***************************************************************** 2/07/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.33 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 Minister says Britain must keep nuclear power option 2 US: Feds push for Bush Energy plan 3 US: NASA Seeks $1 Billion for Nuclear Propulsion Plan 4 Nuclear issue to go to eight committees before vote in full Parliame NUCLEAR REACTORS 5 Dutch Petten research nuke plant to shut 6 Czech nuclear plant goes into automatic shutdown 7 U.N. Studies Chernobyl Aftermath 8 Ukraine: Reactor's reconnection fails due to electric fault 9 Millions of Chernobyl victims still suffering 10 China's First Domestically-Designed Nuclear Power Plant Operational 11 UK: New power stations leak 12 US: Union approves contract at nuclear power plant 13 Vermont Yankee sale: Hydro-Quebec all over again? adgawastf NUCLEAR SAFETY 14 Experts Meet in Georgia to Discuss Storage of Nuclear Material 15 Study: Radiation Caused Mutations 16 US: Health Departments to Oversee Distribution of Anti-Radiation Pil 17 US: Just take a pill? Is it science or simply politics? NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 18 US: A Radiation Sieve: The Yucca Mt. Radioactive Waste Plan 19 German nuclear waste shipment crosses French border 20 US: Some Rocky Flats waste still has nowhere to go 21 US: Bush expected to quickly approve nuclear waste site in Nevada 22 US: Guinn senses rush to approve dump 23 US: Loads of nuclear waste may pass through valley 24 US: Letter: Send nuclear waste into space 25 US: Analysis: Guinn's goal: Fight Yucca, keep ties to Bush 26 US: Gibbons discusses nuke repository with two top presidential 27 US: GOP candidates collect donations from Yucca team 28 US: Guinn, Reid, Ensign taking nuclear dump fight to White House 29 US: Tell truth: Nuke waste could be good for us 30 US: Guinn, senators to confront Bush today over Yucca Mountain 31 US: DOE DEFENSE AN EXERCISE IN SELECTIVITY 32 UK: Economic Lifeline Plea 33 US: Nuclear waste, a problem and an opportunity 34 SELLAFIELD UPDATE NUCLEAR WEAPONS 35 Press scanner: What have you done, governor? 36 Bulgarian customs service introduces equipment for detecting 37 US: Tapes: JFK Saw Nukes As Deterrent 38 Physicist Bohr's letters assail protege's atom role / Heisenberg US DEPT. OF ENERGY 39 Hanford to move radioactive barrels to safer location 40 Opinion: Keep promises; don't shortchange Hanford 41 Funding for test site falls short 42 editorial: Politics imperils (DOE) cleanup OTHER NUCLEAR 43 IAEA Daily Press Review Wednesday, 06 February, 2002 ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Minister says Britain must keep nuclear power option Guardian Unlimited | Archive Search Patrick Wintour, chief political correspondent Thursday February 7, 2002 The energy minister, Brian Wilson, has said Britain must keep nuclear power open as an option, in an interview trailing the cabinet office's review of government energy policy. Mr Wilson said the industry might need tax and planning breaks to make the construction of stations commercially viable. He also suggested they could be built before a resolution of how to handle existing nuclear waste had been agreed. Mr Wilson, one of the few supporters of the nuclear industry in the Labour party, insisted: "There is no contradiction between being pro-renewable [energy source] and pro-nuclear." He said that the review report, prepared by the cabinet office with the prime minister, would "strongly recommend keeping the door open to nuclear in the future, and correctly recognises that several key factors will evolve over the next few years". The review would also propose a drive to increase the efficiency of domestic energy use, with a suggestion that anyone selling a home might be required to offer the buyer an energy audit. The review would call for a target of 20% of energy needs to be met from renewable sources by 2020. Mr Wilson warned that the change would lead to a big increase in energy prices. Without a change in policy the government would find that 70% of Britain's energy consumption was dependent on gas, 90% of which would need to be imported. Mr Wilson said: "The dash for gas now seems a little imprudent... all the sources of gas, including Russia, will be in a seller's market; it will be of major importance that the contracts are not subject to manipulation." Mr Wilson, already facing criticism from green groups for failing to set more ambitious targets, hit back: "Renewables are starting from a pathetically low base. The biggest source of renewable energy in the UK is hydro-electric, which results from the vision of people in the 1940s and 1950s, and nothing that has happened since. "Britain was the world leader in wind power 20 years ago, and threw it away - because nothing was done to support it, or create a market. So the technology went to Denmark which now has a £4bn a year manufacturing industry with a near monopoly of suppliers." He pointed out that planning objections, often led by environmentalists, had stopped a huge number of renewable projects. He excluded Friends of the Earth from his criticism, saying: "I think they are beginning to realise they are vulnerable to this charge that they are for renewables in principle, but against them in practice. I would like to see more of that." The nuclear and the renewable industries needed a relaxation of planning laws. The last nuclear power station built in Britain, Sizewell B, took 15 years to complete the planning and construction process. The report is expected to say that either new nuclear stations, or life extensions of plants, should benefit from the climate change levy. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002 ***************************************************************** 2 Feds push for Bush Energy plan Energy Secretary Abraham and Interior Secretary Norton Call on Senate to Pass Energy Legislation energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release RELEASE DATE: February 7, 2002 WASHINGTON, DC -- Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham and Secretary of Interior Gale Norton today called upon the Senate to immediately pass a comprehensive energy bill. "It is time for the Senate to pass an energy bill," Secretary Abraham stated. "Senator Daschle has promised to bring his comprehensive energy bill to the Senate floor for a vote the week of February 13th. It is in our nation's interest - for the security of our nation's jobs and for the security of our nation's energy supply - that we unite to support swift passage of comprehensive energy legislation." "Yesterday the economic stimulus package was pulled from the Senate calendar leaving energy legislation as the last remaining bill on that calendar that will enhance our economic security and increase employment," Secretary Norton remarked. "Passage of a comprehensive energy package now is essential for the creation of jobs at a time when we need to be focused on the American worker." Abraham went further to add that "failure to pass comprehensive energy will prevent the creation of thousands of jobs at a time our economy desperately needs them, and it will harm both our energy security and our national security." Media Contact: Jeanne Lopatto, 202/586-4940 (DOE) Eric Ruff, 202/208-6416 (DOI) Release No. PR-02-019 ***************************************************************** 3 NASA Seeks $1 Billion for Nuclear Propulsion Plan Chicago Tribune | February 7, 2002 From the Los Angeles Times Aerospace: Space agency will take a new look at developing technology, which foes fear would be used by military. By PETER PAE Times Staff Writer After a 30-year hiatus, government rocket scientists want to resurrect efforts to design a nuclear-powered propulsion system, a controversial concept crucial to any program for human exploration of the solar system. A $125-million initiative for developing the technology, which has frustrated scientists and engineers since the 1950s, was quietly inserted into the proposed fiscal 2003 NASA budget, which was unveiled this week. The space agency's plan calls for a $1-billion program over five years, a project that would include significant roles for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Glenn Research Center in Cleveland and Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. The agency spent 13 years and more than $10 billion before concluding that the technology was not technically feasible and abandoned the effort in 1972. NASA scientists now hope that advances in nuclear reactors and rocket propulsion systems as well as lessons learned from past failures will give the quest for a nuclear rocket new life in the 21st century. Such spaceships would have small nuclear reactors, which would give the engines greater thrust and virtually unlimited fuel supply to travel to the farthest reaches of the solar system. Using nuclear technology would in theory slash a trip to Mars and back by more than half from about two years to less than a year, for instance, and alleviate lingering concerns with the health effects of long-duration space travel, NASA officials said. Astronauts who occupied the former Soviet operated Mir space station for months at a time suffered from muscle atrophy, bone loss and other crippling effects of prolonged exposure to micro gravity. With nuclear power, "missions will be able to speed through the outer reaches of the solar system, at speeds as much as two times faster than is possible even with the most sophisticated space probes available today," NASA officials said in its budget proposal. The technology will "allow NASA to consider more ambitious possibilities involving missions that could travel from one interesting planet, moon or comet to another for a close-up, in-depth study." The proposed initiative was lauded by astronauts and astronomers but slammed by antinuclear activists. "We welcome the proposal to develop nuclear power and propulsion technology to make the entire solar system more accessible with much shorter flight-times and more powerful investigations of the planets," said Wesley T. Huntress Jr., president of the Planetary Society. "These developments will revolutionize space exploration in the same way that the Navy was revolutionized by nuclear power." But Bruce Gagnon, secretary for the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, said that in addition to potential health concerns from radiation exposure, the NASA initiative represents the Bush administration's covert move to develop power systems for space-based weapons such as lasers on satellites. "It's our position that just like missile defense is a Trojan horse for the Pentagon's real agenda for domination of space, NASA's nuclear rocket is a Trojan horse for militarization of space," Gagnon said. Donald Savage, a NASA spokesman, dismissed the argument. "This is a solar system exploration program," he said. "This is a scientific program and that's what we are involved in." Still, sensitive to the criticism and safety concerns, NASA officials stressed that the nuclear propulsion systems envisioned by the agency would be used only for traveling through space outside Earth's orbit. They would not be used for launching rockets into space. In one possible scenario, the spacecraft would be assembled in space and the reactors would be turned on only after leaving Earth's orbit. The reactor and other components would be ferried into space by conventional rockets that use chemicals such as hydrogen and oxygen for combustion. Under the so-called Nuclear Systems Initiative, NASA proposes funding three programs including developing nuclear power systems to power on-board equipment such as sensors to survey planets and instruments to control the craft and communicate with Earth. Another major element would be to develop a nuclear propulsion system that would use a small nuclear reactor to generate electricity and propel ionized or plasma gas out of the rocket nozzle to provide thrust. The reactor would produce enough heat to generate electricity and ionized gas. One advantage of a nuclear propulsion system is that it can generate significantly more energy for almost unlimited duration compared with a conventional chemical combustion engine. A soft-drink can full of uranium, for instance, yields 50 times the energy contained in the Space Shuttle's massive external tank, according to NASA. The reactor would be co-developed with the Department of Energy, which has been looking for ways to maintain its know-how in nuclear power development. More immediately, NASA envisions manufacturing new radioisotope thermoelectric generators that would provide power for long-duration exploration of Mars. The system would allow the Mars Smart Lander, scheduled for launch in 2009, to scout sites for future missions. It would be able to operate on the surface for years instead of months. The currently available solar cell system would become obscured by dust from the planet's atmosphere. NASA officials said a small, rudimentary nuclear electric propulsion system has been used on exploratory spacecraft such as Deep Space One to help propel it in conjunction with solar panels. But such systems would not be sufficient for the kind of missions envisioned for the future. But so far, developing nuclear powered rockets has been a frustrating endeavor and has remained in the realm of artist's conceptual drawings. It has not been for lack of trying, however. Even American rocket pioneer Robert Goddard concluded as far back as in 1907 that nuclear propulsion would be essential to interplanetary exploration. Emboldened by how nuclear subs revolutionized naval warfare, aerospace engineers began pursuing nuclear propulsion for rockets in earnest in the 1950s. And in 1959, NASA, with the then-Atomic Energy Commission, began a program to develop a nuclear rocket. Known as the Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Applications, the program eventually built and tested 20 nuclear-reactor rocket engines. The engines never produced the kind of thrust they had hoped for, however. Copyright © 2002, The Los Angeles Times ***************************************************************** 4 Nuclear issue to go to eight committees before vote in full Parliament HS Home 7.2.2002 - Final vote expected in May Eight different Parliamentary committees are to discuss the proposal for the construction of a fifth commercial nuclear reactor before the full Parliament votes on whether or not to authorise the move. The Speaker's Council in Parliament has proposed that the application for the construction of the new nuclear power plant should be brought before eight Parliamentary committees. The last time that Parliament voted on the nuclear issue, in 1993, the process involved only five committees. At that time Parliament rejected the construction of a fifth nuclear reactor. The Speaker's Council, which includes the Speaker of Parliament and the two Deputy Speakers as well as 15 other Members of Parliament, sets the Parliament's timetables. Under the schedule set by the Speaker's Council the nuclear issue will first come before the full Parliament on Wednesday next week, after which it will go to the Parliament's Commerce Committee, which will draft a statement on the issue in the coming months. The Commerce Committee, headed by Social Democratic MP Leena Luhtanen, will get statements from seven other committees: the Finance Committee, the Social Affairs and Health Committee, the Environment Committee, the Employment and Equality Committee, the Committee for the Future, and the Agriculture and Forestry Committee. The Speaker's Council is to propose that the seven committees be given until the end of April to finish their work on the nuclear issue. The hope is that the Commerce Committee should have its statement on the nuclear question ready so that Parliament would get to vote on it in the last week of May. The Speaker's Council will formally propose the schedules for handling the nuclear issue on Friday. The speaker of Parliament, Riitta Uosukainen (Nat. Coalition), and the Deputy Speakers Sirkka-Liisa Anttila (Centre) and Jukka Mikkola (Soc. Dem.), have called for a speedy, but thorough handling of the nuclear issue. Last week consideration was given to a suggestion that the vote on nuclear power be delayed until late June. Such a delay would mean that the nuclear question would have become a major topic of debate at the party congresses of the three largest parties - the Social Democrats, the National Coalition, and the Centre Party. All of those events are to be held in early June. This prospect was not to the liking of the Speaker, her Deputies, or Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen (Soc. Dem.), who feel that an unresolved nuclear issue might dominate the gatherings, which should focus on choosing their party leaders, as well as prepararing for next year's Parliamentary elections. Previously in HS International Edition: Parliamentary Speakers hope for nuclear power vote before summer (5.2.2002) Helsingin Sanomat ***************************************************************** 5 Dutch Petten research nuke plant to shut NETHERLANDS: February 7, 2002 AMSTERDAM - The European Commission's nuclear research reactor in Petten will shut down temporarily pending an inspection, operator Nuclear Research and Consultancy Group (NRG) said this week. It was not yet known when the high flux reactor at the plant, known as the Joint Research Centre, would be restarted, NRG said. "We do hope (the shutdown) will be as short as possible," NRG spokeswoman Juliette Jenniskens said. Dutch environment minister Jan Pronk had requested a shutdown to investigate a crack in the reactor's internal casing. The plant is owned by the Dutch government but is leased to the EC for research. The crack had been discovered when the casing was installed in 1984, but a new inspection technology had given differing readings from previous checks, Jenniskens said. New checks would be performed to determine if there had been any growth in the crack, she added. The plant is one of three reactors which provide radioactive isotopes to hospitals for medical treatments in Europe, raising concerns that a long shutdown could threaten treatments for some seven million cancer patients. "There is a possibility that there could be a shortage" of the radioactive isotopes, Jenniskens said, because the two other reactors in Belgium and France are currently undergoing maintenance. REUTERS NEWS SERVICE ***************************************************************** 6 Czech nuclear plant goes into automatic shutdown BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 7, 2002 Text of report by Czech Radio on 7 February The first reactor of the Temelin nuclear plant went into automatic shutdown this morning. The spokesman for the south Bohemian nuclear plant, Milan Nebesar, said today that the shutdown had occurred during one of the regular tests on the plant's electrical equipment. The plant's staff are now trying to establish why the control system shut the reactor down. Until this morning, the reactor had been operating at 100 per cent of its capacity. Source: Czech Radio1 - Radiozurnal, Prague, in Czech 1000 gmt 7 Feb 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 7 U.N. Studies Chernobyl Aftermath Newsday.com - By GERALD NADLER Associated Press Writer February 6, 2002, 8:42 PM EST UNITED NATIONS -- Nearly 16 years after the Chernobyl nuclear accident, 200,000 people still live in highly contaminated areas and 4.5 million residents in three countries are receiving financial help -- draining national budgets, according to a U.N. study released Wednesday. The study by four U.N. agencies called for "an entirely new approach" to help those in a state of "chronic dependency" in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia by getting them jobs, fostering small businesses, and reviving agriculture in the areas most affected by the world's worst nuclear disaster. "If active steps are not taken to resolve the human problems relating to the accident, the fate of the communities blighted by Chernobyl will continue to haunt discussions on energy generation for decades to come," the 75-page report said. The explosion and fire at Chernobyl's No. 4 reactor on April 26, 1986, contaminated 23 percent of Belarus, 5 percent of Ukraine and 1.5 percent of Russia, according to the report. It also spewed a radioactive cloud across Europe. At least 8,000 people have died, most from radiation-related diseases. Some 2,000 people have been diagnosed with thyroid cancer and between 8,000 and 10,000 cases are expected to develop over the next 10 years, the report said. Although the most dangerously radiated areas near the Chernobyl plant were evacuated, 200,000 people still live in severely contaminated areas, the report said. Many of those who were resettled still don't have jobs. "Focusing on their needs and helping them take control of their destinies must be a priority," said the report. The 4.5 million people still receiving government payments represent a severe strain to national budgets, especially in Belarus and Ukraine, the report said. Over the last 10 years, Belarus, the state most affected by the calamity, has spent more than $1 billion to help victims of the accident, said Kalman Missel, deputy U.N. coordinator for Chernobyl. Ukraine last year spent $100 million, he said. The study said with the emergency phase of recovery over, the three governments and the international community must now work toward "long overdue" extended development of the communities hurt by the disaster. "Within the available budgets, it is the only real alternative to the progressive breakdown of the recovery effort, the continuing hemorrhaging of scarce resources and continuing distress for the people at the center of the problem," the report said. Ukraine closed the Chernobyl plant on Dec. 15, 2000, and the international community gave $750 million to build a new containment shelter around the stricken reactor. But Kenzo Oshima, head of the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, said the closure of the plant and funding for the new container does not mean the world community can "close the file on the people who continue to live in the shadow of Chernobyl." "We must not turn our back on the government and people of the most affected countries after a decade and a half of assistance," he said. "We must not leave the job half done." Copyright © 2002, The Associated Press ***************************************************************** 8 Ukraine: Reactor's reconnection fails due to electric fault BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 7, 2002 Kiev, 7 February: An attempt to reconnect the Rivne nuclear power plant's No 3 generating set to the national power grid has failed. The set's operators found a defect in electric equipment in the early hours of 7 February, the State Nuclear Control Committee's information centre reported. Soon after the set's electric generator had been turned on and started increasing output, an automatic control system disconnected the set from the external grid because of a short curcuit. The examination found smoke in one of the set's electric devices. Repair work is under way. The accident did not affect the radiation level at and around the plant. [Passage omitted: known facts] Source: UNIAN news agency, Kiev, in Ukrainian 0830 gmt 7 Feb 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 9 Millions of Chernobyl victims still suffering BBC News | EUROPE | Thursday, 7 February, 2002, [Chernobyl nuclear plant] Millions of people still require government handouts Sixteen years after the Chernobyl nuclear accident thousands of people are still living in contaminated areas and millions of people are still in need of international assistance, according to a United Nations report. The study by four UN agencies calls for "an entirely new approach" to help those in a state of "chronic dependency" in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. Level of contamination Belarus - 23% of land Ukraine - 5% of land Russia - 1.5% According to the report those most affected by the disaster have difficulty getting jobs, cannot support themselves financially and suffer drastic health problems - with many developing thyroid cancer. The explosion and fire at Chernobyl's No 4 reactor in April 1986 was the world's worst nuclear accident - it contaminated vast areas of Belarus, Ukraine and Russia and sent a radioactive cloud across Europe. Danger zone The UN report says that while much has been done to reduce the contamination more than seven million people in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia are still suffering the effects. [Experts measuring radioactivity near Chernobyl] Some people have returned to the most contaminated areas Nuclear contamination remains in 23% of Belarus, 5% of Ukraine and 1.5% of Russia, according to the study which was carried out in 2001. Despite the danger, between 100,000 and 200,000 people either remained near Chernobyl or have returned to live inside the 30-kilometre (19-mile) zone that is still highly radioactive. In theory, people are banned from being in the area. Psychological damage At least 8,000 people have died, most from radiation-related diseases. About 2,000 people have been diagnosed with thyroid cancer and between 8,000 and 10,000 cases are expected to develop over the next 10 years, the report said. Health problems 8,000 killed, mostly from radiation related diseases 2,000 people diagnosed with thyroid cancer 8,000 -10,000 thyroid cancer cases expected in next 10 years The most highly contaminated areas were evacuated, but according to the report this too took its toll - causing psychological problems for those moved. "The psycho-social welfare of people who stayed in their homes is better than that of those who were relocated," the study found. The report calls for a complete change in how aid is delivered to the area - shifting the emphasis from short term relief to long term recovery. Kenzo Oshima, head of the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, said: "We must not turn our back on the government and people of the most affected countries after a decade and a half of assistance. We must not leave the job half done." Taking control The report calls for help in finding people jobs, fostering small businesses and reviving agriculture in the areas most affected by the disaster. "Populations in Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine would continue to experience general decline unless significant new measures are adopted to address health, the environment and unemployment," it said. "Focusing on their needs and helping them take control of their destinies must be a priority," the report added. Four and a half million people are still receiving government relief which is putting an enormous strain on national budgets, especially in Belarus and Ukraine. Over the past 10 years Belarus has spent more than $1bn on victims of the accident, while last year alone Ukraine spent $100m. ***************************************************************** 10 China's First Domestically-Designed Nuclear Power Plant Operational Xinhuanet 2002-02-06 18:21:29 HANGZHOU, February 6 (Xinhuanet) -- The first generating unit of the second-phase project of Qinshan Nuclear Power Plant in Haiyan County, in east China's Zhejiang province, was completed and brought into the local power grid Wednesday. This is China's first domestically-designed and constructed nuclear power plant and it marks a milestone in the development ofthe country's nuclear power technology, experts said. The total investment of the second-phase project amounts to 14.8 billion yuan (1.79 billion U.S. dollars) and from June 2002 it aims to send four billion kwh of power annually to the east China power grid. The second-phase project of Qinshan nuclear power plant startedoperation in 1996. The first-phase project of the Qinshan Nuclear Power Plant is in sound condition after 10 years of safe operation. Over the pastdecade, the plant has produced nearly 17 billion kilowatt-hours ofelectricity. Enditem Copyright © 2000 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 11 UK: New power stations leak THE WHITEHAVEN NEWS Thursday, February 07, 2002 New nuclear power stations could be built at sites such as Sellafield and Chapelcross where nuclear installations already exist. The prediction has come from environmental group Greenpeace. which leaked what it says is a top Downing Street think-tank report, which says the government could help businesses set up nuclear power stations across Britain, says Greenpeace. The pressure group says the report is an executive summary of a document that will play a key role in prime minister, Tony Blair's, much-publicised energy review. However a spokesman for the Cabinet Office said the Greenpeace "leak" could be an earlier draft version of the eventual government report. The spokesman refused to say when the real report would be finalised. ***************************************************************** 12 Union approves contract at nuclear power plant PittsburghLIVE.com - By Lou Ransom [lransom@tribweb.com] TRIBUNE-REVIEW Thursday, February 7, 2002 Union workers at the Beaver Valley Nuclear plant in Shippingport, Pa., have approved a four-year contract with Akron, Ohio-based FirstEnergy Corp., ending six months of negotiations. The new pact, the first between the union representing 460 workers and FirstEnergy, which purchased the plant from Duquesne Light Co. in 1999, was ratified Tuesday by a 317-to-84 vote. The contract, which was unanimously recommended for acceptance by the negotiating committee of the union, Local 29 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, included percentage wage and pension benefit increases, according to Jeff Davis, business agent for Local 29. He declined to disclose any specific financial details of the pact. The union initially complained that FirstEnergy had sought to reduce vacation time and holidays and impose higher medical premiums. "We feel that we resolved the outstanding quality-of-work issues," Davis said. He said the union negotiated concessions on work rules and achieved some assurances of job security in the pact. "The effective date of the contract is Oct. 1, when the old one expired," said Davis, "so it is really not a full four years." The length of the contract was not an issue, he said. "It's a good contract for the company as well as the union," said FirstEnergy Corp. spokesman Todd Schneider. "The union gained, the company gained, and we feel that it will enable us to make further improvements to the facility." Schneider said that one of FirstEnergy's objectives was to try to bring the Beaver Valley plant's operations more in line with other FirstEnergy facilities. "They were quite a bit different than our other plants," he said. "But a bigger issue was the flexibility. We need the flexibility to allow us to continue to improve the efficiency of the plant." Workers had authorized a strike if negotiations failed, and a federal mediator had been participating in the talks since early October. The company had set a Jan. 8 deadline for the union to accept its "last, best and final" offer, but that date passed without incident, and the two sides continued to talk. Lou Ransom can be reached at lransom@tribweb.com [lransom@tribweb.com] or 412-320-7886. copyright © 2002 by The Tribune-Review Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 13 Vermont Yankee sale: Hydro-Quebec all over again? adgawastf By David Gram, Associated Press, 2/6/2002 20:05 MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) The chairman of the Public Service Board on Wednesday questioned top utility officials on whether they were repeating the mistakes of their Hydro-Quebec deal in the sale of Vermont Yankee. The board this week is beginning technical hearings in which a battery of lawyers for and against the sale of the nuclear plant as well as board members and staff are questioning power company executives on the terms of the sale. Entergy Nuclear, based in Jackson, Miss., has offered $180 million for the Vernon reactor. As part of the deal, Green Mountain Power Corp. and Central Vermont Public Service Corp., currently two of the plant's major owners, would agree to buy Vermont Yankee's power back from Entergy for the 10 years remaining on the plant's license. It was that long-term power contract that drew much of the board's scrutiny during testimony Wednesday afternoon. One of the major issues in the case is whether it's wise for Vermont's two largest electric utilities to sign up for another long-term power contract as opposed to shopping for electricity on the currently softening open market when they already get a third of their power under an expensive long-term contract with Hydro-Quebec. ''Tell me another utility in the United States that has a third of its power locked in for the next decade and is choosing to lock in a second third of its power for the next decade,'' board Chairman Michael Dworkin said to Kent Brown, a CVPS vice president and chairman of the committee managing the Vermont Yankee sale. Brown said he couldn't do that. Dworkin and George Young, a staff attorney with the board, also questioned the utility officials on whether they have comparison-shopped in the wholesale power market to be sure their buy-back deal with Entergy is a good one. The board penalized both companies in the late 1990s to the extent that their executives were talking about possible bankruptcy after finding they acted imprudently in locking in their deal with Hydro-Quebec just as the regional electric market was slackening in 1991. In Wednesday's hearing, Dworkin actually read part of one of those penalty orders the part in which the utilities were found not to have studied the power markets thoroughly enough in 1991. Both Brown and Nancy Brock, vice president and chief financial officer at GMP, said the Entergy buy-back deal shouldn't be compared with the spot electric market, but with the costs of keeping and continuing to run Vermont Yankee, which they said would be more expensive. Brock said GMP considered only the sale and continue-to-operate options. ''The transaction didn't contemplate replacement power,'' she said, adding that her company had not put out a request for bids from electric wholesalers. The board's suggestion that replacement power be looked at clearly indicates that it would entertain a third option aside from the Vermont utilities selling or continuing to operate the plant: shutting it down. On that front, the board also questioned utility officials closely on the so-called ''safe-store'' option, in which the plant would be mothballed, but not dismantled for a number of years while the fund set aside for that purpose continues to collect investment earnings. Vermont utility officials have put the cost of maintaining the plant in a mothballed state at about $60 million a year. On Tuesday, Entergy Vice President Michael Kansler said it would cost far less than that that: something more like $60 million total for the 10 years left on the plant's license. Dworkin noted that Entergy had offered to back up the deal with a $60 million line of credit against the possible costs of an early and unscheduled shutdown of the plant. If that $60 million would not come close to covering the costs of an early shutdown, he questioned whether it would be responsible to approve the sale of the plant to the Mississippi company. ***************************************************************** 14 Experts Meet in Georgia to Discuss Storage of Nuclear Material Bloomberg.com : 02/06 23:16 By Andrew Hobbs Tbilisi, Georgia, Feb. 7 (Bloomberg) -- Experts from Russia, the U.S., Germany and France are meeting in Georgia to discuss the storage and safety of radioactive materials in the former Soviet republic, the International Atomic Energy Agency said. Georgia's Environment Protection Minister Nino Chkhobadzre said there are hundreds of former Soviet military installations in the country that may contain radioactive material, Agence France- Presse reported. The meeting is discussing concerns that some of the material may fall into the hands of militant groups or organized crime. The danger was highlighted in December when three Georgians were hospitalized with radiation sickness and burns after they found two discarded radioactive batteries containing strontium 90 in a forest, the IAEA said. Strontium 90 is present in the fallout from nuclear explosions. The environment ministry doesn't know how many radioactive objects were brought into Georgia for military purposes during the Soviet era and hasn't any information on nuclear safety at current Russian military bases in Georgia, AFP said. A number of discarded or ``orphan'' radioactive objects have been found in Georgia over the past decade. Experts estimate many others remain lost, abandoned, or otherwise outside regulatory control, the IAEA said on its Web site. A container of radioactive iridium-92 discovered in a dump in Georgia's capital, Tbilisi, in November 2000, emitted enough radiation to kill a person exposed to it for 10 hours, AFP cited Zurab Kerekheldize, the head of the Georgian ecology ministry's radiation safety committee, as saying at the time. Iridium is used to harden platinum and in high temperature materials. ©2002 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Terms of Service, ***************************************************************** 15 Study: Radiation Caused Mutations Las Vegas SUN Today: February 07, 2002 at 11:05:48 PST WASHINGTON (AP) - Radiation from Soviet atomic bomb testing caused gene mutations in families living nearby, according to a new study, but researchers say it is not known if the genetic changes caused adverse health effects. The study, appearing Friday in the journal Science, gives new evidence that low-dose radiation from atomic bomb fallout can cause genetic mutation that can be passed to a new generation, but the study did not find any health consequences from these DNA changes, experts say. A group of European researchers led by Yuri E. Dubrova of the University of Leicester took blood samples from 40 families in an area of Kazakstan not far from the Semipalatinsk site where the former Soviet Union conducted atomic bomb tests. For a control group, the researchers took blood samples from 28 families in a geographically similar region of Kazakstan that had not been exposed to radiation from the tests. Members of the study group and the control group were matched by year of birth, occupation and ethnicity. The researchers then checked DNA of the two groups for evidence of mutations that could have been passed from one generation to another. For the generation exposed to radiation from bomb tests in 1949, 1951, 1953 and 1956, the study found a mutation rate that was about 80 percent higher than in the corresponding generation in the control group. In the children of the exposed generation, the researchers found a mutation rate about 50 percent greater than in the group that had not been exposed to radiation. All the mutations were found in what is known as "junk DNA," bits of genetic material that have no known function. "These are mutations, but not in critical genes and there is not anything that we can correlate with a health effect," said Dr. William F. Morgan, director of the Radiation Oncology Research Laboratory at the University of Maryland, Baltimore. Morgan, who reviewed the study for Science, said the findings give new understanding of how ionizing radiation, such as from an atomic bomb and its fallout, can affect successive generations. Most of what is known about such radiation effects comes from survivors of the atomic bombs dropped on Japan during World War II. Those survivors were exposed to a single, severe dose of radiation. No inherited mutations were found in that group, said Morgan, but it was rare that both parents in the Japanese bombings were equally exposed. In the new study, he said, "they are finding that if you live in an environment that is contaminated where you are continuously exposed, then you start to see these increases" in mutations. Dubrova and his colleagues found that the rate of mutations declined with the passage of time once the bomb tests stopped. They said this suggests that the 1963 treaty banning aboveground nuclear weapons testing "has been effective in reducing genetic risk to the affected population." Morgan said the findings are consistent with animal studies that showed low-level, chronic exposure to radiation, such as from the fallout of bomb tests, can cause some genetic mutations that are passed to the next generation. Such mutations, he said, can be traced to radiation exposure affecting sperm at a critical phase of its development. The mutations that pass to the next generation originate "predominantly on the male side" of reproduction, Morgan said. In an earlier study, Dubrova found similar mutations among families exposed to fallout from the 1986 nuclear power plant accident at Chernobyl in the Ukraine. The deaths of about 8,000 people in the Ukraine, Russia and Belarus have been blamed on the incident, but another 200,000 are thought to live in areas still contaminated. Dubrova's Chernobyl study, published in Nature in 1996, found that children of men living in the contaminated area of Belarus had about twice as many mutations as a comparison group in Britain. Many researchers said that study was flawed. But Morgan said the new study in Kazakstan supports Dubrova's earlier findings. --- On the Net: Science: http://www.sciencemag.org [http://www.sciencemag.org] All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 16 Health Departments to Oversee Distribution of Anti-Radiation Pills (washingtonpost.com) By Raymond McCaffrey and Michael Amon Washington Post Staff Writers Thursday, February 7, 2002; Page SM02 Local health departments will oversee the distribution of potassium iodide pills to help residents guard against radiation poisoning in the event of an accident at Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, a state official reported this week. Though Maryland still has not received the pills from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, it has met with "health officers and emergency managers from the five jurisdictions" affected, in an attempt to figure out how to get the medication to residents within a 10-mile radius of nuclear power plants, according to Michael Sharon, chief of the emergency response division at the state Department of the Environment. St. Mary's County health officer William B. Icenhower told county commissioners on Tuesday that an emergency at Calvert Cliffs could pose a danger to all of the county's residents, not just those within the 10-mile emergency zone. Icenhower recommended that all county residents, and especially children, who are most susceptible to thyroid cancer, receive potassium iodide pills. "I myself would like to have potassium iodide, if I was more than 10 miles away," Icenhower said. The state will receive about 160,000 doses of potassium iodide, which can help prevent thyroid damage, or two pills for each of the 80,000 residents who live within 10 miles of a nuclear facility, according to the state. Three-fourths of those individuals live in Calvert, St. Mary's and Dorchester counties, within 10 miles of Calvert Cliffs, the state's only nuclear power plant. The remaining residents live in Harford and Cecil counties, near the Peach Bottom nuclear facility in Pennsylvania. The distribution plan, according to officials, could involve handing out pills at a central location, such as a local school, or delivering them door to door. "Final authority rests with those local governments -- those local health officers," Sharon said. "We're still working on the methods. "My sense is we're going to attempt to reach a consensus across all five counties. We're looking at targeting critical populations, specifically probably schoolchildren, retirement centers, critical populations like that." Maryland's decision to accept the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's offer of the medication represents a policy change for the state, which has strictly advocated evacuation and sheltering in response to a nuclear plant emergency, but has not stockpiled potassium iodide for residents. The cost of distributing the pills is unknown. General Assembly on Cable Comcast Cable began broadcasting Maryland Public Television's coverage of the Maryland General Assembly this week on its systems in Charles and Calvert counties. The program will air three times a week throughout the current legislative session. The coverage will air from 8 to 10 a.m. on Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays. In Charles, the program will be on Channel 15, and in Calvert it will be available on Channel 6. Maryland Public Television airs the two-hour program at midnight, following days on which the General Assembly is in session. Preservation Council Spots The Charles County commissioners are looking for residents who want to serve on the newly created Historic Preservation Advisory Council. The council will develop a heritage resource survey and evaluation plan for the county and make recommendations on preservation policy. Anyone interested should sent a letter and brief résumé to Shirley Gore, clerk to the county commissioners, P.O. Box 2150, La Plata, Md. 20646. Materials may also be faxed to 301-645-0560 or e-mailed to gores@govt.co.md.us. The deadline is Feb. 15. Federal Workers Left Short? Southern Maryland's congressman, Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D), says President Bush's proposed budget shortchanges civilian federal employees. The budget, unveiled Monday, proposes a 2.6 percent pay increase for civilians and a 4.1 percent boost for military personnel. Hoyer said the gap is inconsistent with Bush's declaration that homeland defense and the war on terrorism are the nation's highest priorities. "Many federal employees, from customs officials to border patrol officers, are crucial to homeland defense," Hoyer said in a statement. Last year, Hoyer attached an amendment to an appropriations bill that mandated a 4.6 percent raise for civilian workers, the same as the military received. The measure won wide support in Congress and was signed into law by the president. Pax River Fuel Project Patuxent River Naval Air Station is in the midst of a two-year project that will bring it into compliance with state and federal rules for fuel storage. The $8.5 million construction effort will phase out all underground storage tanks at the base. Planes at Pax River use about 2 million gallons of fuel each month, according to a statement from the Navy describing the project. Two new above-ground tanks for JP-5 fuel -- used by all current Navy airplanes -- are being built on a reclaimed site that was formerly contaminated by petroleum. Reclamation involved the removal and replacement of more than 1,000 cubic yards of tainted soil, the Navy said. At the same time, a new underground fuel line is being installed. The final phase of the project will involve demolition of three underground 600,000-gallon tanks. Guide Compares Hospitals The Hospital Performance Evaluation Guide, which provides a detailed look at more than 40 acute care hospitals in the state, was released last week by the Maryland Health Care Commission. The first of its kind in Maryland, the guide allows consumers to review information on several characteristics of the hospitals, such as location, number of beds and accreditation status. Calvert Memorial Hospital in Prince Frederick, Civista Health Center in La Plata and St. Mary's Hospital in Leonardtown are all included in the guide. The guide also provides information on 36 medical conditions, allowing consumers to compare hospitals based on the volume, length of stay and readmission rates, for each condition. The commission created the guide after a state law passed in 1999 requiring the agency to create a system for comparing hospitals' quality of care and performance. The commission has released similar guides, including one for health maintenance organizations and another for nursing homes. All are available online at www.mhcc.state.md.us, or can be obtained by calling the commission at 410-764-3460 or 877-245-1762. © 2002 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 17 Just take a pill? Is it science or simply politics? Editorial - Wednesday, February 6, 2002 People who live near Seabrook Station will soon be receiving radiation-inhibiting pills. It’s just in case the nuclear-powered generating facility goes "boom!" Gov. Jeanne Shaheen has asked the federal government to send New Hampshire a supply of anti-radiation pills (magic bullets?) for residents who live near the Seabrook and Vermont Yankee nuclear plants. The fear of further terrorist attacks in the wake of those on Sept. 11 and the possibility of nuclear facilities becoming targets prompted the feds to announce they would supply potassium iodide pills to states requesting them. The pills are seen as providing some protection against thyroid cancer. Offer it and they will come. Until now, New Hampshire officials did not recommend stockpiling the pills. The state’s Office of Emergency Management had said the pills provide very little protection and detract from the best-case response — evacuation. But now the state OEM has joined the governor in requesting 350,000 pills — enough for all residents living within 10 miles of the two nuclear plants and anyone who might be visiting them. How has the science changed? Has the OEM rethought its position regarding the efficacy of the pills or does the change in thinking simply represent a "make-’em-feel-good" political approach to a very real or remote threat. If government has any single important function it is doing what it can to provide and promote public safety — to protect the people from dangers foreign and domestic. When government starts sending mixed signals on what might or might not be valuable in ensuring our safety, it does no one of us a service. What is the OEM’s current view of evacuation as it concerns Seabrook and Vermont Yankee in the event of a terrorist attack or possibly lethal accident? We heard a lot about such planning in the early days of Seabrook Station, but not much since. A lot has changed in southeastern New Hampshire and southern Maine during the past two decades. Twenty years ago, few of us gave thought to the likelihood of a foreign invasion. But that is exactly what took place on Sept. 11 ... and will most likely take place in the future. And, yes, nuclear power plants on the coast and near a state boundary have to be considered as potential targets of such invasions. When were evacuation plans last updated? What interest has there been in educating the people on those plans? Take a pill? It’s a simplistic and political approach to effective emergency planning. ©2002 Geo. J. Foster Co. ***************************************************************** 18 A Radiation Sieve: The Yucca Mt. Radioactive Waste Plan Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 17:25:13 -0600 (CST) http://commondreams.org/views02/0207-09.htm Published on Thursday, February 7, 2002 by Common Dreams A Radiation Sieve: The Yucca Mt. Radioactive Waste Plan by John M. LaForge The Energy Department's plan for burial of hot reactor fuel at Yucca Mountain cannot be defended scientifically. The site near Las Vegas does not meet the original requirements for deep geologic disposal-come-dispersal. In a 1998 study, the Energy Department (DOE) itself acknowledged that the proposed site is a fractured, leaky mountain plagued by earthquakes and that the DOE's untested waste containers have limited viability. If Yucca begins operation, tons of radioactive waste on trucks and trains will be passing through 43 states for 25 years. The planned routes would take the waste through 100 cities with populations of 100,000-plus. The scheme recommended by the DOE doesn't begin to address the nuclear waste problem -- it merely transfers the waste's liability to the public, and the radiation risk to Nevada and to the almost 138 million people living along proposed transport routes. Yucca Mt. should have been disqualified already: In 1999, proof that the site is periodically flooded, came from Zircon crystals found deep inside. "Crystals do not from without complete immersion in water," said Jerry Szymanski, formerly DOE's top geologist."That would mean hot underground water has invaded the mountain and might again in the time when radioactive waste would still be extremely dangerous. The results would be catastrophic." In 1998, the Yucca site was found to be subject to earthquakes or lava flows 10 times more frequently than earlier estimated. This finding means radiation dispersal from the site is much more likely during the proposed 10,000-year lifetime of the dump -- not to mention the million-year-long radioactive hazard period. In 1997, the DOE's own researchers announced that rainwater had seeped 800 feet into the repository in a mere 40 years. The government had earlier claimed that it would take water hundreds or thousands of years to reach the waste, and guidelines have long held that fast-flowing water would disqualify the site. In 1995, a Los Alamos National Laboratory report dropped a bomb on the Yucca plan by charging that after the waste containers dissolve, the wastes might erupt in a fission explosion, scattering radioactivity to the winds or into groundwater, or both."We think there's a generic problem with putting fissile materials underground," said co-author Charles Bowman. In 1990, the National Research Council said Energy's plan for Yucca is "bound to fail" because it is "a scientific impossibility" to build an underground nuclear waste dump that will be safe for 10,000 years. In 1989, 16 members of the U.S. Geologic Survey charged that the DOE was deliberately preventing the discovery of problems that would disqualify the site. They reported that, "There is no facility for trial and error, for genuine research, for innovation, or for creativity." Even the Nuclear Regulatory Commission complained that work at site seemed designed to get the repository built rather than to determine if the area is suitable. In 1983, the National Academy of Sciences reported that chemical characteristics of water at Yucca Mt. are such that nuclear wastes would dissolve more easily than at most other places. While regulations require the DOE to contain the cancer agents for 10,000 years, New York Times science writer Matthew L. Wald has said, "The waste...is the most concentrated and dangerous, and some of it remains radioactive for millions of years." In 1999, the DOE declared that leaving the waste where it is, at 77 reactor sites, is just as safe as moving it to Nevada. Given Yucca Mountain's faults and the enormous risks of moving the waste, it's less reckless to leave it with its producers while seeking alternatives. Independent scientists suggest on-site, above-ground, monitored storage. Leaving the waste where it is allows time to give alternatives the consideration they deserve. John M. LaForge is on the staff of Nukewatch, a nonprofit environmental group in Wisconsin, and edits its quarterly newsletter The Pathfinder. ***************************************************************** 19 German nuclear waste shipment crosses French border BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 7, 2002 Woerth: The Castor shipment with burnt-out fuel elements from various nuclear power plants left Germany on Wednesday evening [6 February]. Police in Ludwigshafen reported that the train crossed the French border at Lauterburg in the evening... According to the police, there were no protests on the last leg of the journey before the French border. Source: ddp news agency, Berlin, in German 1845 gmt 6 Feb 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter All Material Subject to Copyright ***************************************************************** 20 Some Rocky Flats waste still has nowhere to go Denver Post.com By Mike Soraghan [msoraghan@denverpost.com] Denver Post Washington Bureau Thursday, February 07, 2002 - WASHINGTON - There's a new glitch in the plans to have Rocky Flats closed by 2006. It turns out there's still plutonium there without a place to go. Last month, U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard and the Department of Energy trumpeted a deal they said would get all the plutonium out of the former nuclear weapons plant by the end of this year and keep the site in northern Jefferson County on track for closure by 2006. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said the federal government had agreed to build a plant at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina to convert the plutonium into fuel for nuclear reactors. The conversion plan was designed to appease South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges, who'd threatened to lie down in front of any plutonium-bearing trucks trying to come into the state, because he feared the plutonium would never leave. Abraham agreed that any of the waste that couldn't be converted into fuel wouldn't be sent to South Carolina. But there's still some nuclear waste at Rocky Flats that can't be converted into fuel. That material was originally supposed to be immobilized in glass at Savannah River. Abraham has not told Allard or anyone else where it could go. "They said it was taken care of," said Allard spokesman Sean Conway. "They didn't disclose where it was supposed to go." Now, elected officials are scrambling to make sure it isn't coming to their state. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., started hearing that the Energy Department was thinking about "diluting" the waste and sending it to New Mexico, to the Waste Isolation Pilot Project facility in Carlsbad, which is taking low-level waste from Rocky Flats. He didn't like the idea. WIPP takes low-level waste such as contaminated clothing. The waste that can be turned into nuclear fuel in South Carolina is fairly pure plutonium. The waste that's in limbo is in the middle. It's material so contaminated that bomb builders determined they could recover the plutonium and use it in bombs. But it's not pure enough to turn into fuel. Domenici said he talked to Abraham a week ago, and was assured that the mid-level waste isn't going to New Mexico. Domenici went public with the conversation Wednesday, sending a letter to Abraham to confirm that the waste isn't going to the WIPP. "I appreciate your agreement that this subject needs significantly more study before any selection of a disposition route is finalized," Domenici wrote. "Despite your assurances, I'm continuing to hear suggestions that this material will be diluted and immediately shipped to WIPP. With this letter, I want to confirm our agreement to the effect that this will not occur." Energy Department spokesman Pat Etchart acknowledged Wednesday that the agency doesn't have a place to put the waste. He acknowledged that if the agency can't find a place, that could delay closure of Rocky Flats. "We're still evaluating what our options might be," Etchart said. All contents Copyright 2002 The Denver Post or other copyright ***************************************************************** 21 Bush expected to quickly approve nuclear waste site in Nevada Las Vegas SUN February 06, 2002 WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush is expected to move swiftly, possibly as soon as early next week, to approve construction of a nuclear waste site in Nevada, according to congressional and administration sources. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham endorsed the site last month, but by law has to wait 30 days to give a formal recommendation to the president. That time is up this Saturday and Bush is expected to make a decision quickly, the sources said. With Nevada officials vowing to try to prevent the shipment of up to 77,000 tons of nuclear waste into their state, a final decision will have to be up to Congress. Nevada can block a presidential decision, but Congress can then overrule the state. Bush will not make a final decision until he gets the report from Abraham but is expected to approve the Yucca Mountain site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, said White House sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "He trusts the energy secretary's judgment," said one source. Abraham has briefed Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge about the need for a centralized site for storing highly radioactive nuclear waste and Ridge "saw no reason to object," said the source. Even after a presidential decision, it will be years before the site - once it gets a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission - would be ready to take any of the waste now kept in spent fuel pools and concrete bunkers at nuclear power plants around the country. Abraham, who notified Nevada officials on Jan. 10 that he will recommend the site to the president, called it a "scientifically sound and suitable" place to bury the nation's used reactor fuel now kept at the power plants. The Energy Department's schedule calls for opening the site to waste shipments by 2010, but that timetable could be optimistic, government and industry officials acknowledge. Meanwhile, Nevada officials, fully expecting a goahead from Bush, are revving up for a tough fight in Congress, which will have 90 days to overrule the Nevada objection if it comes to that. One reason Bush wants to make a decision quickly is that he wants to give Nevada as little time as possible to lobby other lawmakers on the issue, said both administration and congressional sources closely watching the issue. According to congressional sources, at this point almost all of the Republicans - and a good number of Democrats - appear ready to support the president on building the Yucca Mountain repository. Nevada Sen. John Ensign and Rep. James Gibbons, both Republicans, are stepping up efforts to try to sway some GOP lawmakers to oppose the site. "They need time," said one congressional source, who said that perhaps as many as 20 Republicans might have to be convinced to oppose their president if Nevada's objections are to be sustained. Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn, who was highly critical of Abraham's endorsement of the Yucca Mountain site last month, was expected to lobby the White House this week in hopes of convincing Bush to hold off on a decision, said a source familiar with the ongoing debate. Under a 1987 that designated Yucca Mountain in Nevada to be the only location to be studies for waste disposal, Nevada has 60 days to override presidential decision. Congress then has 90 legislative days to counter Nevada's objection by a majority vote in both the House and Senate. If the president's decision is affirmed, the Energy Department can begin preparing an application for an NRC license to build and operate the underground facility. The licensing process is likely will take several years. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 22 Guinn senses rush to approve dump Gov. Kenny Guinn Meeting with president today Thursday, February 07, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By JANE ANN MORRISON REVIEW-JOURNAL Gov. Kenny Guinn isn't optimistic about today's visit with President Bush because Guinn believes Yucca Mountain is being "fast-tracked" for selection as the nation's nuclear waste repository. Although the Nevada governor will get the personal meeting he wants, Guinn said Wednesday the sudden pressure to have that meeting suggests Bush will support Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's imminent recommendation that Yucca Mountain is a suitable site. The Bush administration informed Guinn on Monday that if he wanted a face-to-face White House meeting with Bush, he needed to do it before Saturday -- and Wednesday and Friday were unavailable. Saturday is the soonest Abraham can make his formal recommendation to the president, 30 days after he informed Guinn he favors Yucca Mountain for the repository. If he makes a recommendation to Bush over the weekend, Bush could send the matter to Congress as early as Monday. The small window for a meeting "signals to me this is on a fast-track," Guinn said at a news conference at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Guinn's meeting with Bush is scheduled for 12:45 p.m. local time. He will leave Las Vegas in the morning and return immediately after the meeting. The president "may just listen and say thank you," Guinn said. But the governor plans to inform Bush that he will veto the president's decision, should Bush recommend Yucca Mountain for the storage of the nation's high-level nuclear waste. Guinn plans to make his presentation "in a very professional way and explain our interpretation of the law that allows the governor to veto" the repository. He wants to stress to Bush that there are unresolved questions about the suitability of the mountain, despite Abraham's contention that Yucca Mountain is a safe site. Guinn said he won't use political arguments, and he won't warn Bush about any political backlash against the GOP in Nevada in the aftermath of a decision to place nuclear waste 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "I don't believe that will happen," Guinn said. Calling it part of the "chess game," Guinn declined to say when he would exercise the veto should he need it, although he has 60 days after the president's decision to do so. The next opportunity to stop the repository would come in Congress, where the House and Senate would have to vote to override his veto by a simple majority to keep the nuclear waste train moving. But Guinn places his faith in the courts, where he believes Nevada will find a nonpartisan, nonpolitical and fact-based decision. Guinn said it's clear the House would override his veto, and the only chance he has would be in the Senate, where Harry Reid is assistant majority leader and John Ensign can try to collect support among Republicans. Guinn will be accompanied by Reid and Ensign when he meets with Bush. Nevada's two House members, Republican Jim Gibbons and Democrat Shelley Berkley, were not invited to the meeting, which is expected to be a short one. Reid said in January he believes there is "a real possibility" that Bush will reject the idea of putting the waste in Nevada, but didn't explain why he believed such a scenario is possible. He speculated Bush "may step forward and do something that surprises everyone." A call to Reid's spokesman to see whether he still holds that belief was not returned Wednesday. Guinn's pessimism Wednesday was in stark contrast to an editorial he wrote for Tuesday's Seattle Post-Intelligencer. In that op-ed piece, Guinn wrote, "I have confidence in the common sense of President Bush, who promised me personally and in writing that the project would not be mindlessly advanced in the face of bad science. I believe the president is a man of his word. If he changes course, however, my duty is clearly to Nevadans, and I will spare no effort to ensure that science and the law will ultimately stop Yucca Mountain from going forward." In Washington, top aides to Nevada's lawmakers met to plan strategy for the days following the governor's White House meeting. A press event was discussed for Friday, and possibly more for early next week, part of a strategy to push Nevada's message that Yucca Mountain is not ready to be declared suitable for nuclear waste storage in the view of independent scientists and congressional investigators. Also, Ensign bowed out of a scheduled meeting today with Bush political adviser Karl Rove because he will accompany Guinn to the meeting with the president, Ensign's spokeswoman said. Gibbons was to keep the appointment with Rove, which was scheduled for 3:30 a.m. local time, aides said. Although Guinn doesn't believe political arguments are worth raising now, he did in 2000. In that election year, in an effort to neutralize nuclear waste as a defining issue in the presidential race in Nevada, Bush issued a one-paragraph policy statement: "I believe sound science, and not politics, must prevail in the designation of any high-level nuclear waste repository. As president, I would not sign legislation that would send nuclear waste to any proposed site unless it's been deemed scientifically safe. I also believe the federal government must work with the local and state governments that will be affected to address safety and transportation issues." Guinn called Bush's statement "a victory for Nevada" and said it matched the Clinton administration's position. But Democrats clung to nuclear waste as an important defining presidential issue in Nevada. "A vote for George Bush equals bringing nuclear waste to Nevada," Reid said repeatedly before the election. Reid insisted that if Bush was elected instead of Democratic Vice President Al Gore, "nuclear waste would be here within six months after he's sworn into office." The majority of Nevada voters, despite opposing nuclear waste in their state, chose Bush anyway. Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault contributed to this report. webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 23 Loads of nuclear waste may pass through valley IdahoStatesman.com Thursday, February 7, 2002 Shipments to Nevada will likely travel I-84 By Faith Bremner Gannett News Service Statesman file photos A shipment of radioactive waste is prepared to leave the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory in April 1999. Waste shipments from INEEL could go to Yucca Mountain, a proposed waste repository in Nevada. An INEEL caravan makes its way with nuclear waste. If Yucca Mountain opens, such caravans could become more common through Idaho. What's at stake? How and where to store highly radioactive nuclear waste from power plants and other facilities across the country, including the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. The federal government is looking to Yucca Mountain in Nevada as a storage site. Why Yucca Mountain? Most current nuclear waste storage sites are near population centers and major bodies of water, and Yucca Mountain is viewed by supporters of the plan as isolated and dry. It´s also been used in the past to test nuclear weapons. What do critics say? Yucca Mountain isn´t safe, because of seismic faults and an underground river. What's next? On Saturday, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is expected to recommend Yucca Mountain to President Bush. Waste's route to Yucca Mountain Nuclear waste headed to Yucca Mountain from commercial reactors and government sites could travel through 43 states, Nevada state officials say. [http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/daily/20020207/LocalNews/220146.shtml] ://www.epa.gov/radiation/yucca/] - radiation protection standards and see documents about the project WASHINGTON -- If the U.S. Department of Energy opens a high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., as planned, thousands of trucks and trains carrying the waste will roll through the Treasure Valley on their way to the desert tomb. Over 38 years, 16,240 truckloads of highly radioactive waste -- most of it from the DOE´s Hanford Site in Washington -- likely would travel over Interstate 84 through Boise, across Idaho, into Utah and on to southern Nevada, according to an analysis conducted by the state of Nevada. The shipments will be of spent fuel rods from nuclear power plants in Washington and Oregon and radioactive liquids left over from bomb-making activities at Hanford dating back to the 1940s. These shipments will be joined by another 2,460 truckloads of waste coming down Interstate 15 from the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory west of Idaho Falls. The Department of Energy is recommending that President Bush develop Yucca Mountain as a national repository for radioactive waste, but doubts remain that it will ever open. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said in January that he will recommend the site to Bush on Saturday. The president is under no time constraint to act on the recommendation. If Yucca Mountain does open, Idaho´s waste may well be among the first to be shipped there. The Department of Energy´s Naval Reactors Facility at INEEL already has worked through the tedious process for preparing waste for shipment, Idaho officials say. So far, officials in Idaho say they´re not worried about the prospect of, on average, 35 truckloads of radioactive material each month traveling through Boise´s residential areas and within 2 miles of downtown. They say the shipments will be safe and that accidents are unlikely. They point to DOE´s safe record of transporting nuclear waste across the country. Idaho has received and shipped nuclear waste out of INEEL for years without mishap. Boise Mayor Brent Coles said he´d prefer to see the waste transported by rail. That would require DOE to build a railroad spur to Yucca Mountain at an additional cost of $1 billion. If DOE decides to use trains, the number of shipments through the Boise area would drop to 3,300 during the 38-year shipping period, or seven per month on average. The number of train shipments out of INEEL would drop to 700. "It would be safer by rail," Coles said, noting that the mainline tracks run well south of Boise. "You can close the (safety) loop around rail transportation much more than you can around trucking." But Gary Richardson, executive director of the nuclear watchdog group Snake River Alliance, said Idaho is so eager to get rid of high-level waste at INEEL that it´s willing to turn a blind eye to the out-of-state shipments. Those shipments would be inviting terrorist targets, he said. "The idea of sending this stuff through population centers like Boise is crazy, especially now with the threat of terrorism being renewed," Richardson said. "What you´ll be doing is creating one more place for the stuff to be stored and thousands of transportation targets. "Some people have called them mobile Chernobyls." Kathleen Trever, a state employee who is overseeing Idaho´s effort to force DOE to clean up and remove radioactive waste at INEEL, declined to discuss the potential for terrorist attacks on the shipments. "From the state´s perspective, we work to make sure that all of the nuclear shipments that come along our highways are done safely. "We´re working with the Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to make sure the packaging is adequate and that our emergency responders are knowledgeable about the risks involved in the unlikely event of an accident." Waste accumulated at the INEEL over nearly 50 years from submarines and ship reactors is ahead of commercial waste in the shipment approval process, Trever said. DOE has refused to provide probable transportation routes to Yucca Mountain or even discuss how the waste would be moved. It would be premature to do so until Congress designates Yucca Mountain the nation´s nuclear waste repository, DOE officials say. But the state of Nevada, which is fighting the dump designation, has prepared maps using state and DOE routing regulations for nuclear waste that show the likely waste-shipment routes. Nationwide, the federal government plans to ship 70,000 metric tons of waste now stored at 72 power plants and five DOE facilities, including INEEL, to Yucca Mountain. The shipping project would consist of 96,000 truckloads or 20,000 train shipments augmented by 3,700 truck shipments from power plants that aren´t accessible by rail. INEEL is temporarily storing highly radioactive material the U.S. loaned to foreign countries for research and is now taking back. The facility also stores spent fuel from a New York power plant, from nuclear-powered ships and from the damaged reactor at the Three Mile Island power plant in Pennsylvania. In a legally binding agreement, DOE has promised to remove INEEL´s high-level nuclear waste by 2035. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the agency responsible for licensing the Yucca Mountain site and approving the waste-shipment containers, is reviewing all its safety standards because of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, agency spokeswoman Rosetta Virgilio said. She could not say when the review would be finished. Richardson´s group doesn´t believe Yucca Mountain is a safe place to store nuclear waste because, he said, the area is full of fault fractures and near an underground river. The group advocates that power plants stop generating the waste and that the waste already generated be stored and monitored in above-ground, safe containers indefinitely. That´s not acceptable to Idaho, Trever said. "We´ve had this discussion at the state level, and the state´s policy is, the material in INEEL should be removed from the state by 2035, and we expect the DOE to develop a repository for the material," she said. Mitch Singer, spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute -- the trade organization for the nuclear power industry -- said environmental groups like the Snake River Alliance are trying to shut down nuclear power plants. That´s not likely to happen because they supply 20 percent of the nation´s electricity, he said. The shipping containers, called casks, stand up to rigorous fire, crash and underwater tests, Singer said. There have been 3,000 high-level waste shipments in the United States since 1965 without any major mishaps, he said. "This is a dangerous world we live in, and there are so many different scenarios that could be played out, some so fantastic the odds are against them happening," Singer said. "At the same time, safety is paramount in the nuclear industry. "This is something we can do effectively and safely." Statesman reporter Rocky Barker contributed to this report. ***************************************************************** 24 Letter: Send nuclear waste into space Las Vegas SUN Today: February 07, 2002 at 8:40:02 PST Am I missing something? Is my federal government telling me it is safer for this country to bury 77,000 tons of lethal poison underground in my back yard for the next umpteen zillion years, and in all good faith predict without a doubt the safety of such a venture? Who wrote this script, Stephen King? When nuclear waste first became an issue, the thought was to send this excrement into space to the sun to dispose of it. The possibility of rocket failure, however, scared everyone and tabled this obvious solution. Now is the time to reopen this win-win proposal. I don't want this crap in Nevada, California, Michigan, or for that matter, anywhere on Earth. Rockets could be safely launched from any state, negating the necessity of moving it across the country. The nuclear industry would have new life since disposal would be a reality. We can develop in a relatively short time a safe mode of rocket transport if we want to. I know what the argument is. What about a rocket failure and the possibility of fallout? But who said we had to send up millions of tons at a time? Put sane amounts of waste into those indestructible containers our government says they can make, and give those billions of dollars to NASA to develop the space disposal program, along with our outer space projects to the stars. For once Americans will get a specific return on investment. No solution is guaranteed. But science has come a long way since the '60s. Now is the time to put space technology to work. No place on Earth should ever have a weather report of 5,000 degrees and sunny. ARTHUR KAPETANSKY All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 25 Analysis: Guinn's goal: Fight Yucca, keep ties to Bush Las Vegas SUN Today: February 07, 2002 at 10:01:30 PST By Erin Neff Normally Nevada's first couple eagerly anticipates a visit with George and Laura Bush. There have been public campaign dinners and quiet chats when Dema Guinn and Laura Bush discussed their common fear of public speaking. But today's trip to Washington is strictly business for Gov. Kenny Guinn. He'll meet with President Bush to try to persuade the president against putting a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain. It's the state's biggest fight and the issue that pits Guinn's responsibility to his state against his party loyalty. And it all comes during an election year. It's no wonder Dema Guinn quietly worried Wednesday that "I have a bad feeling about this trip." For Guinn, it's troubling on several fronts. State politicans say it appears Bush is ready to make a decision, and it comes at a tough juncture for Guinn, who has vowed to veto the plan. Guinn, who led Bush's campaign effort in Nevada, has been close to the president and his Republican administration has several ties to Bush. But Yucca Mountain has become the curse word in state politics and some Republicans say a decision to put a nuclear waste dump at the site could cost the party in the upcoming campaign. The issue for Guinn is how to be try to fight the proposal, not lose any political ground to the Democrats who plan to make Yucca Mountain an issue, and still retain strong ties to the White House and the Republican Party. Political observers note Guinn is in a tough position but say the governor will score major points by choosing his constituents over his party. "If I were working with the governor's campaign, I'd love this issue," said Ted Jelen, chairman of the political science department at UNLV. "Politically, Guinn is in a good position because he is seen as fighting for his constituents. "My guess is Bush will understand this is something (Guinn and Republican Sen. John Ensign) believe," Jelen added. "Not everybody is going to be able to support the party." State Democratic Party Chairman Terry Care said if Bush approves Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's recommendation, it could create trouble for Guinn if Democrats could come up with an opponent "It would give a candidate an issue," Care said. Keeping up the image of a strong leader against the dump won't be easy without relaxing ties to Bush or saying things that cast Guinn in a more independent light. The governor and his staff have been cautious making public statements about the Bush Administration's role in Yucca Mountain, even though to observers, it seems as if the president has already made up his mind. Guinn, along with Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., are planning to meet with the president today. "It's a little disconcerting to me to have received a call Monday, very late, saying that my request to meet the president face-to-face before he makes a decision has to be scheduled before (Feb.) 9th," Guinn said Wednesday. "The first thing that came to my mind is the president must be ready to make a decision. It seems rather fast-tracked." And that realization is proving difficult for Guinn, his staff and his campaign advisers -- all of whom have ties to Bush. As chairman of George Bush's 2000 campaign in Nevada, Guinn was instrumental in getting Bush to respond to then-Vice President Al Gore's statement that any Yucca Mountain decision be based on sound science and not politics. Bush echoed the sound science, not politics statement with help from the governor. Guinn's staff nervously crafted an official no comment when Bush's proposed budget came out Monday showing a jump in funding for Yucca Mountain and no money for transmutation -- an alternative option that would keep nuclear waste in its current locations. Guinn's chief of staff, Marybel Batjer, held jobs in the Defense Department during both President Ronald Reagan's and the elder President George Bush's administrations. Batjer was assistant to the Defense Secretary and served on the staff of the National Security Council during the Reagan administration. She then served on the Defense Department's transition team and was special assistant to the secretary of the Navy in the Bush administration. The Guinns have been friendly with George and Laura Bush since Kenny Guinn first took office in 1998, spending time at the Texas governor's mansion and attending a number of dinners together. Guinn is also active in the Republican Governor's Association, through which he worked firsthand with George Bush when he was Texas governor. In addition to Guinn's personal relationship with George Bush, Guinn's advisers have a lengthy history with the Bush family. Republican consultant Sig Rogich ran the media campaign for Reagan's 1984 re-election and served as the elder Bush's media adviser before being appointed ambassador to Iceland late in Bush's administration. Guinn's re-election campaign chairman and former chief of staff Pete Ernaut had entertained offers to work on Bush's 2000 election staff. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 26 Gibbons discusses nuke repository with two top presidential advisers Las Vegas SUN Today: February 07, 2002 at 10:57:27 PST By Benjamin Grove WASHINGTON -- Starting Nevada's appeal to the White House on Yucca Mountain, Rep. Jim Gibbons said that President Bush's advisers are struggling with the issues of terrorism and nuclear waste storage. Meeting with Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, and energy-policy adviser, Andrew Lundquist, this morning for an hour at the White House, Gibbons said a major part of the discussion was related to terrorism. "They talked about national security issues and about how since Sept. 11 nuclear energy facilities have been put at high risk," said Gibbons, R-Nev., who started his day at the White House. Gov. Kenny Guinn and Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., were scheduled to meet with Bush this afternoon. The meetings come as Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham prepares to make his recommendation that Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, become the burial ground for 77,000 tons of highly radioactive nuclear waste. Abraham could make his announcement as soon as this weekend, although a decision is expected Monday. While reports say Bush will act quickly to approve the decision -- and Guinn on Wednesday expressed concern of a pending decision -- Gibbons said the aides seemed oblivious to speculation Abraham and Bush would act next week. "I was surprised they weren't aware of the rumors that the decision is going to be made soon," Gibbons said, adding that the two seemed sincere on that point. "I don't think there was reason for them to hedge." A White House spokesman said this morning that Bush would make his decision after Abraham makes his recommendation. The spokesman declined to describe Bush's position on terrorism and nuclear waste. Gibbons argued that shipping nuclear waste across the nation from the 103 nuclear plants to Nevada invited terrorist strikes. The White House advisers seemed to be wrestling with whether it is safer to ship waste to be stored in one central location, or to leave it scattered nationwide on-site at power plants, Gibbons said. He laid out numerous arguments against the Yucca project, stressing that years of scientific study by the Energy Department had not determined that the site is a safe place to store waste. He reiterated recent General Accounting Office findings that faulted the project and recommended delaying it. Gibbons said that the nation should consider new technologies for reprocessing waste instead of burying it in Nevada. He talked about treating waste through promising but undeveloped, high-tech processes that speed the breakdown of radioactive waste. Rove and Lunquist seemed receptive to that, Gibbons said. "I was pleasantly surprised that Karl Rove wanted to talk about the science and many of the issues that are related to our concerns," Gibbons said. During his campaign for president, Bush vowed to let sound science -- not politics -- drive his decision about the nuclear waste repository. But Reid said political arguments have the most sway now that Bush's decision may be imminent. Reid will push those buttons in his meeting with the president, he said. "I'm going to go in there and not talk about science, I'm going to talk politics," Reid said this morning. "I'm going to tell the president this is a very big political mistake. The science is awful." Reid said the decision to advance Yucca will hurt Bush and GOP congressional candidates in Nevada. At a press conference Wednesday, Guinn said he will deliver to Bush studies by the state, the independent Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, the General Accounting Office and Nuclear Regulatory Commission consultants, which say a repository recommendation is premature. "It's certainly an uphill battle, because there are 42 states opposing us," Guinn said, referring to states where nuclear reactors are located. If Bush approves Abraham's recommendation, Guinn would file an official objection, which Congress would likely overrule. Reid, the Senate majority whip, said he was not ready to release a "whip count" -- the number of senators he expects to vote with him on Yucca. Longtime supporters of a Yucca repository are eager to advance the project. "They are prepared to move it out of the House as fast as possible," said Samantha Jordan, spokeswoman for Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, an energy subcommittee chairman and leading Yucca advocate in the House. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said she expects both Abraham and Bush will act soon. "I think it's important for these meetings to take place," Berkley said of today's gattherings. But she added, "I don't think Spence Abraham would be making his recommendation unless he thought the president was ready to accept it." Sun reporter Mary Manning contributed to this story. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 27 GOP candidates collect donations from Yucca team Las Vegas SUN Today: February 07, 2002 at 10:57:27 PST By Erin Neff Republicans vying for Nevada's three congressional seats each received campaign contributions from Yucca Mountain proponents -- a move they said has no impact on their opposition to the project. Both Jon Porter and Lynette Boggs McDonald received contributions from former Nevada governor Robert List, a Yucca Mountain lobbyist. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., received money from Yucca Mountain contractor Bechtel Corp.'s political action committee. Gibbons received $1,000 from Bechtel PAC on Aug. 17, 2001, Boggs McDonald received $1,000 from List on Dec. 14, 2001 and Porter got $1,000 from List on Aug. 22, 2001, according to reports filed last week with the Federal Election Commission. Boggs McDonald said she sees no problem accepting money from List, despite her stated opposition to Yucca Mountain. "When I look at Robert List, I don't just look at him as a one-issue person," said Boggs McDonald, who is running against Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., in Nevada's 1st Congressional District. "While this may be an issue we disagree on, it doesn't take away from Robert List's tremendous pro-business experience," Boggs McDonald said. "I disagree with my husband on issues, and we share a checking account." Gibbons said Bechtel's long history in the state, including its work on Hoover Dam, makes him proud that the Nevada company would donate to his campaign. "It's not the company that is Nevada's enemy, it's the law that is Nevada's enemy," Gibbons said. "They're looking for good government, they're not looking for influence." Porter's campaign consultant, Mike Slanker, said Porter's opposition to Yucca Mountain will not be diminished by a $1,000 contribution. "We disagree with Bob List on this issue and unfortunately we're going to be on opposite sides," Slanker said. "That check certainly shows no sign of weakness by Jon Porter." Slanker first become aware of the Yucca Mountain campaign controversy when working on John Ensign's two Senate campaigns. Ensign accepted contributions from Bechtel until the company was named Yucca contractor. Porter's Democratic opponent, Dario Herrera, said he avoids accepting money from anyone related to the nuclear industry. And, he said, if a contribution is traced to someone related to Yucca Mountain, his campaign would return it. "I think voters should be concerned about any congressional candidate taking money from the nuclear power industry's hired gun," Herrera said. "I think voters would be right to question any candidate's level of commitment to fighting Yucca Mountain if they receive money from the people trying to bring it here." Boggs McDonald said she doesn't see any reason to return List's contribution. Altogether she raised $250,000 for the period ending Dec. 31. "It's not me giving money to Robert List," she said. Berkley's campaign manager, Peggy Egan, said Berkley would not accept any money from a source related to Yucca Mountain, or from any of the project's congressional advocates. Porter's FEC report shows List's contribution but then reports it on another line, reattributing the donation to List's wife, Maryanne. Candidates often reattribute donations to earmark the money for either the primary or general election or to redesignate the donation to a person's spouse. Democrats have been attacking Republicans more stridently on the Yucca Mountain issue since Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said he would recommend the site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas to be the nation's high-level nuclear waste repository. Last month Democrats protested House Majority Leader Dick Armey's trip to Las Vegas to raise money for Republicans and to publicly endorse Boggs McDonald. Boggs McDonald also received contributions from PACs operated by House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, R-Texas. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 28 Guinn, Reid, Ensign taking nuclear dump fight to White House [RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL] February 7, 2002 Associated Press [] Gov. Kenny Guinn said he and U.S. Sens. Harry Reid and John Ensign will tell President Bush on Thursday that the nation's radioactive waste shouldn't be buried in Nevada. "I want him to hear it from me that I will veto it,"the Republican governor said Wednesday of a pending decision on the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. "This is a decision vital to the people of Nevada,"Guinn said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press."We want to express our concerns that the science isn't ready." An aide to Ensign, a Republican, confirmed that Guinn, Ensign and Reid, the second-ranking Democrat in the Senate, will make up the Nevada delegation in the White House meeting, scheduled for 12:45 p.m. PST. Bush is about to act on a recommendation from Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham that Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is a suitable site to entomb 77,000 tons of spent commercial, industrial and military nuclear waste. Abraham's official recommendation can come as early as Sunday. If Bush approves it, Guinn has the power to veto the decision and send the question of whether the Yucca Mountain dump will be built to Congress. Guinn said Wednesday that Nevada's 2 million residents are overwhelmingly opposed to the nuclear dump, which the Energy Department wants to open in 2010. "I wanted to have an opportunity to express our concerns face-to-face,"Guinn said, recalling that while campaigning for president Bush made a written promise that any decision on the Yucca Mountain site would be made on the basis of"sound science." Guinn said a White House representative called this week and said the Nevada governor should meet with Bush before Saturday. Guinn on Tuesday also sent a letter to Abraham declaring that Yucca Mountain, a volcanic ridge at the edge of the vast Nevada Test Site, is not scientifically suitable for containing radioactive waste. "Going forward with the Yucca Mountain project would be an unfortunate breach of justice for Nevadans and a grave mistake for the nation,"the letter says. It also outlines Nevada's efforts to fight the proposal on legal grounds. Guinn cited a recent report by the independent Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board criticizing the Energy Department's scientific analysis of the Yucca Mountain site as"weak to moderate." He also cited a November report by the congressional General Accounting Office that said some 293 issues should be addressed before the proposed repository is licensed. The Energy Department wants to apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license in 2004 and begin accepting waste in 2010. As planned, the site would remain radioactive for at least 10,000 years. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 29 Tell truth: Nuke waste could be good for us [RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL] February 7, 2002 Ronald Phaneuf’s Your Turn expressing his belief that Nevada should embrace the Yucca Mountain repository (Jan. 30) is a breath of fresh air. Make no mistake: Nevadans are rightly concerned about radioactive material passing through their communities, but we’ve failed to acknowledge that nuclear material detonated in numerous atomic tests for some 40-plus years didn’t magically materialize at the Nevada Test Site. It was safely imported from laboratories outside our state. Reason dictates that when the dust finally settles, the feds will eventually store radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain — with or without our consent. For their own self-interests, elected officials have mistakenly drawn and crossed an emotionally charged line in the sand from which there is no reasonable retreat. This leaves Nevada helpless to capitalize on this radioactive resource. Our refusal to accept the realities of Yucca Mountain places all of us in the identical shoes of those fabled spectators who ambiguously watched the king parade through the streets without clothes. They were afraid to publicly acknowledge his nakedness for fear of being ridiculed. Who then, among us, will be the innocent child to break from the crowd and proclaim the truth? “Radioactive storage can be very good for Nevada.” Jim Mitchell, Reno (via e-mail) ******************* What a shame that RGJ had to show its bias by hiding a great article about Yucca Mountain under a say-nothing headline! Physicist Ronald Phaneuf presented knowledgeable information about the Yucca Mountain controversy. Nevada is a gambling state, and our elected officials should know they are playing a game with all the cards stacked against them. We simply don’t have the political power to keep Yucca Mountain empty of fuel rods. The repository has been a “done deal” from the very beginning with our background of nuclear testing in this same area. For years, I have heard information from sources such as Lawrence Livermore Labs stating just what Ronald Phaneuf stated, the fuel rods may well have significant economic value some day. Other states’ “trash” could become Nevada’s “treasure.” Please look up a copy of that hidden article; it is well written by a knowledgeable physicist. Nevada now has natural gold deposits in our mountains, but we have a chance to have a huge “gold mine” in the future in the productive, responsible and safe use of those fuel rods in Yucca Mountain! Andrea Bradick, Reno (via e-mail) ******************* So Assemblyman John Lee has accused the Energy Department of “scare tactics” in stating the obvious, that leaving nuclear waste in 30-some different locations around the country is a virtual invitation to terrorist activity. The alternative is the mountain basement in Nevada where taxpayers have forked over about $3 billion — yes billion —to provide safe storage, and other than the New York City subway system, there probably isn’t a better geographic location. If Yucca is so bad, why hasn’t our intrepid senator (Reid) belly-ached before now, remembering that this is not a recent dig? In these same pages, I have read that the governor, along with the other emotional politicians, have been spreading the word to other mayors and governors that allowing this stuff to travel through your state may irradiate your entire population: Of course, that is just sound advice. No scare tactics there, by golly. In simple truth, the storage containers are virtually indestructible (by letter to me from Sen. Reid) so it would matter little if they were transported on a U-Haul trailer! Is there not an unemotional voice through which to properly inform the public? The newspaper doesn’t seem to have one. Vernon M. Latshaw, Gardnerville © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 30 Guinn, senators to confront Bush today over Yucca Mountain February 7, 2002 Geoff Dornan As a Saturday deadline looms, Nevada's top three politicians will make a last-minute plea today to President George Bush to keep Yucca Mountain from becoming the nation's nuclear waste dump. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is expected to formally notify Bush by Saturday he has recommended the central Nevada site. Bush could approve it and send the recommendation to Congress next week. Gov. Kenny Guinn and Nevada senators Harry Reid and John Ensign will meet with the president today to try to slow the process. Guinn said Wednesday the urgency was clear after he advised the White House he wanted to talk with the president. "It's really concerning because I had requested a meeting with the president and they called Monday and said 'OK, we can have a meeting but we have to do it before the 9th,'" said Guinn. Saturday marks the end of a 30-day deadline for Abraham to make his recommendation to Bush. The energy secretary notified Guinn on Jan. 10 of his intention to approve the Yucca site. "So it's really telling you this is on a fast track, whatever action he's going to take," said the governor in a phone interview from Las Vegas. He and Ensign are both Republicans who solidly supported Bush in the 1998 elections in Nevada. Reid is the second-ranking Democrat in the U.S. Senate leadership. "At least we'll have the opportunity to sit down and talk to him before he makes the decision -- publicly anyway," said Guinn. He said he hopes the decision isn't a "done deal" but that, in any case, Guinn wants Bush to hear Nevada's arguments that much more scientific study must be done. "The main issue we want to talk to him about is safe science and sound science," he said. Guinn said the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission is among the groups saying more study is needed on up to 292 issues before a decision is made. Those issues include the dangers of transporting the waste to Yucca Mountain 75 miles north of Las Vegas, how long the site and the waste containers will last before leaking, the potential for earthquakes and volcanoes to damage the site and dangers the radioactive material will reach groundwater below Yucca Mountain. "Local communities have to do an environmental study to build single-family homes, and here we're talking about building a $70 billion storage facility for nuclear waste and you don't even have an environmental impact study," he said. He said Bush may not be aware of some of the issues. If Bush indicates his mind is made up to ship nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, "I want to be the first to express to him in a very professional way that I will invoke all authority under the law to protect the people of the state of Nevada." Guinn and Nevada's two senators plan to show Bush "that it's not a political issue in this state. It's a Nevada issue against those other states and the high powered lobbyists who represent the nuclear power industry," the governor said. Guinn said that means he will veto the project and the senators will fight any attempt to override that veto in Congress. And if it is overridden, he said, Nevada will take its case to court. "You just have to go sit down with the president of the United states face to face and make your case," he said. "That's the best shot we have with him." Copyright Nevada Appeal. ***************************************************************** 31 DOE DEFENSE AN EXERCISE IN SELECTIVITY www.lasvegasweekly.com Date: February 7, 2002 | Local time: 9:45PM | Nuke dump foes take heed: The Department of Energy's primed for a legal war over the proposed Yucca Mountain nuke dump. Its "Commonly Raised Topics" report, released the same day Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham formally announced support for the dump, provides insight into a probable DOE defense strategy. And, fittingly, it reads like answers to a cross examination. The 37-page report delivers a one-sided, stick-to-the-script, Yucca-or-bust perspective. There's no mention of public opposition to the project, scientific data that questions its suitability or an explanation as to why other sites were removed from dump consideration. Instead, the report heaps platitudes on Yucca Mountain for being dry, remote and sparsely populated. Further into the "deposition," the DOE falsely trumpets a congenial relationship between the NRC and the Environmental Protection Agency. The truth is, the two bodies don't see eye-to-eye on suitability standards. The EPA backed off its proposed groundwater radiation standards only after the NRC sued, saying the standards would derail the project. It gets worse. Not only does the DOE admit uncertainty about the proposed dump's safety--it would "likely protect the health and safety of the public and workers"--but it glosses over important details about remedies for nuclear accidents. The fact is that unless Congress renews the Price-Anderson Act, which expires Aug. 1 and only covers accidents involving current facilities, there will be no compensation. Even if it's renewed, it protects government contractors involved in accidents. And, should cleanup costs exceed insurance reserves, it forces those costs onto taxpayers. On second thought, given all the holes in this report, getting ol' Spence to take the stand might be fun. "Commonly Raised Topics" can be accessed at the DOE Web site, www.energy.gov. --Damon Hodge ( [damon.hodge@vegas.com] ) All contents © 1998 - 2002 Radiant City Publications, LLC ***************************************************************** 32 UK: Economic Lifeline Plea THE WHITEHAVEN NEWS Thursday, February 07, 2002 Copeland Council's erstwhile leader, Robin Simpson, last week called on the new government landlords of Sellafield to help give the area an economic lifeline. Under arrangements still being finalised, a Liabilities Management Authority will take over ownership of Sellafield's nuclear operations, including ownership of Thorp and the controversial Mox plant. "We need to seriously look at this," Robin Simpson told the full council, before his resignation. "If the government is going to take over the liabilities for the nuclear industry then they should pick up some of the bills as well. In the past we have had to finance everything ourselves and that is wrong." He singled out the Westlakes Science and Technology Park, which BNFL helped set up to help lessen the area's dependence on Sellafield, as a good example. "Westlakes is a national institution but it has had to spend £1.4 million of its own money paying for a road junction which was necessary for its expansion. That money could have been better spent." Whitehaven Tory councillor, Alistair Norwood, warned that the area was in danger of becoming "a wasteland" unless it got help. "Look at all the promises we have had for this scheme or that scheme, then, at the last minute, they have turned out to be nothing but mist," he declared. "If we don't make things happen we will face severe economic problems. Our grants from central government are being cut down and, as the population declines, the money we have to spend will continue to shrink." Coun John Henney said high-tech, high-value, developments ,such as Westlakes, were the solution for Copeland. Another member of the council's Executive, Brian Dixon, also praised Westlakes for being "successful world wide," but condemned Cumbria County Council for neglecting the area. "It is detrimental to Copeland and West Cumbria in general. The County will have to listen because local people are being denied the opportunity to provide for their families. Why should we be treated as second-class citizens? The fight is on but if we all work in partnership we can be successful." Council leader Robin Simpson claimed that efforts were being hampered by too many agencies. "Do away with the lot and just have one - they all have their own agendas, fighting each other, while we are struggling." Copeland Council's regeneration strategy identifies poor transport as a key factor in the lack of investment and is helping to press for A66/A595 upgrading to improve vital links into West Cumbria. The council is also sticking to its guns for a Duddon estuary crossing, to further improve communications. But another identified key to future success is Broad Band - a high capacity telecommunications network, in West Cumbria. Coun Henney said that at present "the cable went across the top of Whitehaven but not in the town centre." Brian Dixon described it as "the next phase of the industrial revolution" and Alistair Norwood added: "It is information these days, not goods moving about. It is only moving about vast amounts of information that will create wealth for us. Without it we are in serious trouble." "Copeland are looking for an urgent meeting with the county council to try and get to grips with the area's problems." ***************************************************************** 33 Nuclear waste, a problem and an opportunity canberra.yourguidewww.yourguide.com.au By CHRIS HAMER THE UNITED States will soon decide whether to proceed with a repository for high-level nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. The proposal has been under study for some 20 years, at the enormous cost of $7 billion ($A13.5 billion). Present plans are to store the waste 300 metres below the desert floor, but 300 metres above the water table, in multilayered metal canisters. The canisters will lie on the floor of a tunnel, possibly protected from drips by a titanium ''umbrella''. They can thus be continuously monitored and retrieved if necessary. The proposal has had to satisfy a criterion that no member of the public should be exposed to a dose of more than 15 millirem a year for the next 10,000 years. The nearest community is a truckstop called Lathrop Wells, consisting of two filling stations and a house of ill repute. It would be exposed to only one millionth of the recommended maximum dose, on the most pessimistic estimate. President George W. Bush is due to announce his decision on the proposal shortly, and is expected to approve it. The two houses of Congress will also have to vote on it. Only one credible source of risk has been identified - the possibility of a volcanic eruption nearby, in which the repository might be breached by lava flow. The risk has been estimated at about 1 chance in 10 to 100 million a year, but this still might be enough to derail the project. In the most recent development, the state of Nevada is suing the Department of Energy in a bid to stop the repository. In these circumstances, perhaps Australia should think again about the Pangea proposal for a repository in the Australian outback. Pangea Resources put forward a plan for a $16 billion, privately operated repository, to take about 20 per cent of the world's high-level radioactive waste from nuclear power stations. Aiming to store 75,000 tonnes of waste for 250,000 years, Pangea identified a 1500km stretch of desert from near Coober Pedy in South Australia to Norman in Western Australia as the most suitable zone. Below the desert, the repository could extend for up to 20 square kilometres at a depth of 500 metres. It would be served by a special rail line, a special port, and a special fleet of waste transport vessels. Some compelling prima facie arguments for the idea were presented some time ago in an article by Sir Gustav Nossal (a member of Pangea's Scientific Review Group). First, there would be enormous economic benefits to Australia. The estimated worth to this country is of order $200 billion ($A195 billion) over 40 years, which is more than half our current net international debt. Second, the problem of radioactive waste already exists, and has to be solved somehow. Finally, Australia is the oldest, driest and most stable continent on Earth, and is logically the best place to look for a repository. We should be able to find a site at least as good as Yucca Mountain, where the risk of volcanic activity is negligible, or, in other words, where there is no credible source of risk at all. As for danger to local communities, I recall reading in Too Long in the Bush by Len Beadell that there is an area of 155,400 square kilometres out there where only one family lived and they moved out the following year. The federal and South Australian governments have rejected the Pangea proposal out of hand. The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation at Lucas Heights attended meetings with Pangea, but only ''on the basis that it is not government policy to accept the radioactive waste from other countries''. Pangea Resources International has now ceased commercial operations entirely, but its scheme still merits further consideration. 'We should be able to find a site at least as good as Yucca Mountain, where the risk of volcanic activity is negligible' Of course, we do not want to saddle ourselves with an ecological disaster for the next 250,000 years. If feasible, the project would have to be supervised in perpetuity by an international body such as the International Atomic Energy Agency. The canisters would have to be monitored continuously, and remain in a position to be retrieved if it were ever necessary. The international user community would have to guarantee to clean up the situation if any problems did occur. There are certainly many complex issues, both technical and political, to be considered. But there is a possibility here that Australia could make a major contribution towards solving the nuclear waste problem, and assisting nuclear disarmament by providing a safe repository for spent nuclear fuel, while at the same time reaping some huge economic benefits. In assisting the nuclear power industry, we could even help to ameliorate the greenhouse gas problem. Surely it could do no harm to take a second look at the idea, at least? Dr Hamer is an Associate Professor in theoretical physics at the University of New South Wales, and editor of The Physicist, the magazine of the Australian Institute of Physics. C.Hamer@unsw.edu.au ***************************************************************** 34 SELLAFIELD UPDATE Irish Newspapers LEINSTER Fine Gael MEP Senator Avril Doyle says the Irish Government should accept EU Environment Commissioner Wallstrom's offer to help facilitate discussions between Ireland and the United Kingdom over the risks posed by Sellafield and other BNFL installations. During a meeting of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on European Affairs on Thursday last with Commissioner Wallstrom, the Commissioner said Ireland could ask the Commission for help in reaching a solution to this problem. She welcomed the Commissioner's positive commitment to help Ireland by facilitating tripartite talks over Sellafield and added that she recognised this possibility some time ago having tabled a Parliamentary question to the Commission asking them to indicate if they could sponsor a similar agreement between the Irish and British Governments on Sellafield and other BNFL installations in the UK along the same lines they used to reach a legally binding agreement between Austria and the Czech Republic over the Temelin Nuclear plant. She felt this procedure could possibly be used as a template for communication and consultation on matters of security and risk management in the nuclear industry, between other friendly sovereign neighbours, within Europe. She said the commitment of the Irish Government towards resolving this issue had to be questioned however when, according to the European Commission, it had not kept the Commission informed of its concerns. While the Government had submitted documentation to both OSPAR and the UN (Tribunal for the Law of the Sea) it did not sent a copy of these papers to the Commission. She said this also suggested the Government, while promising the Irish people that it would leave no stone unturned, had ignored the role which the European Commission could play, in helping to try and resolve the Sellafield issue!. © Copyright Unison ***************************************************************** 35 Press scanner: What have you done, governor? Turkish Daily News; Feb 7, 2002 SABAH said: "The United States and Turkey have made a secret agreement to prevent the materials used in nuclear weapon production from being shipped to Iraq's Saddam Hussein. The United States sent five nuclear material detectors and, during a secret operation, Turkish officials placed them at five border gates, starting with Edirne's Kapikule. However, Edirne Governor Fahri Yucel invited reporters on Tuesday and disclosed the presence of the detectors. He even sent the reporters to Kapikule and had them take photos of the detectors. This made waves in Ankara, with State Minister Responsible for Customs Mehmet Kececiler saying, 'This is not good. This is something that should have been kept secret'." Copyright © Asia Intelligence Wire ***************************************************************** 36 Bulgarian customs service introduces equipment for detecting nuclear material BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Feb 6, 2002 Text of report in English by Bulgarian news agency BTA web site Sofia, 6 February: Bulgaria possesses detectors capable of discovering in nuclear material trafficked illicitly by transport vehicles and people across border checkpoints, BTA learnt from the National Customs Agency. The mobile detectors are installed at the checkpoints of Kapitan Andreevo (on the border with Turkey) and Danube Bridge (on the border with Romania). The equipment, donated by the US, arrived in July 2001, and its serviceability is checked periodically by American experts. Such a check was last conducted at Danube Bridge in December 2001. At Kapitan Andreevo, the Americans checked the nuclear detectors a week ago, after installing identical devices at the Kapikule checkpoint on the Turkish side of the border. A scandal erupted in the Turkish press over a statement by Edirne Governor Fahri Ucel that nuclear detectors are being installed at five Turkish border checkpoints. Mehmet Kececiler, minister of state in charge of Customs Affairs, reacted strongly to the fact that the news was disclosed by the governor instead of being kept secret. The Turkish daily Sabah writes that the installation of nuclear material detectors along Turkey's borders is intended to prevent the export of nuclear material and technologies from Europe to Iran, Iraq and Syria via Turkey. Source: BTA web site, Sofia, in English 6 Feb 02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC. World Reporter ***************************************************************** 37 Tapes: JFK Saw Nukes As Deterrent Las Vegas SUN Today: February 07, 2002 at 4:20:22 PST BOSTON (AP) - President Kennedy saw nuclear stockpiles as a deterrent against attack and worried that the United States would fall behind the Soviets in building its arsenal, according to newly released tape recordings. Kennedy discussed the stockpiling of nuclear weapons in a Dec. 5, 1962, meeting with Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Maxwell Taylor and other high-ranking officials. Kennedy said the nuclear buildup had a stabilizing effect, and that it would be lost if the Soviets developed the ability to annihilate the United States. "And that being true, then they will use their conventional force to take whatever they want, anyplace - well not in this hemisphere - but in Europe and Asia," Kennedy said. On Wednesday, the John F. Kennedy Library and Museum released the four hours of newly declassified recordings that Kennedy had taped in the Oval Office and cabinet room. In the tapes, recorded weeks after the Cuban missile crisis, President Kennedy said the United States wouldn't use nuclear missiles in an offensive strike. "We have an awful lot of megatonnage to put on the Soviets sufficient to deter them from ever using nuclear weapons," Kennedy said. "Otherwise what good are they? You can't use them as a first weapon yourself, they are only good for deterring." "I don't see quite why we're building as many as we're building," he added. Seven months after Kennedy's remarks, the United States, Great Britain and the Soviet Union entered into the Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, banning nuclear tests in the atmosphere, outer space and under water. Timothy Naftali, director of the Presidential Recordings Project at the University of Virginia's Miller Center of Public Affairs, said the new recordings show Kennedy's foresight on foreign policy and arms control. He said the tapes will shape future Kennedy biographies. "These tapes will add to the developing picture of Kennedy as a thoughtful, creative, strong leader," said Naftali, co-editor of "The Presidential Recordings: John F. Kennedy: Volumes 1-3, The Great Crises." "Once again," Naftali said, "Kennedy comes off as the man you'd want in a crisis." On the Net: Kennedy Library: http://www.jfklibrary.org [http://www.jfklibrary.org] Miller Center: http://millercenter.virginia.edu [http://millercenter.virginia.edu] All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 38 Physicist Bohr's letters assail protege's atom role / Heisenberg did all he could for Germany, they say James Glanz, New York Times [chronfeedback@sfchronicle.com] Thursday, February 7, 2002 The leader of Hitler's atomic bomb program, Werner Heisenberg, portrayed himself after World War II as a kind of scientific resistance hero who sabotaged Hitler's attempts to build a nuclear weapon. But in a series of letters and other documents made public yesterday, his friend and onetime mentor, Danish physicist Niels Bohr, says that is not so. As if speaking from beyond the grave, Bohr says that under Heisenberg, his beloved protege, "everything was being done in Germany to develop atomic weapons." In particular, the documents describe a meeting that Heisenberg initiated between the two men in occupied Denmark in September 1941. After the war, Heisenberg said he had traveled to Copenhagen to share his qualms about nuclear weapons. But the papers, released by the Bohr family and posted on the Niels Bohr Web site (www.nba.nbi [http://www.nba.nbi] . dk), which is maintained by the Niels Bohr Archive, tell a different story. Heisenberg did not travel to Copenhagen for the 1941 meeting to express moral qualms about building an atomic weapon in wartime or to suggest that physicists on both sides of the conflict should refuse to do so, according to a passage in a letter Bohr wrote to Heisenberg, but never sent. He was moved to write his letter, the authenticity of which seems beyond doubt, in 1957 when he read "Brighter Than a Thousand Suns," a history of the atomic bomb, in which Heisenberg is quoted offering his defense of his wartime role. "You said that there was no need to talk about details," Bohr said, "since you were completely familiar with them and had spent the past two years working more or less exclusively on such preparations." In another letter never sent, Bohr wrote: "You informed me that it was your conviction that the war, if it lasted sufficiently long, would be decided with atomic weapons, and (I did) not sense even the slightest hint that you and your friends were making efforts in another direction." Although historians and scientists agree that Bohr broke off the meeting in shock, they have debated for decades what actually happened that day. Did Heisenberg hope to save the world from the horrors of the bomb, or was he really trying to pry loose information on the parallel effort by the Allies, which Bohr later joined? The mystery is the center of an award-winning play, "Copenhagen," by the British playwright Michael Frayn. The play was inspired by a 1993 book by the journalist Thomas Powers, "Heisenberg's War," which argues that Heisenberg destroyed the German project from within. The revelation made public yesterday "pretty much knocks that out of the water," said David C. Cassidy, a historian of science at Hofstra University, who is the author of "Uncertainty: The Life and Science of Werner Heisenberg." But others say questions about the meeting remain. One of Heisenberg's sons, Jochen Heisenberg, who is now a physicist at the University of New Hampshire, and Powers say the documents show that Bohr never understood the message Heisenberg meant to convey in Copenhagen. The two men met for the first time when Bohr gave a talk in Goettingen, Germany, in 1922, by which time he was already known as the major theorist of the atom. Heisenberg asked critical questions from the audience, and Bohr took him on as a student. Together, they all but revolutionized physics in the 1920s, playing central roles in the development of quantum mechanics, the science of the very small. But after their encounter in Copenhagen, Bohr broke off nearly all contact with his former protege. He escaped from occupied Denmark in 1943 and made his way to England and then to the U.S. effort to design an atomic bomb at Los Alamos, New Mexico. ©2002 San Francisco Chronicle   Page A - 2 ***************************************************************** 39 Hanford to move radioactive barrels to safer location This story was published Fri, Feb 1, 2002 By John Stang Herald staff writer Hundreds of barrels of radioactive uranium and oil just north of the 300 Area will be moved to a safer site in central Hanford. Bechtel Hanford Inc. recently awarded a $3.9 million contract to Federal Engineers & Constructors and Thompson Mechanical Inc. to move those barrels and contaminated debris from Hanford's 618-4 and 618-5 burial grounds. The 618-4 site is three miles north of Richland and has been a high-profile Hanford headache since 1998. In 2000, Hanford's massive range fire came within a few hundred feet of about 300 exposed barrels holding uranium chips and oil in the 618-4 site. It was the closest the fire came to burning radioactive materials. The barrels were discovered during routine excavation work in 1998, stopping cleanup efforts there until Hanford's experts could figure out what to do. The 618-4 site holds about 1,500 barrels of uranium chips, including the 300 dug up before work was stopped. The barrels are filled with oil to prevent the uranium from spontaneously catching fire. The 618-5 burial ground is near the 618-4 site. Bechtel is unsure what is buried in the 618-5 site, but speculates it could hold barrels of wastes similar to those found in the 618-4 site, said Bechtel spokesman Todd Nelson. Federal Engineers and Thompson Mechanical are supposed to finish moving the barrels and other contaminate materials to a huge central Hanford landfill by July 2003. There, the barrels will be stored temporarily on concrete pads until Hanford figures out how to deal with the mixed hazardous and radioactive wastes inside them, Nelson said. The 618-4 and 618-5 sites are a few hundred feet from the Columbia River, which prompts their move to central Hanford. "We, along with our joint venture partner, Thompson Mechanical Inc., look forward to successful completion of the project and making an impact on Hanford cleanup," said Dick French, Federal Engineers' president. French is the former president of a former major Hanford contractor Kaiser Engineers Hanford Co. and former manager of the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection. He founded Federal Engineers last March. Copyright 2002 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 40 Opinion: Keep promises; don't shortchange Hanford The Seattle Times: Editorials & Thursday, February 07, 2002 - 12:00 a.m. Pacific The Bush administration's skimpy cleanup budget falls well short of 12-year-old federal commitments to the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. Hanford remains a towering case of federal initiative followed by federal frugality — as history repeats itself on promises made but not always kept. A new administration comes in, gasps at the size of the cleanup bill, and tries to cut corners. It's a losing proposition for any secretary of Energy who eventually faces an upset governor and state attorney general, a seething congressional delegation and, perhaps, an irritated federal judge. Washington state and the federal government work off timelines and agreements for Hanford that date to 1989 and have been punctuated by a federal consent decree. State officials estimate it will take approximately $1.7 billion to stay on track through the next federal fiscal year, from October 2002 to September 2003. The estimate assumes spending approximately $1 billion for the Office of River Protection, which handles Hanford's crud-filled and leaking tanks, and the vitrification project to turn radioactive waste into manageable glass blocks. The balance would be spent on the rest of Richland cleanup operations. The federal budget appears to cut $262 million from 2002 spending, which state regulators say is actually more than $300 million short of what is needed to stay with agreed-upon timelines. With talk of leaving the vitrification process protected from cuts, work on dozens of leaky above- and below-ground tanks could be shortchanged to compensate. That collides with a 3-year-old federal consent decree to get all waste into double-shell holding tanks. Plans to put a portion of the money into a competitive pool for cleanup projects is another way to mask providing less money to meet the rigors of an agreed timeline. Sure, the numbers are expensive, but they are sized to match the dangerous nature of the toxic substance moving toward the Columbia River. Spending less means doing less or lowering cleanup standards. All the agreements have been the subject of continuous negotiations and periodic delays over safety and technology. But ultimately, progress is directly related to adequate funding. As the state says, it never gets cheaper to wait. The Bush budget is not sized to the urgency of the task, or a string of federal commitments and promises. It should be. ***************************************************************** 41 Funding for test site falls short Thursday, February 07, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Bush's budget proposal allocates $60 million less than request for anti-terrorism training By TONY BATT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- President Bush's budget proposal this week falls almost $60 million short of the amount requested for anti-terrorism training at the Nevada Test Site, a government spokesman said Wednesday. The president requested $10 million in fiscal year 2003 for the test site's training of government emergency personnel in responding to biological and chemical emergencies. That's the same amount approved by Congress for this year's budget. Kevin Rohrer, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Agency, which runs the test site, said the agency's office in Nevada requested $69.6 million for counterterrorism training in 2003. "No reason was given (for the reduced sum). We don't know the rationale," Rohrer said. The agency wants to expand the center, Rohrer said, so it becomes "one-stop shopping for counterterrorism training and exercises for first-responders, emergency medical personnel, and law enforcement officers." The proposal also has been pushed by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., who wants the test site declared as a National Center for Combating Terrorism. Since 1999, more than 1,200 people have completed anti-terrorism courses at the test site, and there is a waiting list of up to six months, Rohrer said. A typical course lasts four days. In the aftermath of Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the courses have focused on weapons of mass destruction, Rohrer said. "We have state-of-the-art equipment to train first-responders in how to deal with radiological and chemical attacks," he said. Despite the Bush administration's rejection of a substantial increase, Reid thinks it's a good sign that the president approved $10 million for the anti-terrorism center, according to Reid spokeswoman Tessa Hafen. Reid, who is chairman of the Senate subcommittee that oversees the test site's budget, will try to obtain more money for the anti-terrorism center as the budget works its way through Congress, Hafen said. Rohrer said his agency also was surprised by the magnitude of the president's budget cuts for environmental cleanup at the test site, about 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The Bush administration's budget includes $61.9 million for cleanup compared to $88 million in this year's budget for the test site. Rohrer said it is too early to tell where the agency will make cuts. "Right now, groundwater is the high priority program," he said. "We know the groundwater at the test site is contaminated (from nuclear blasts that were halted in 1992), but the key point is that there is no detectable migration (of the water) off site. We just want to understand if and when that migration might occur." webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - ***************************************************************** 42 editorial: Politics imperils (DOE) cleanup Denver Post.com --> Thursday, February 07, 2002 - Bush administration foot-dragging on plutonium disposal is putting Rocky Flats at risk of not just missing its 2006 closing date, but of ever being completely cleaned up and closed. Arvada, Broomfield, Westminster and other communities near the mothballed nuclear bomb factory in Jefferson County should raise a ruckus to prevent that alarming outcome. For years, Colorado communities and elected officials have worked to ensure that the federal government cleanses, closes and transforms the former weapons factory into a wildlife refuge. But those goals were put at risk last year when a tiff erupted between the U.S. Department of Energy and South Carolina, where excess plutonium was to be shipped. Although U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham recently touted a settlement with South Carolina, in truth the DOE hasn't made real, on-the-ground progress toward meeting any of the mileposts needed to remove the plutonium from Rocky Flats. The Bush team unwisely rejected one way of handling excess plutonium - combining it with other substances to render it unuseable. Instead, the administration plans only to convert the plutonium into nuclear reactor fuel, at a facility to be built at DOE's Savannah River, S.C., plant. But a significant percentage of Rocky Flats' 14 tons of plutonium isn't pure enough to be used as reactor fuel - yet DOE has no other plans for disposing of it. This point is important. Unless the Bush administration summons the political will to find an alternative disposal plan, a large amount of plutonium may remain at Rocky Flats, essentially forever. That outcome will leave Colorado with an environmental headache and a terrorist risk, and cost taxpayers many millions of dollars, because the government will continue to spend big bucks on security systems at a facility with no ongoing mission. Indeed, DOE supposedly had to tell Congress within 30 days that it had altered the plutonium disposal plan. It has not done so. Despite Abraham's optimism, DOE hasn't taken the simplest steps to put the plan into action. DOE also refuses to specify its target date for removing all plutonium from Rocky Flats, but without that information, some parts of the cleanup may be put on indefinite hold. A key U.S. Senate seat is up for grabs in South Carolina, so the Bush team may be avoiding hard but necessary policy choices, lest GOP candidates have to explain. If so, the White House is playing politics in an arena - nuclear cleanup - where partisanship had previously been set aside. DOE must summon some backbone and common sense, or the feds will break their long-standing promises to Colorado - and leave the nation's taxpayers with expensive and dangerous unfinished business. All contents Copyright 2002 The Denver Post ***************************************************************** 43 IAEA Daily Press Review Wednesday, 06 February, 2002 1. Non-proliferation Iran rules out nuclear weapons. Secretary of State Powell announces that US expects to meet Russia's demand for "legally binding" agreement on reducing nuclear warheads. (G; NYT - 5/11) Iran, Islamic Republic of; Russian Federation; United States of America 2. IAEA Georgian officials say operation to secure two radioactive sources successful and are focusing efforts on two other sources that remain to be found. (NYT - 6/2) Georgia; IAEA 3. Terrorism According to report, CIA has no evidence that Iraq has engaged in terrorist operations against the US in nearly a decade. (IHT - 6/2) Iraq; United States of America 4. Nuclear power Officials in Shenyang call on Government to shelve plans to build China’s first nuclear reactor dedicated to heating. (SCMP - 6/2) China 5. Nuclear safety European Commission-owned Petten research reactor in The Netherlands to be shut down temporarily on Friday for investigations into hairline crack in one of the welds of the reactor vessel. (AFP; NUC - 4/2) Netherlands 6. Radiation, health Radiation levels on deserted Rongelap Island near former US nuclear test site on Bikini Atoll have returned to normal levels 48 years after US tested hydrogen bomb there, according to a study by Japanese researcher. Report about brachytherapy cutting radiation time for breast cancer patients. (AFP; KYO - 6/2) Japan; United States of America 7. UN UN SG hopes talks with Iraq will lead to return of UN weapons inspectors to nation after more than three years, Kofi Annan's spokesman announced. (CNN; NYT - 5/2) Iraq; UN ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************