations. In medialand, a red-white-and-blue nuclear warhead is not really a "weapon of mass destruction." Three months ago, the U.S. government's new Nuclear Posture Review caused a nearly incredulous response from Pervez Hoodbhoy, a peace advocate who is a professor of physics at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad: "Why should every country of the world not develop nuclear weapons now that America may nuke anyone at any time? The Bush administration has announced that it views nuclear weapons as instruments for fighting wars, not merely as the weapons of last resort. Resurgent American militarism is destroying every arms control measure everywhere. Those of us in Pakistan and India who have long fought against nuclearization of the subcontinent have been temporarily rendered speechless." What goes around has a tendency to come around. Washington's policymakers keep fortifying the U.S. nuclear arsenal with abandon while brandishing it against many other countries -- declaring, in effect, "do as we say, not as we do." But sooner or later, such declarations are not very convincing. ___________________________________________ Norman Solomon is co-author of "Killing Our Own: The Disaster of America's Experience with Atomic Radiation" (Delacorte Press, 1982). The entire book is posted online at: www.ratical.org/radiation/KillingOurOwn/ ***************************************************************** 46 FCNL: Legislative Action Message (6/6/02) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 13:21:30 -0500 (CDT) FCNL LEGISLATIVE ACTION MESSAGE - 6/6/02 The following action items from the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) focus on federal policy issues currently before Congress or the Administration. TOPIC: FUNDING FOR NEW NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND MISSILE DEFENSE CONTINUE TO OPPOSE FUNDING FOR NEW NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND MISSILE DEFENSE: The Senate Armed Services Committee completed its FY2003 Defense Authorization Bill on May 10. Timely intervention by constituents encouraged the committee to alter its nuclear policy. This bill strips all funding for the development of a new "useable" nuclear weapon, the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetratror (RNEP), and authorizes $812 million less than the Bush administration requested for a missile shield. The Senate floor debate on this issue has been delayed, but the Senate may finally bring the bill to the floor the week of June 10 or the week of June 17. It is still vitally important that Senators hear a clear message from their constituents: OPPOSE ANY AMENDMENT THAT SEEKS TO RESTORE FUNDING FOR A NEW NUCLEAR WEAPON OR FOR A MISSILE SHIELD. ACTION: Contact your senators. Urge them to vote against any amendments that seek to restore funding for the RNEP or for so- called missile defense. USE FCNL'S WEB SITE TO MAKE LETTER-WRITING EASIER: Start with the sample letter posted in our Legislative Action Center, personalize the language, then send your message as an email or fax directly from our site. You can also print it out and mail it. To view a sample letter to your senators, click on the link below, then enter your zip code and click in the box. Here is the link: BACKGROUND: The President's budget requested $7.6 billion for missile defense. This includes money for space-based missiles and lasers as well as more localized ground and sea-based missiles. The Senate Armed Services Committee found that some of these programs were inadequately justified and reduced the total amount to $6.8 billion. The Bush administration also requested $15.5 million to begin designing the RNEP, the so-called "bunker buster". The proposed RNEP is a nuclear bomb that, according to theory, would destroy hard and deeply buried targets such as underground bunkers. Some members of the Administration see military uses for such a weapon. Were this weapon available, it might be used in a nuclear first strike by the U.S., possibly against non-nuclear states. Work on the RNEP would also end the long-standing U.S. policy against the development of new nuclear weapons. The committee removed all funding for the RNEP and reallocated the money to the development of better radiation detectors, which would help prevent a terrorist group from smuggling a nuclear weapon into the country. The committee's work offers the best opportunity to block funding for these weapons. The House has already passed a military authorization bill that preserves full funding for both missile defense and the RNEP. Therefore, if the Senate bill is amended on the floor to restore funding, it is highly unlikely that the funding will be removed in the ensuing Senate-House conference. On the other hand, if the Senate bill passes unamended, there is a reasonable possibility that the final bill will arrive on the President's desk without funding for these programs. These issues are even more important in the light of recent arms control developments. The recent treaty with Russia, though disappointingly weak, could be a positive step, but both the treaty and the recent Nuclear Posture Review send disturbing signals about the administration's lack of commitment to real reductions in nuclear arms. It is important to send a message to the Bush administration, as well as to other nuclear powers, that there is no place for nuclear weapons in today's world. The United States must take the lead in eliminating all weapons of mass destruction. CONTACTING LEGISLATORS Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 Sen. ________ U.S. Senate Washington, DC 20510 Rep. ________ U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 Information on your members is available on FCNL's web site: http://capwiz.com/fconl/dbq/officials/directory/directory.dbq?command=congdi r CONTACTING THE ADMINISTRATION White House Comment Desk: 202-456-1111 FAX: 202-456-2461 E-MAIL: president@whitehouse.gov WEB PAGE: http://www.whitehouse.gov President George W. Bush The White House Washington, DC 20500 ----------------------------------------------------------------- This message supplements other FCNL materials and does not reflect FCNL's complete policy position on any issue. For further information, please contact FCNL. Mail: 245 Second Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-5795 Email: fcnl@fcnl.org Phone: (202) 547-6000 Toll Free: (800) 630-1330 Fax: (202) 547-6019 Web: http://www.fcnl.org Your contributions sustain our Quaker witness in Washington. We welcome your gifts to FCNL, or, if you need a tax deduction, to the FCNL Education Fund. You can use your credit card to donate money securely to FCNL through a special page on FCNL's web site http://www.fcnl.org/suprt/indx.htm FCNL also accepts credit card donations over the phone. For more information about donating, please contact the Development Team directly at development@fcnl.org. Thank you. ----------------------------------------------------------------- This message may be found regularly on FCNL's web site http://www.fcnl.org where a printer-friendly version is available and on PeaceNet in the fcnl.updates conference. This message is distributed regularly via the fcnl-news mailing list. To subscribe to this list, please visit FCNL's web site at http://www.fcnl.org/listserv/quaker_issues.php. Alternatively, you can send an e-mail message to majordomo@his.com. Leave the subject line blank. The message should read "subscribe fcnl-news." Please Note: Make sure that you are sending this message from the e-mail address to which you would like fcnl-news materials to be sent. If you currently receive this message via the fcnl-news mailing list and are no longer interested in receiving messages from this list, send an e-mail message to majordomo@his.com. The message should read "unsubscribe fcnl-news." ----------------------------------------------------------------- We seek a world free of war and the threat of war We seek a society with equity and justice for all We seek a community where every person's potential may be fulfilled We seek an earth restored... ***************************************************************** 47 U.S., NATO Discuss Nuclear Threats /Thu Jun 6, 9:52 AM ET/ /By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer/ BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) - The United States and its NATO allies agreed Thursday that links between international terrorists and nations that illicitly develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons pose an urgent threat, especially to civilians, a senior U.S. official said. The official, who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity, said NATO defense ministers agreed to put new emphasis on improving their ability to detect, prevent and respond to attacks by weapons of mass destruction ? particularly biological, nuclear and radiological. The agreement was part of a broader discussion, led by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, of ways the North Atlantic Treaty Organization can modernize its command structure and focus member countries' spending on high-priority defense items as the alliance prepares to add new members. The U.S. official said the ministers discussed a concern that is at the top of Rumsfeld's list of priorities ? the nexus between terrorism and nations like Iraq that could provide terrorists with weapons of mass destruction. Other countries mentioned in this context were Iran, North Korea, Syria, Libya and Cuba, the official said. There was no discussion of whether to undertake a pre-emptive attack on Iraq or other countries, the official said. On Wednesday, Rumsfeld and his British counterpart singled out Iraq as a growing threat to the West. "We know that Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq has had a sizable appetite for weapons of mass destruction," and it is finding ways to acquire their ingredients, Rumsfeld said Wednesday. "We know the borders into that country are quite porous," he added, allowing Iraq to import technologies useful for both civilian and military industries "as well as illicit materials that are helpful in their programs for weapons of mass destruction." "There is not a doubt in the world that with every month that goes by, their programs mature," he said in London before flying to Brussels for meetings Thursday and Friday with NATO allies. Iraq denies it possesses or is developing weapons of mass destruction, but it has refused to allow the international inspections that it accepted as a condition of ending the 1991 Gulf War. Rumsfeld would not discuss the possibility of U.S. military action to topple Saddam, saying that was a matter for President Bush to decide. He spoke at a joint news conference with British Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon after meetings to discuss Iraq and other issues. The two defense chiefs flew together to Brussels, where Iraq is expected to be a topic of discussion in NATO meetings Thursday, including the first-ever session of the NATO-Russia Council. After morning NATO meetings, Rumsfeld held a one-on-one session with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Ivanov. It originally was to last 40 minutes, to be followed by a joint news conference. But the session with reporters was scratched, and aides said the two officials planned to hold a second session Thursday evening after NATO's afternoon conference was over. Aides offered no word on what Rumsfeld and Ivanov talked about or why a second session was needed. Rumsfeld and Hoon both expressed their governments' hope for a lowering of tensions between nuclear rivals India and Pakistan. Rumsfeld's stop in London was the first on a 10-day journey that is scheduled to take him to the Indian and Pakistani capitals next week. For months the Bush administration has been publicly making the case for strong action ? possibly by military means ? against Iraq, but allied nations have been slow to offer support. In Washington on Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota said his fellow Democrats expressed support for a push to topple Saddam. "The question is when and how and under what circumstances," Daschle told reporters. Hoon said the Iraqi military threat has increased in recent weeks. Asked in a later interview to elaborate, Hoon said Iraq's air defenses are more aggressively trying to shoot down the U.S. and British pilots who regularly fly combat air patrols over northern and southern Iraq. He was alluding to the fact that U.S. and British pilots have reported a series of attacks in recent week by Iraqi anti-aircraft artillery and surface-to-air missiles. The allied planes have responded by bombing various elements of Iraq's integrated air defense system. Since the start of U.S. and British enforcement of the "no fly" zones more than a decade ago, Iraq has considered them a violation of its sovereignty and has vowed to shoot down pilots. Hoon said that immediately after the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States, there was a marked decline in Iraqi targeting of allied pilots enforcing the "no fly" zones south and north of Baghdad. "We judged that the regime in Iraq seemed to have got the message that military action would follow if they were not very careful," Hoon said in an interview with reporters accompanying him and Rumsfeld aboard an Air Force jet en route from London to Brussels. The recent Iraqi aggressiveness would suggest a new, more worrisome Iraqi attitude, Hoon said. "Clearly they are feeling a little more confident than they have in the recent past," he said. Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 48 Kiss My Nuclear Arsenal Much macho swagger as India and Pakistan threaten annihilation, and the U.S. feels totally left out * By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist Wednesday, June 5, 2002 *A*nd then PM Vajpayee snickered at President Musharraf and President Musharraf scowled at PM Vajpayee and both met separately with President Nazarbayev to pule about how there is no way on Vishnu/Allah's shattered green earth either of them will stand down until the other backs off, and no way will they back off until the other stands down and hey if he doesn't like it I've got a freshly armed nuclear warhead with his country's name all over it so there. Just another brink of another potential nuclear holocaust wrought by another pair of politically unkempt and piously volatile countries that really really hate each other due to very complicated and long-standing issues regarding land and religion and culture and power and ego and who has the cooler formal robes and smarmier dignitaries and more pious frowns. And where's the U.S.? Not even invited to throw our weight around, ram our political agenda into the mix. And boy are we steamed. Of course we mean India and Pakistan, although maybe you thought we meant the U.S. and Egypt or the U.S. and Iraq or the U.S. and any number of recently named newly minted enemies we just so happen to be pointing major nuclear weaponry toward at this very moment shhh, but no. No, it's another pair of bitter warring nations full of enmity and vanity we don't even have major multibillion-dollar economic or oil pipeline interests in. No wonder Bush is so flustered and baffled and resentful and Rumsfeld now has to learn that Kashmir doesn't mean a really soft sweater. Two nations who seem more than willing to obliterate each other over largely trivial reasons, and if you're right this second saying hey buddy their reasons are far from trivial I say wrong, they're threatening more than just war, they're waving around nuclear arsenals like big macho sticks and promising they won't ever use them no really we promise just don't mess with us or we just might, even though we won't. They're threatening human annihilation and massive karmic destruction and violent fatuity on a scale many of us thought had perhaps receded into history once and for all. After all, as the old adage goes, no one wins a nuclear war. But now here it is again, threatening to devolve the planet and regress the human species a few hundred millennia and once and for all prove that Muslims are just as ignorant as Hindus who are just as ignorant as Christians who are just as ignorant as the fill-in-the-blank. These are nuclear warheads. Any reason they can possibly muster is, wholly and inarguably, trivial. Of course the superpowers are up in arms and Bush is flustered and feeling rather impotent as in rush China and Russia and the U.S. to try and calm things down, and please stop giggling at the painful irony of those Three War-Happy Stooges playing nuclear peacekeeper. But it is rather funny. It is rather painfully and bitterly ironic. Let us now recall how George "Nukuler" Bush and Vladimir "Plutonium Leak" Putin just recently agreed to temporarily unplug a few hundred long-range nukes and promised not to use them against each other unless they really really need to, as meanwhile Cheney and the flying monkeys at the Pentagon quietly work to crank up our arsenal of short-range nuclear warheads aimed at Iran and North Korea and Libya but for some reason not Florida. And now here we are, along with fuzzywarm pacifist Russia, trying to assuage India and Pakistan, stomping in with our jackboots of cultural ignorance and political strong-arming, trying to prevent them from escalating their ongoing battles into something far, far worse, like we know better. Here we are, acting like we are really just completely horrified and morally shocked that anyone would actually consider using nuclear missiles besides us in this day and age. Isn't that cute? Doesn't it make you proud? Ah, blatant hypocrisy. It's an American political institution. Of course neither India nor Pakistan is going to launch a full-scale nuclear strike. Of course it's all macho posturing and swaggering cold-war maneuvering, which is why it's not splashed in 200-point bold on the front page of the paper every day and headlines aren't screaming from every media orifice and no one's really paying all that much attention. They wouldn't really do it, would they? Of course they wouldn't. Probably. What's on ESPN? Besides, India and Pakistan have warred before, ever since those pesky Brits cleaved colonial India into messy Islamic and Hindu states, and have done so sans much American intervention or concern. Really, what's a little deeply complicated and tribally intricate cultural war between countries with histories and belief systems we don't fully or even partially understand, battle lines drawn down the middle of Kashmir, one of the more beautiful places on the planet? Happens all the time. Except this time, they have nukes. They have serious issues. Which explains the U.S. response, shot through, it seems, with pangs of frustration and ego and a decided lack of our usual power to let it be known who the real obliteration-ready nuclear power is on this planet. This is what it feels like. How dare these political brats threaten nuclear war without us. How dare they ignore our indignant demands for them to stand down. After all, we veritably invented violent egomaniacal macho end-game stratagems in the name of political and cultural bile under the threat of total human obliteration. Darn right we did. Darn nuclear punks. Don't they see we've got a hollow war-that's-not-really-war to wage over oil and money and future presidential elections over here? We don't have time for this serious deeply ingrained cultural messiness involving genuine, passionately felt issues. How dare they show us up, steal our spotlight, ignore us completely. What do they think this is, a game? Thoughts for the author? Email him . /Mark Morford's Notes & Errata column appears every Wednesday and Friday on SF Gate, unless it appears on Tuesdays and Thursdays, which it never does. He also writes the Morning Fix, a deeply skewed thrice-weekly email column and newsletter. Subscribe at sfgate.com/newsletters// ©2002 SF Gate ***************************************************************** 49 Bush Seeks Homeland Security Dept. Las Vegas SUN June 06, 2002 WASHINGTON- In the aftermath of intelligence lapses, President Bush proposed creation Thursday of a Cabinet post for homeland security that would swallow up scores of federal agencies - including customs, immigration, the Secret Service and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Bush's move came as Congress intensified investigations into whether the administration could have done more to prevent the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. "The purpose is to protect the homeland from terror," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said. He said Bush is pleased with stopgap reforms enacted since Sept. 11 but, "We can and will do more." The proposal, which Fleischer called the biggest government restructuring plan since 1947, will be announced by Bush in a Thursday night address from the White House. Bush aides asked television networks to broadcast the speech. Requiring congressional approval, the proposal is part of a stepped-up effort to shield Bush from criticism that his administration missed terrorism warning signs prior to Sept. 11. Not coincidentally, FBI Director Robert Mueller testified before Congress Thursday about the agency's failure to anticipate the terror attacks. Mueller recently announced a major restructuring of the FBI. On Capitol Hill, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, D-Mo., welcomed the proposal as overdue, but were already talking about making changes. And both Democrats said it does nothing to negate their calls for an independent inquiry into what went wrong before Sept. 11. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said he wasn't sure an internal reorganization is needed. "The question is whether shifting the deck chairs on the Titanic is the way to go," he said. Former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge is the current homeland security adviser, and is virtually certain to be Bush's choice to head the Cabinet department, aides said. Congress has been pushing a reluctant Bush to elevate the office to Cabinet status because lawmakers would have oversight authority over the new agency, which Bush wants to call the Department of Homeland Security. As an adviser, Ridge has been able to avoid formal testimony before Congress. With pressure mounting, the White House signaled this spring that it would make the domestic security office a Cabinet agency. Ridge had planned to unveil his strategy in the fall, but the schedule was pushed up in part to counter the congressional hearings, one senior White House official said. Bush will ask Congress to approve his plan by year's end, knowing the proposal is likely to spark a turf war among agencies heads and lawmakers who oversee them. "Leaders asked the country to do something big," Fleischer said. "The president is now asking Congress to do something big to prevent terrorism." Fleischer said the plan will not cost more money; it will shuffle current operations within the government without expanding the bureaucracy. The new Department of Homeland Security would have four divisions: -Border transportation and security, which would take over the Immigration and Naturalization Service from the Department of Justice, the Customs Service from Treasury and the Coast Guard from the Department of Transportation. -Emergency preparedness and response, which would include FEMA, now an independent agency. -Chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear countermeasures, which would take over the Lawrence Livermore National Lab in Livermore, Calif. The Departments of Health and Human Services and Agriculture would lose divisions to this office. -Information analysis and infrastructure protection, which would draw from several agencies including the FBI. The FBI's national infrastructure protection program will be part of the division. The Secret Service, which specializes in threat assessments, would be a separate entity within the new department. Fleischer said the FBI and CIA would remain independent agencies, not seeing major changes under the proposal. White House officials privately conceded they face a tough sell in the turf-conscious Congress, where 88 committees and subcommittees have power over the affected agencies. A senior White House official said the new department would likely get its own building, though some of its agencies might continue working out of their current structures. Fleischer said "recent noise" about counterterrorism failures at the FBI and CIA did not precipitate the president's plan. But, the spokesman added, "There is the recognition that we still need to keep the FBI and CIA working closely together and this new entity will be one place where information will get pulled together." Ridge, White House congressional liaison Nicholas Calio and White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card have consulting members of Congress. "The initial reaction from the Hill has been good but reorganizing the government has never been easy; it involves turf," Fleischer said. Bush, who had expressed support for the FBI and CIA in the early days of the controversy, acknowledged for the first time this week that the agencies failed to communicate adequately. But he said there was no evidence that better communication could have prevented the attacks. Mueller conceded for the first time recently that a better analysis of warning signs might have prevented the attacks. Ridge has been working on a restructuring proposal since his appointment last fall - meeting heavy resistance from law enforcement and intelligence bureaucracies. Associated Press writer Sandra Sobieraj contributed All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 50 Subcritical nuclear weapons test rescheduled Thursday, June 06, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal REVIEW-JOURNAL Government scientists plan to conduct a subcritical nuclear weapons experiment Friday at the Nevada Test Site to increase their understanding of plutonium in the nation's stockpile. A statement from the National Nuclear Security Administration's North Las Vegas office said Oboe 9 will be conducted by scientists from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. Designed to stop short of erupting into a nuclear chain reaction, the subcritical experiment will be the United States' 17th since the program was launched July 2, 1997. The experiment had been planned for detonation Wednesday and then again today, but was rescheduled while scientists corrected a technical problem, an administration spokesman said. Subcritical experiments are intended to give scientists information about the aging nuclear stockpile in the absence of full-scale nuclear tests, which the United States put on hold indefinitely in 1992. The experiments in a below-ground complex, 85 miles northwest of Las Vegas, allow scientists to study how materials, such as plutonium, blow apart when detonated. The most recent U.S. subcritical experiment, Vito, was conducted successfully at the test site on Feb. 14. The most recent subcritical experiment in the Oboe series was Dec. 13. The National Nuclear Security Administration is a branch of the Energy Department. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 51 Fears spread that other Asian nations will seek nuclear arms IHT: Michael Richardson International Herald Tribune Thursday, June 6, 2002 SINGAPORE Despite assurances from India and Pakistan that their dispute over Kashmir will not escalate into nuclear war, many officials in Asia and the West are worried that a nuclear exchange could prompt other countries to develop such weapons, especially in Asia, where national rivalries are unfettered by regional arms control arrangements. "The mere fact of the first use of nuclear weapons since Hiroshima and Nagasaki could have the effect of lowering the threshold for nuclear engagements in the future," said Robert Einhorn, a former U.S. assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation. "That would be a very damaging precedent." The Pentagon has estimated that between 9 million and 12 million people would die in a "worst-case" nuclear war between India and Pakistan and that between 2 million and 6 million would be injured in the short term. Einhorn, now a senior adviser on security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said in an interview that there were many imponderables if a conventional war between India and Pakistan became a nuclear conflict. Such questions include the number of nuclear weapons that each side would be able to explode in the other's territory and whether all would burst on the ground, sending up clouds of radioactive fallout that would contaminate crops and water supplies and cause additional deaths and birth defects. Because of the greater fallout of radioactive poisons in such ground-burst nuclear explosions, they would probably produce several million more casualties than if nuclear weapons were detonated in the air. That would cause more damage to structures, analysts said. Jane's Strategic Weapons Systems estimates that India has between 50 and 150 nuclear weapons and Pakistan between 25 and 50. U.S. defense officials said that the Indian nuclear weapons were estimated to be in the low 10-kiloton range while Pakistan's were in the 20-kiloton range. The atomic bomb that devastated Hiroshima in 1945 was about 14 kilotons, with each kiloton equal to 1,000 pounds of TNT. Einhorn said that if India and Pakistan had a nuclear exchange, the sheer horror might well shock other nations into taking more effective action to stem the spread of weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them, especially on ballistic missiles. "But if it looked as if the world had lived through a nuclear exchange and it wasn't as horrific as people thought, I think that could have very dangerous consequences because people could figure: 'Well, these are weapons like other weapons and we can use them as instruments of war.'" Einhorn was speaking on the sidelines of a meeting in Singapore of defense ministers, other security officials, lawmakers and strategic analysts from the United States and more than 20 other countries, mainly Asian. The conference ended Sunday with an agreement among the ministers to meet again next year. Officials and analysts warned in the public sessions of the meeting that Asia was poised between improved arms control and a lowering of tensions, and a widening race to develop nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction. China is known to have nuclear weapons, while North Korea is suspected of having the material to make them if it has not already done so. Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are among the Asian countries considered able to build nuclear weapons quite quickly if they decided to do so. In a move that alarmed Japan's neighbors, the chief secretary of the Japanese cabinet, Yasuo Fukuda, said this month that Tokyo could review its ban on nuclear arms. Ichiro Ozawa, leader of Japan's second-biggest opposition party, drew an angry response from Beijing in April when he said that Japan could easily make nuclear weapons and surpass China's military might. Asia is now at risk of major military conflict not just between India and Pakistan, but between China and the United States over Taiwan and between North and South Korea, said Paul Dibb, a former senior Australian defense official who now heads the Strategic and Defense Studies Center at the Australian National University in Canberra. "Moreover, Asia is a part of the world where the proliferation of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles is much in evidence," he said. "Yet, we have no regional arms-control agreements or understandings on basic transparency and confidence-building measures." Major General Kim Kook Hun, director of the arms control bureau in South Korea's Defense Ministry, said that the most worrying security issue in Asia was that some countries were seeking to develop weapons of mass destruction. He said that of 17 countries with nuclear weapons or weapon programs, seven were in the Asia/Pacific region; of the 28 with missile programs, 16 were in the region; of the 16 with chemical weapons programs, 10 were in the region, and of the 13 with biological weapons programs, eight were in the region. "More than 50 percent of potential proliferators are in the Asia/Pacific region," Kim said. "Furthermore, we cannot rule out the possibility of weapons of mass destruction and related technologies and equipment falling into the possession of terrorist organizations." He did not cite the sources of his information about proliferation in Asia or name the countries allegedly involved. But Kim and others at the meeting said that North Korea was a leading offender and a major source of concern. "They have dangerous technologies in almost every category you can imagine," said Paul Wolfowitz, U.S. deputy secretary of defense. "They seem to show willingness to sell anything to anybody who can pay them enough. So it is a source of great concern." Copyright © 2002 the International Herald Tribune All ***************************************************************** 52 Bush urges senators to ratify nuclear treaty Orange County Register - Top News Lawmakers want assurance that Russia can safely store disarmed warheads. June 6, 2002 By SCOTT LINDLAW The Associated Press WASHINGTON – President Bush summoned lawmakers Wednesday to press for Senate approval this year of the nuclear arms reduction treaty that he and Russian President Vladimir Putin signed last month. But the senators expressed concern that Russia doesn't have the money to safely store warheads deactivated under the treaty. Bush called to the White House Sens. Joe Biden, D-Del., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Richard Lugar, R-Ind., a senior member of the panel, to discuss the new treaty. The president told them he has a "hope and expectation" the Senate will ratify the treaty "before this Congress was over," Biden said. Congressional leaders have set an Oct. 4 target date for adjournment, but the session is almost certain to last longer. Bush and Putin signed the pact May 23 during Bush's trip to Russia. It calls for the United States and Russia to slash their deployed strategic nuclear arsenals by two-thirds over the next decade, from about 6,000 warheads each to 1,700-2,200 warheads each. Both senators said they were concerned about how Russia will store nuclear material from decommissioned warheads, and whether the material can be kept out of terrorists' hands without additional U.S. financial assistance. The treaty does not address what should be done with warheads taken out of service. U.S. law requires the government to certify that Russia is committed to full compliance with existing treaties before new initiatives can be started or additional money provided for existing programs to reduce the threat of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. In April, the administration said it will hold back on some disarmament projects with Russia because of concerns over Moscow's compliance with chemical and biological weapons treaties. "At the very moment we need the money to destroy the weapons, the money has stopped, because the administration has not certified," as the U.S. government had done for the last nine years, Lugar said. Bush indicated he "will be thinking about it," Lugar said. The Orange County Register ***************************************************************** 53 Rumsfeld Cautions Nuclear Foes (washingtonpost.com) Washington Post Foreign Service Thursday, June 6, 2002; Page A20 LONDON, June 5 -- Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said today he will try to persuade the leaders of India and Pakistan to step back from the brink of war by reminding them that nuclear weapons are "distinctively different" from any other tool of war. With the two South Asian nuclear powers threatening all-out conflict over the disputed territory of Kashmir, Rumsfeld told reporters here that he expects to arrive in the region next week with a message about the history of the nuclear age. "We have, what has it been, 55-57 years since nuclear weapons have been fired in anger," the secretary said. "That is an impressive accomplishment on the part of humanity, I would say. I don't know of any other time in history where there has been a significant weapon that has not been used for that long a period." The reason for that, he said, is that leaders of nuclear states have recognized that "these are not just larger weapons. They are distinctively different weapons, and war being what it can be, it can be unpredictable." The defense secretary stopped in London today on the first leg of an expected 10-day tour of Europe, the Persian Gulf and South Asia. He met in the morning with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Defense Minister Geoffrey Hoon, and then headed to Brussels for a regular meeting of defense ministers of the 19 countries in the NATO alliance. From Brussels, Rumsfeld is scheduled to head to Germany to visit the crews of European AWACS surveillance planes that were sent to the United States after the Sept. 11 attacks to help with security patrols. He is then to visit Talinn, the capital of the former Soviet republic of Estonia, to meet with defense ministers from Nordic and Baltic nations. Like other small nations along the Russian border, Estonia would like to become a member of the European Union and NATO, and thus gain collective economic and military clout. Rumsfeld and his British hosts also talked about Iraq and the Bush administration's hopes that President Saddam Hussein will be removed from office. But the key topic today was the tense situation along the Line of Control that divides Indian and Pakistani troops in Kashmir. "There is no question that when you have two nations that have nuclear weapons and the situation is as it is between India and Pakistan, it is a dangerous situation," Rumsfeld said. In addition to the risk to the people of the two nations involved, Rumsfeld said, the tension between India and Pakistan could also harm the war on terror. "Pakistan has been enormously helpful in the war on terrorism, being a neighbor of Afghanistan, and [due to] our being able to cooperate so fully with the Pakistani government," the defense secretary said. "To the extent that tension on the [Indian-Pakistani] border continues to go up, at some point those troops that are along the Afghan border are going to be moved," he said. "Fortunately thus far only very small elements have been moved. So it has not had a notably harmful effect thus far. To the extent it goes on much longer it could, and that would be most unfortunate." At the NATO meeting, Rumsfeld said, he expects to find himself again in the position of exhorting U.S. allies to spend more on defense. "I hate to fuss at folks, I really do," he said. "But we live in a dangerous and untidy world. The militaries of the NATO nations clearly have to recognize that that calls for several things. It calls in some cases for a number of countries to increase their defense budgets and see that they are putting the resources in that will enable NATO to contribute to peace and stability in the period ahead." © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 54 U.S nuclear expert in Kashmir entourage CNN.com - - June 6, 2002 BRUSSELS, Belgium (CNN) -- A senior military official with detailed knowledge of India and Pakistan's nuclear weapons will accompany U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld during his meetings with the two countries' heads of state next week, a U.S. official told CNN Thursday. Rumsfeld is in Brussels Thursday meeting with NATO allies ahead of his visit next week to India and Pakistan in an attempt to diffuse tensions between the two nuclear neighbors. Adm. James Ellis, Commander in Chief of the U.S. Strategic Command, will sit in on Rumsfeld's meetings with Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf. Ellis is expected to warn both India and Pakistan that they cannot conduct a limited conflict without risking a full-scale nuclear exchange, sources told CNN. As head of strategic command, Ellis is the senior U.S. military official with detailed operational knowledge of U.S. and foreign nuclear weapons. Ahead of Rumsfeld's visit, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage met with Pakistani officials in Islamabad Thursday and is scheduled to visit India on Friday. The nuclear rivals have massed about a million troops along Kashmir's Line of Control raising international fears of a possible nuclear war developing from the dispute over Kashmir, which already has sparked two wars between Pakistan and India. ***************************************************************** 55 A-bomb survivors fear new Hiroshima Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Jonathan Watts in Tokyo Thursday June 6, 2002 The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk] Survivors of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs expressed a growing sense of foreboding yesterday about the increasing tension between the nuclear-armed India and Pakistan. Events on the subcontinent dominated the annual meeting of Japan's biggest group of hibakusha , the Japan Confederation of A-bomb Sufferers: elderly survivors dedicated to thwarting any recurrence of the August 1945 bombing. "We are terrified at the growing risk of nuclear war between India and Pakistan," said Satoru Konishi, one of the 120 people at the gathering. "I can't stress strongly enough how terrible the implications are of what they are doing. If only they knew what we went through." Mr Konishi was 16 when the US bomber Enola Gay dropped the "Little Boy" bomb on Hiroshima, killing more than 140,000 people, mostly by radiation. Even after the mushroom cloud lifted, some survivors recall walking around the city, with their skin dripping like wax, among blackened corpses and rivers full of bodies. "Both countries don't understand the real horror of atomic bombs," said Sunao Tsuboi, 77, a Hiroshima native and joint chairman of the group meeting in Tokyo yesterday. Military analysts believe India and Pakistan have the technology and the plutonium to make warheads similar to the 4.3 tonne Little Boy bomb, although the potential loss of life in south Asia would be far greater, because of the population density. A Princeton University study says that a bomb exploded over each of the 10 main cities would kill or maim 4.4 million. Tokyo expressed its concern to New Delhi and Islamabad last month. The mayor of Hiroshima, Tadatoshi Akiba, has sent a plea for peace to its leaders. "The suffering inflicted on innocent civilians in both countries would be immense, devastating environmental destruction would ensue, and humanity would be thrust closer to the brink of self-obliteration," his message said. The survivors fear that the experiences of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are being forgotten as the number of survivors falls and youngsters grow up unaware of the horrors of nuclear war. "If ordinary people in India and Pakistan knew the truth about nuclear warfare, they would never allow their governments to behave in this way ... Young people cannot imagine what it is like," Mr Konishi said. To the survivors' alarm, Junichiro Koizumi's cabinet has indicated that it may reconsider Tokyo's three non-nuclear principles: never to produce, possess or permit the siting of nuclear weapons in Japan. The cabinet secretary, Yasuo Fukuda, said the policy could be amended if the constitution were revised. Tokyo has denied that a change is planned, but protesters in Hiroshima said such comments were designed to change the public opinion that nuclear weapons are inherently evil. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 56 Scientist 'Melt' Environmental Remediation Efforts* News EarthVision Environmental News / LOS ALAMOS, NM, June 5, 2002 - Using electrical energy, scientists have successfully been able to "melt" contaminated soil buried at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, trapping low-level radionuclides from the soil in a glass-like substance. After the successful demonstration of the Non-Traditional In Situ Vitrification (NTISV) technology at the U.S. Department of Energy's Los Alamos National Laboratory's Material Disposal Area, scientists at the lab are now beginning the hot test coring phase of the project, which is designed to help cleanup a site at the lab that was once a disposal area for an on-site facility used to wash radionuclide-contaminated garments. This new testing phase will be used to demonstrate the applicability to this innovative NTISV technology on other sites. The current phase involves sampling parts of an inactive absorption bed, which was heated in April, 2000, during the project's initial phase, to convert the soil into a glass-like block, a method known as vitrification. The sample has cooled to a temperature close to 100 degrees F, immobilizing and capturing the low-level radionuclides that are present in the soil, according to Los Alamos scientists. Core samples of the vitrified mass will be taken, using a specialized dust-suppression system to protect against potential low-level radiation exposure, and then studied to determine the mineralogical and chemical makeup. The disposal area for the laundering facility that is being tested has three discharge-absorption beds. When in operation, these beds accumulated approximately 40 million gallons of waste over ten years, between 1945 and 1961. Contained in the waste were a variety of inorganic compounds and radionuclides, including americium, plutonium, strontium, tritium and uranium. The specific area that was vitrified measures 20 feet long, 30 feet wide and 22 feet deep. Traditional in situ vitrification technology has been used over the past 20 years to stabilize contaminants in a variety of soil types by melting soil from the top down. Non-traditional in situ vitrification technology differs in that it melts the soil, thereby securing the contaminants and preventing them from leaching into the surrounding environment, from the bottom up. For more information about this and other environmental technology developments at Los Alamos National Laboratory, visit the lab's web site at www.lanl.gov . * ***************************************************************** 57 * Is It OK To Hate Bush? In which the president's carefully orchestrated dumb-guy shtick proves hollow and dubious By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist Friday, June 7, 2002 *O*f course "hate" is too strong a word. You should not hate anyone. Especially not jittery world leaders who are striving to justify war and make it look all fierce and necessary. Look, there they are, trying so hard. Especially Bush. Look at that earnest, constipated, caught-in-the-headlights expression. Trying trying trying. Please do not hate him. GW Bush's image is extremely carefully managed, probably more intensely than any president in recent history. He gives almost zero unscripted talks, expresses minimal extemporaneous thoughts, still mispronounces "nukuler" even when reading from a teleprompter. He is protected from difficult questions, schooled in basic sentence structure, makes sudden political maneuvers to deflect increasingly troubling accusations that his administration had plenty of advance warning of 9/11 and did little to prevent it. And please do not mention his major ties to Enron at this time. Thank you. Bush has undoubtedly been told to try and look less scared and squinty on camera. He makes cute self-deprecating jokes about his horrible command of the English language. Rumor also has it that during a meeting with Brazil's President Cardoso, Bush allegedly interrupted to ask, "Do you have blacks, too ?" Condi Rice, ever the trouper, visibly cringed before quickly informing Dubya that Brazil is indeed home to more blacks than any country outside Africa. White House Press corps coverage? None. Just too embarrassing. This is the leader of the free world. Are you sure you want to know this sort of thing? Besides, Dubya has proven again and again and you read it just about everywhere and the man has it tattooed on his thigh and it veritably oozes from the pores of his happily myopic followers, he is indeed a Very Nice Man with a Very Swell Disposition and Good Christian Manners and gosh darn it, people like him so please quit being so mean. Ashcroft has scowled about it and Rumsfeld has squinted angrily about it and Cheney has shown twitching signs of life about it and it's been made very clear again and again: You are not allowed to openly abhor the president or his decisions because doing so clearly indicates traitorous inclinations and this is wartime which is a Very Difficult Time for Us All. If you insist on calling it wartime, that is. Which of course it's not, given how we've killed untold thousands of barely armed Taliban and untold numbers of innocent Afghan civilians and over a dozen of our own soldiers and even some Canadian troops (whoops) and we have suffered exactly two combat casualties. This is not a war. But you can't really say that either. So let's just go with it, the common wisdom: It is unpatriotic to criticize the president and we need to rally and be strong now, united we stand, especially in our collective misunderstanding of foreign policy and oil stratagems and the deeper root causes of 9/11. Or rather, you can criticize if you like, but Bush's image is now being so carefully controlled you feel a little ashamed and slightly guilty doing so, like that feeling you'd get if you teased, say, a quadriplegic. Or a child. And this is exactly how they want you to feel. It is a bizarre duality, a cleverly wrought irony: Bush is spun so he appears rather plain and simpleminded and not really mentally agile enough to be openly complicit in the coverup-related decisions he's being accused of, a feeling that, aww shucks, he's still just a good ol' daddy's boy from the oilier parts of Texas who don't know no better and how dare you accuse this Very Nice Man of leveraging the horror of 9/11 for political gain. Besides, that's Cheney's job. Yet you can't believe Bush is truly a man of nuanced intelligence because that implies that he probably did know something about the possibility of a terrorist attack and how it could fortify his political career, but you can't call him flagrantly stupid because that's unpatriotic and un-American and embarrassing, and hence you're just left with this feeling of unease and vague despondency about the nation's overall direction and whatever happened to your civil liberties. And then there are people like Lt. Col. Steve Butler of the Air Force who openly bashed the president in print , called him a fool who let 9/11 happen to boost his stagnant presidency and that's very bad indeed, can't be slamming the commander-in-chief when you're in the military, understandably, but it certainly does get you thinking, maybe Bush really is dumb as a post -- but in a rather sharp, deeply sinister way. Better take the Dan Rather approach. There he was, America's anchorman, with the odious Larry King, responding to a phone-in question asking how he, Rather, would advise the president about possibly invading Iraq and Rather replying, well caller, I'd probably say, Mr. President, whatever decision you make in this very difficult matter I will support it because you're the president and I'm a patriot and that's that, and he said it with a straight melodramatic face you immediately wanted to slap. And there it is. Ignorance is bliss. Ignorance is patriotism. We don't want to believe the Bush administration could've done something to prevent the horrors of 9/11, can't imagine Bush would use the tragedy to bolster his re-election hopes while simultaneously pummeling Afghanistan into docility in the name of oil pipelines and his friends in the military-industrial complex. Increasing piles of evidence be damned. It's just too painful. So then, please do not openly hate Mr. Bush or call him names or believe his decisions are all too often terribly detrimental to the progress of the human animal. He is too nice. He is too dumb. He is too nicely dumb, in a really smart way. Clever, isn't it? Aww, shucks. Thoughts for the author? Email him . /Mark Morford's Notes & Errata column appears every Wednesday and Friday on SF Gate, unless it appears on Tuesdays and Thursdays, which it never does. He also writes the Morning Fix, a deeply skewed thrice-weekly email column and newsletter. Subscribe at sfgate.com/newsletters// ©2002 SF Gate ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************